11 Amendments of Karima DELLI related to 2010/2305(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the EU economic, regional and social policy are interlinked and problems of absorption capacity of different funds in Member States are similar;problems linked to fund absorption are still an obstacle to the effectiveness of the cohesion policy in many regions, in particular those in new the Member States and whereas the causes of this situation are to be found at Community, national and local level,
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that there is a need to concentrate efforts on a limited number of priorities in order toe need to focus the ESF’s employment and social inclusion measures more clearly on integrated local development strategies; considers that such strategies yield positive results; encourages the development of bottom-up local initiatives for the ESF; stresses the value of creating greater synergy between the ERDF and the ESF, as real levers that can maximise the impact of the ESF in supporting the Europe 2020 Strategy;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Supports the establishment for the next planning period of a performance reserve that would enable more rapid take-up of funds and whereby the Commission would reward at the mid- term stage the efforts and achievements of a limited number of EU priorities laid down in the OPs;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Member States to involve the socialadopt a more inclusive approach involving all the partners, at national and local levels in order to better identify the needs of the labour markets they are defined in the general regulation, at all levels in order, firstly, to establish a clear assessment of the needs of regions and, secondly, to inform and raise awareness among the local population of the added value of ESF action;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Urges the Member States systematically to involve local and regional authorities and all stakeholders from the priority definition stage to the evaluation stage, including in relation to National Reform Plans; supports the territorialisation of the ESF with a view to avoiding the application within national OPs of measures that do not differentiate between regions; supports, in this connection, the use of global grants for its management, provided the number of intermediary bodies is rationalised on the basis of a territorial approach, guaranteeing ongoing coordination between administrative entities and the use of joint monitoring tools;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Member States to improve information onand the Commission to ensure that one-stop schemes are developed for the submission of applications and the dissemination of information and advice to those concerned as regards their applications, in so far as this simplification would be visible to the public and would rationalise administrative work; Calls on Member States to improve the accessibility of the ESF and raise project building capacities in order to contribute to new job-creatthe creation of new, decent jobs and more effective social inclusion;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Regrets that due to lengthy administrative procedures, and complicated rules and heavy control mechanism, especially in some Member States, the implementation of the ESF is slower than foreseen and that many potential beneficiaries are discouraged to apply for funding; stresses the need for simplification as regards eligibility of expenditure, management and evaluation by means of clear, common and easy-to- use indicators; insists that each region’s audit and control systems should meet high standards; calls for closer coordination between the different control levels (regional, national and EU) in terms of dates, recommendations and results; takes the view that regionalisation of OPs does not necessarily entail more controls; recommends that the frequency of controls be based to a greater extent on the amounts of subsidies and any irregularities which occur, in accordance with the principle of proportionality, so as not to discourage small project organisers and to increase the number of field-based audits by the Commission with a view to improving the quality of projects;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls on the Member States to transpose Community legislation more rapidly into national law; stresses the importance of mobilising trained personnel in sufficient numbers to address challenges on the ground more effectively;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to review the level of co-financing, to reflect better the level of development; calls, to this end, for an adequate Community budget to be allocated to cohesion policy at a time when national and local contributions are being hampered by national budgetary austerity policies; calls on the Member States to create mechanisms for helping the small beneficiaries preparing for applications and during the period of implementation;
Amendment 63 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses the need for strong and dedicated focus on the actual outcomes and results of the ESF support by the improvement of evaluation, monitoring and indicator systems; calls on the Commission to take account of the uncertainty factors affecting long-term return-to-work projects.