Progress: Procedure completed
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | REGI | COZZOLINO Andrea ( S&D) | MAZZONI Erminia ( PPE), DELLI Karima ( Verts/ALE), VLASÁK Oldřich ( ECR) |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54
Legal Basis:
RoP 54Subjects
Events
The European Parliament adopted by 473 votes to 46 with 12 abstentions a resolution on urban re-development as contribution to economic growth in the framework of the EU Cohesion Policy.
Noting that 80 % of European citizens live in an urban context, a figure which is increasing due to the acceleration of rural-to-urban migration flows, Members call for a new EU regulatory phase connected to a plan to safeguard and regenerate urban areas, which – while respecting the principle of subsidiarity – may supply the legal basis required, define common and shared medium to long-term goals and optimise the use of cohesion policy funds.
Key role of cities : Members point out that cities represent the engine of the economy, manufacturing and employment, yet at the same time they are the places where one encounters the problems of suburbanisation, unemployment and, more generally, social exclusion and segregation, and environmental pollution. Parliament emphasises the key role that urban areas have to play in achieving the economic, social and environmental objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy, and highlights the fact that the Union can only be globally competitive if cohesion policy fully harnesses the development potential of all its regions and urban areas. It asks for cultural and economic resources to be mobilised , and hopes for actions aimed at the completion and restoration of existing parts of cities and the return of strongly symbolic and historically rich spaces which have lost their original function and have become progressively neglected. It points to the need to rethink the concept of urban periphery to change the current trend towards spatial segregation, which gives rise to social polarisation.
New forms of urban regeneration : Parliament calls for an integrated approach which involves the interconnection of nature and the environment with history and culture and with society and commerce, ensuring the development of infrastructure, the improvement of urban spaces and the growth of the economic fabric. It is convinced that environmental problems like the management of waste represent a major problem that transcends merely technical aspects and has an impact on social issues. Furthermore, the increase in green spaces and urban parks forms an element of extremely high value in terms of the natural, historic and cultural heritage, and contributes to regulating negative microclimate effects, a better energy budget and financial savings, increases sustainability and the quality of the urban environment, and allows social and recreational needs to be met.
Develop a participatory approach : stressing that the local development model represents a key strength of the cohesion policy , Members call for participatory planning dynamics in partnership with associations and citizens to guarantee the necessary connection between general policies and specific territorial spaces, by enhancing their peculiarities, identities, memory and history and by reinforcing the sense of belonging to the community and trust in institutions.
Parliament reiterates the need to coordinate the use of funds to ensure an integrated approach to the dysfunction of demographic development, progressive ageing and urban concentration. Structural fund projects can help provide solutions to serious problems and should focus on people and pay particular attention to the underprivileged in this society, e.g. children, young people, women and the elderly.
Welcoming the steps taken to promote networks between cities and the exchange of experience and good practices, Parliament points out that these steps should be further strengthened. It calls for the expansion of existing instruments for this purpose, while underlining that existing programmes and bodies should be used before new structures are created.
Integrated actions for urban development : Parliament also welcomes the provision that at least 5% of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) resources be made available for integrated actions for sustainable urban development, to be delegated to cities for management. However, Members emphasise that this figure is a minimum target and should be used to support the development in functional urban areas. They oppose rigidity in the use of the above resources in the implementation of integrated territorial investments (ITI), and consider that Member States should be given the possibility of implementing the integrated actions for sustainable urban development through a specific operational programme or a specific priority axis.
Parliament goes on to call for:
· decisive actions in the fight against energy inefficiency , through the functional re-designation of buildings and the construction of more resource efficient dwellings, with priority given to technical materials and solutions that allow energy-saving standards in line with the objectives of the European policies;
· reducing congestions, contamination and noise in such a way as to make the city more competitive as regards environmental problems;
· an improvement of the administrative capacity – e.g. through increased use of technical assistance – of local and regional authorities, and of economic and social actors, in the management of the structural funds, for the purpose of real multilevel governance, in order to ensure that objectives are met;
· a sustainable mobility management model , integrated with town planning, that comprises more public facilities and systemic logistics networks appropriate to the needs of the urban distribution of goods and services, with appropriate attention given to green transport needs.
Lastly, Parliament points to the the opportunity to create networking between pilot projects on sustainable urban development financed by the ERDF and the new multiannual Horizon 2020 programme, in order to guarantee innovative solutions and replicable strategies in urban regeneration.
The Committee on Regional Development adopted the report by Andrea COZZOLINO (ALDE, IT) on urban re-development as contribution to economic growth in the framework of the EU Cohesion Policy.
Noting that 80% of European citizens live in an urban context, a figure which is increasing due to the acceleration of rural-to-urban migration flows, Members call for a new EU regulatory phase connected to a plan to safeguard and regenerate urban areas, which – while respecting the principle of subsidiarity – may supply the legal basis required, define common and shared medium- to long-term goals and optimise the use of cohesion policy funds. They point out that cities represent the engine of the economy, manufacturing and employment, yet at the same time they are the places where one encounters the problems of suburbanisation, unemployment and, more generally, social exclusion and segregation, and environmental pollution.
The committee emphasises the key role that urban areas have to play in achieving the economic, social and environmental objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy, and highlights the fact that the Union can only be globally competitive if its cohesion policy fully harnesses the development potential of all its regions and urban areas. It asks for cultural and economic resources to be mobilised , and hopes for actions aimed at the completion and restoration of existing parts of cities and the return of strongly symbolic and historically rich spaces which have lost their original function and have become progressively neglected.
Members stress that new forms of urban regeneration are required , focusing on the need for communities to have public spaces, parks, leisure, culture and sport. They call for an integrated approach which involves the interconnection of nature and the environment with history and culture and with society and commerce, ensuring the development of infrastructure, the improvement of urban spaces and the growth of the economic fabric. They are convinced that environmental problems like the management of waste represent a major problem that transcends merely technical aspects and has an impact on social issues. Furthermore, the increase in green spaces and urban parks consitutes an element of extremely high value in terms of the natural, historic and cultural heritage, and contributes to regulating negative microclimate effects, a better energy budget and financial savings, increases sustainability and the quality of the urban environment, and allows social and recreational needs to be met.
Stressing that the local development model represents a key strength of the cohesion policy , Members call for participatory planning dynamics in partnership with associations and citizens to guarantee the necessary connection between general policies and specific territorial spaces, by enhancing their peculiarities, identities, memory and history and by reinforcing the sense of belonging to the community and trust in institutions.
They reiterate the need to coordinate the use of funds to ensure an integrated approach to the dysfunction of demographic development, progressive ageing and urban concentration. Structural fund projects can help provide solutions to serious problems and should focus on people and pay particular attention to the underprivileged in this society, e.g. children, young people, women and the elderly.
Welcoming the steps taken to promote networks between cities and the exchange of experience and good practices, the committee points out that these steps should be further strengthened. It calls for the expansion of existing instruments for this purpose, while underlining that existing programmes and bodies should be used before new structures are created. It also welcomes the provision that at least 5% of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) resources be made available for integrated actions for sustainable urban development, to be delegated to cities for management. However, Members emphasise that this figure is a minimum target and should be used to support the development in functional urban areas. They oppose rigidity in the use of the above resources in the implementation of integrated territorial investments (ITI), and consider that Member States should be given the possibility of implementing the integrated actions for sustainable urban development through a specific operational programme or a specific priority axis.
The committee goes on to call for:
· decisive actions in the fight against energy inefficiency, through the functional re-designation of buildings and the construction of more resource efficient dwellings;
· reducing congestion, contamination and noise in such a way as to make the city more competitive as regards environmental problems;
· an improvement of the administrative capacity – e.g. through increased use of technical assistance – of local and regional authorities, and of economic and social actors, in the management of the structural funds, for the purpose of real multilevel governance, in order to ensure that objectives are met;
· a sustainable mobility management model, integrated with town planning, that comprises more public facilities and systemic logistics networks appropriate to the needs of the urban distribution of goods and services, with appropriate attention given to green transport needs.
Lastly, Members highlight the opportunity to create networking between pilot projects on sustainable urban development financed by the ERDF and the new multiannual Horizon 2020 programme, in order to guarantee innovative solutions and replicable strategies in urban regeneration.
Documents
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament: T7-0001/2013
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary: A7-0406/2012
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE496.575
- Committee draft report: PE491.162
- Committee draft report: PE491.162
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE496.575
Amendments | Dossier |
67 |
2011/2311(INI)
2012/10/01
REGI
67 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 21 a (new) - having regard to its resolution of 26 March 2009 on the impact of extensive urbanisation in Spain on individual rights of European citizens, on the environment and on the application of EU law, based upon petitions received;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Calls for a new EU regulatory phase connected to a plan to safeguard and regenerate urban areas, which – while respecting the principle of subsidiarity – may supply the legal basis required, define common and shared medium to long-term goals and optimise the use of cohesion policy funds;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 b (new) 1b. Points out that part of the own resources in the Union’s budget could be allocated to this through the use of new financial instruments and by extending the project bonds’ pilot phase to this field;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Hopes for actions aimed at the completion and restoration of existing parts of cities, the functional conversion of disused spaces, the return to the community of strongly symbolic and historically rich spaces which have lost
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Hopes for actions aimed at the completion and restoration of existing parts of cities, the functional conversion of disused spaces and redevelopment areas, the return to the community of strongly symbolic and historically rich spaces which have lost their original function and have become progressively neglected;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Hopes for actions aimed at the completion and restoration of existing parts of cities, the functional conversion of disused spaces, the desegregation of marginalised neighbourhoods, the return to the community of strongly symbolic and historically rich spaces which have lost their original function and have become progressively neglected;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Emphasises the key role that urban areas have to play in achieving the economic, social and environmental objectives of the Europe 2020 Strategy, and supports the dynamic development process of the integrated urban programmes, stressing the importance of the pilot schemes currently in progress;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Asks for cultural and economic resources to be circulated, assuming as a priority the theme of social sustainability and urban transformation,
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Asks for cultural and economic resources to be circulated, assuming as a priority the theme of social sustainability and urban transformation, in the knowledge that processes of urban regeneration always risk pushing out the weaker sections of the population; underlines the necessity to closely involve the inhabitants from the earliest stage possible;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Emphasises the fact that the Union can only be globally competitive if the cohesion policy fully harnesses the development potential of all its regions and urban areas, and if it is fit to face the challenges and difficulties identified in the Europe 2020 Strategy;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Stresses that new forms of urban regeneration are required for this, focusing on the need for communities to have public spaces, parks, leisure, culture and sport;
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas 80 % of European citizens live in an urban context (this figure is increasing further due to the acceleration of rural-to-urban migration flows), where there is a greater concentration of the effects of the economic crisis, and where the challenges of the fight against climate change, job creation, well-being and quality of life are played out;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Urges urban areas to develop a strategic territorial planning instrument based on objectives and targets that will result in the drawing-up of a medium- /long-term action plan in the areas of activity that have been identified as levers for their sustainable economic, social and territorial development;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Highlights that urban regeneration and economic revitalisation are closely related and that the construction of an attractive location can become a factor in economic recovery; supports economic growth and wealth and job creation based on prosperous communities where people want to work, invest, live or visit;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Highlights that urban regeneration and economic revitalisation are closely related and that the construction of an attractive location can become a factor in economic recovery; to achieve this, urban regeneration should be matched with a new approach which can prevent urban decline and focus the requisite attention on social integration.
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Highlights that urban regeneration and economic revitalisation are closely related and that the construction of an attractive location can become a factor in economic recovery, and asks that development of needy and marginalised areas be promoted;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Highlights that urban regeneration and economic revitalisation are closely related and that the construction of an attractive location can become a factor in economic recovery that should also serve the evolvement of local economy and jobs;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6 a. states that, particularly in pockets of poverty, actions in favour of economic development should be complemented by social measures in order to achieve real inclusion;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6 a. highlights that efficient and affordable public transport should be available to all citizens, as it plays a key role in breaking the isolation of deprived areas;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 b (new) 6 b. stresses that a sustainable city must be based on urban solidarity, where exclusion and discrimination are actively combated by strengthening social cohesion between neighbourhoods, socio- occupational categories and people of different backgrounds. Urban solidarity must be a reflection of our ambition to build an inclusive and more cohesive European society;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Calls for incisive actions for the fight against fuel
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Calls for incisive actions for the fight against fuel poverty, via the functional re- designation of buildings and the construction of better designed and better located dwellings that are more resource efficient, in such a way as to make the city more competitive as regards environmental problems;
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas cities represent the engine of the economy, manufacturing and employment, yet at the same time are where one encounters the problems of suburbanisation, unemployment and more generally, social exclusion and segregation, and environmental pollution;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Emphasises that urban regeneration plans ought to include construction of infrastructure and affordable social housing for both underprivileged sections of society and the middle classes;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. stresses that in those areas affected by urban decay, the city should once more be made an attractive place to live, capable of fulfilling everybody's aspirations irrespective of their income levels;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. stresses that urban re-development requires that particular attention is given to improving the state of urban environment by reducing congestions, contamination and noise resulting from transport and unsustainable land-use patterns;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 b (new) 7b. Stresses the need for a strategy to preserve and make secure urban and housing heritage in areas classified as being at high risk of earthquakes or flooding;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Reiterates the need to coordinate the use of funds to ensure an integrated approach to the dysfunction of demographic development, progressive ageing and urban concentration caused by migration; calls for funds to focus on people as this will ensure genuine social inclusion, and to pay particular attention to underprivileged sections of society: children, young people, women and the elderly;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Considers that the approach to passive preservation of historical old towns needs to be rectified, bringing in redevelopment plans that can trigger revitalisation or development dynamics, to stop these areas being neglected and shops and small businesses closing as a result;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 а (new) 8а. Draws attention to the fact that structural fund projects can help provide solutions to serious problems and needs of the young in urban areas, such as unemployment, access to education, and conditions more propitious to a healthy lifestyle;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Welcomes the proposal
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Welcomes
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) Ba. whereas strong urban areas also have a positive influence on the surrounding countryside which can thus lead to spillover effects;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Welcomes the
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9 a. Encourages the Commission to promote networking and exchange of experience between cities; stresses however that existing programmes and bodies should be used for this purpose before creating new structures;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Appreciates the provision for a reserve of at least 5 % of the ERDF funds, to be assigned directly to municipalities to promote sustainable urban development; calls on the managing authorities to consistently propose a full delegation of funds to voluntary cities to implement the integrated urban strategies and to make use of new instruments such as Community-led local development due to its shared governance and bottom-up participation;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10.
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Appreciates the provision
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Stresses however, the rigidity of the constraint on the use of the above resources under the Integrated Territorial Investments (ITI); welcomes, therefore, proposals that the Operational Programmes can continue to include their own priority axis for sustainable urban development;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11.
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Highlights the
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12.
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas the current transformation processes within the urban fabric produce growing expectations and problems that the state traditionally seeks to resolve, which therefore require mechanisms for innovative and integrated economic
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Highlights the importance of involving
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Highlights the importance of involving rural, suburban and neighbouring areas, integrating their needs with those of the urban areas, to promote a relationship that is not in conflict but is complementary and synergetic;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. Calls for recovery and redevelopment plans for disused land and run-down areas, in order to tackle the gradual loss of the rural-urban fringe due to the trend for changing this into building land;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Calls for an extension of the capacity of local authorities
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Calls for
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13a. Considers it crucial that sustainable multifunctional networks are developed, based on capitalising on their distinctive elements, in a way that will trigger a vibrant urban culture and foster a culture of entrepreneurship and innovation that will breathe life into the knowledge society;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13a. Stresses the need to call on past experience and examples of good practice when designing a framework for balanced and integrated urban-rural development based on the needs of individual regions;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 b (new) 13b. Calls on the Commission to examine and propose working methodologies that promote urban-rural partnerships, stem the depopulation of rural areas and, at the same time, stimulate sustainable urban development, since nearly 80% of the EU population lives in urban areas;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Highlights the opportunity to create networking between pilot projects on sustainable urban development financed by the ERDF and the new multiannual Horizon 2020 programme, in order to guarantee innovative solutions and replicable strategies in urban regeneration; advocates an increase in funding for the 'Smart Cities and Communities Initiative' as a way of supporting a new development paradigm that will improve urban interconnections and the quality of life of local communities;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Calls for a mobility and parking management model integrated with town planning,
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C a (new) C a. whereas in many cities socio- demographic change has provoked a movement of people from their dwellings in older urban areas to new and more peripheral housing estates, urban areas on the fringes of cities or simply new towns close to big agglomerations;
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Calls for a
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Calls for a mobility and parking management model integrated with town planning, with appropriate attention to
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Is convinced that the management of waste
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Is convinced that the management of waste represents a problem that transcends merely technical aspects and has an impact on social issues, that involves institutions, the economy and society and that therefore requires participative governance;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 а (new) 17а. Urges that measures to ensure quality water supply and purification services in towns be continued, since this benefits the public and the environment at the same time;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Stresses that the increase in green spaces and urban parks forms an element of extremely high value for natural, historic and cultural heritage, and contributes to regulating negative microclimate effects, a better energy budget and financial savings, increases sustainability and the quality of the urban environment and allows social and recreational needs to be met;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 a (new) 18a. Considers it necessary to rethink the concept of urban periphery to change the current trend towards spatial segregation, which gives rise to social polarisation;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19a. Favours a cohesion policy with a strong approach to local development issues and the social sustainability of urban transformation.
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C b (new) C b. considers aggravation of social inequality to be a major challenge in most urban areas. Inequalities between neighbourhoods are the outcome of socio- spatial ghettoisation, which is sometimes due to inappropriate housing policies, and of service provision that is restricted to wealthy areas and does not reach deprived suburbs;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas revisiting traditional approaches can become an opportunity to launch a process of urban experimentation and pathways of design, based on a reinterpretation of the planning of spaces
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Stresses that the local development model represents a key strength of the cohesion policy since decisive mobility factors encourage the selection of the best choices closest to the citizens, joint actions and more coherent, effective and efficient measures giving moreover greater visibility to community interventions in the EU areas facing more difficult challenges;
source: PE-496.575
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
events/3/docs |
|
committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
docs/0/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE491.162New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/REGI-PR-491162_EN.html |
docs/1/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE496.575New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/REGI-AM-496575_EN.html |
events/0/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament |
events/1/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee |
events/2 |
|
events/2 |
|
events/3/docs |
|
events/5 |
|
events/5 |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 150
|
procedure/Other legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 54
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 052
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
events/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2012-406&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2012-0406_EN.html |
events/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2013-1New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2013-0001_EN.html |
activities |
|
commission |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
docs |
|
events |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150New
Rules of Procedure EP 150 |
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
REGI/7/08152New
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 052
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
|
procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
other/0/dg/title |
Old
Regional PolicyNew
Regional and Urban Policy |
procedure/subject/2 |
Old
4.70.04 Town and country planningNew
4.70.04 Urban policy, town and country planning |
procedure/subject/1 |
Old
4.70.02 Cohesion, Cohesion FundNew
4.70.02 Cohesion policy, Cohesion Fund |
activities |
|
committees |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure |
|