2017/2279(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses the crucial role cohesion policy has played in the achievement of economic and social convergence in the EU; stresses its potential for creating a European standard on social rights within the Union and its mission of providing support in the restructuring of European economies, to help them adapt to the technological revolution and cope with population aging and the opening up of European and world markets; stresses, in this regard, that it is a beacon of European solidarity, something that it must continue to embody; expresses concern, however, that inequalities persist between rich and poor regions and between the salaries of the social categories of citizens, and that many regions classed as ‘intermediate’ have suffered general impoverishment; stresses that neither the objectives nor the EU funding of cohesion policy should be watered down; questions whether cohesion policy funding should be conditional on respect for the rule of law, which could penalise final contributors while reinforcing measures taken at national level;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Points out that Brexit will considerably increase the financial burden of maintaining or enhancing the cohesion policy's objectives and its funding from the EU budget;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes the shortcomings of the financial planning and implementation system, which have led to the accumulation of unpaid bills and to a form of fraudulent budgeting that runs counter to the spirit of the Treaties; expresses concern at the significant delays in the adoption of operational programmes and in the designation of management, payment and certification authorities for cohesion policy, which have led to extremely low absorption rates of cohesion policy in the current programming period with the project organisers themselves bearing the brunt of the effects; calls in this connection for the simplification begun as part of the review of the Financial Regulation in force since 1 January 2016 to be enhanced, in particular by placing greater emphasis on ex-post checks and harmonising procedures at the level of each fund and introducing greater flexibility in the next multiannual financial framework; stresses that the level of payment appropriations should at least match past commitments, with a view to continuing to support the creativity of our regions;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes the shortcomings of the financial planning and implementation system, which have led to ~~the~~delays in requests for payments, backlogs and accumulation of unpaid bills; ~~exp~~stresses ~~concern at the~~that the late conclusion of 2014-2020 MFF negotiations and European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF funds) regulations resulted with significant delays in the adoption of operational programmes and in the designation of management, payment and certification authorities for cohesion policy, which have led to extremely low absorption rates of cohesion policy in the current programming period; therefore calls for quick negotiations and agreement on the new post 2020 MFF and adoption of new ESI Funds regulations as soon as possible; stresses that the level of payment appropriations should match past commitments;

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes the shortcomings of the financial planning and implementation system, which have led to the accumulation of unpaid bills; expresses concern at the significant delays in the adoption of operational programmes and in the designation of management, payment and certification authorities for cohesion policy, which have led to extremely low absorption rates of cohesion policy in the current programming period; stresses that the level of payment appropriations should match past commitments; calls for the early adoption of the recommendations of the High Level Group on Simplification;

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes the shortcomings of the financial planning and implementation system, which have led to the accumulation of unpaid bills; expresses concern at the significant delays in the adoption of operational programmes and in the designation of management, payment and certification authorities for cohesion policy, which have led to extremely low absorption rates of cohesion policy in the current programming period; s~~tresses that the level of payment appropriations should match past commitments~~ees this as is evidence that the most effective form of management is also the most local, and that there is no place for management at any level above national;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Notes that each year the difference between estimated and actual payments from the EU budget for Cohesion policy is huge and calls on the European Commission to define a methodology for better planning of EU budget execution in close cooperation with Member States; stresses that establishment of the e- Cohesion system in which Member States would enter data on project pipelines, procurement plans with planned and actual dates for tendering, contracting and implementation, as well as all financial and accounting data related to invoices, co-financing, eligibility of expenditures etc. would be an important contribution to better management and monitoring of Cohesion Policy implementation in Member States, as well as to more precise estimations of payments from the EU budget.

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Notes that infrastructure projects within cohesion policy will frequently involve time scales that extend beyond the scope of a 7 year MFF and therefore acknowledges the requirement to develop budgeting frameworks that enable effective long term planning to take place;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Underlines that EU funding needs to focus on areas in which the highest EU added value can be achieved, therefore the system of allocation of ESI funds should be revised by adding criteria linked to challenges the EU faces, such as demographics, unemployment, social inclusion, migration, innovation and climate change.

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2c. Takes into account that poor institutional quality reduces competitiveness, the impact of investment and economic growth; therefore stresses that the link between economic governance and the European Semester needs to be strengthened in order to ensure improvement of the quality of governance, implementation of structural reforms and strengthening administrative capacities with the aim of fostering convergence and thus increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of Cohesion Policy investments.

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that financial instruments in EU cohesion policy should not replace direct grants and aid, but should be treated as complementary tools that extend the scope of the project or where projects generate income; and also stresses that the logic of the Commission’s December 2017 report “Financial instruments under the European Structural and Investment Funds” should be followed and therefore financial instruments should be used less in those programmes where they have the least impact, i.e. the ESF and the European Fund for Agricultural Development;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses the crucial role cCohesion pPolicy has played in ~~the~~ achiev~~ement of~~ing economic and social convergence in the EU, narrowing disparities, safeguarding investments and strengthening resistance to the impacts of globalisation; expresses concern, however, that inequalities persist between rich and poor regions and between the salaries of the social categories of citizens; therefore highlights that investments into new technologies, modernisation, new skills and knowledge, innovation, research and development which will help less developed regions move up the value chain, should be strongly supported by Cohesion Policy, harmonised throughout the entire EU budget and in synergy with national budgets; stresses that neither the objectives nor the EU funding of cCohesion pPolicy should be watered down;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that financial instruments in EU cohesion policy should not replace direct grants and aid, but should be treated as complementary tools; emphasises in this connection that the ESI funds and EFSI are managed according to different approaches, and that cooperation between these two funds could be beneficial for large-scale projects, but that such links must in no way undermine the strategic coherence, territorial concentration and long-term prospects of cohesion policy programmes;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that financial instruments in EU cohesion policy should not replace direct grants and aid, but should be treated as complementary tools; nevertheless asks that the possibilities for new financial instruments in cohesion policy should be explored;

Amendment 22 #

Younous OMARJEE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Is critical of the link made between the European Structural and Investment Funds, sound economic governance and the relevant country-specific recommendations; is opposed to macro- economic conditionality, which allows payments or commitments to regions to be frozen if the Council decides that the Member State concerned has failed to take effective measures to correct its deficit;

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that the legislative proposals for the next MFF should be submitted as soon as possible to avoid delays in the programming for the next period; Takes the view that cohesion policy ceilings should be raised so that the EU can finally have all the funds it needs to meet its objectives and priorities, as set out under the Treaties; points out that cohesion policy is supposed to protect the public from the negative effects of globalisation and provide financial assistance to SMEs, support research and cooperation projects, promote participation in initiatives to develop human capital, and that it must therefore remain strong, effective and visible for citizens;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that the legislative proposals for the next MFF should be submitted as soon as possible to avoid delays in the programming for the next period; ~~Takes the view that cohesion policy ceilings should be raised so that the EU can finally have all the funds it needs to meet its objectives and priorities, as set out under the Treaties;~~

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that the legislative proposals for the next MFF should be submitted as soon as possible to avoid delays in the programming for the next period; Ttakes the view that cohesion policy ceilings should be ~~raised~~at the same level of funding for the EU-27 in the next programming period while further improving its effectiveness and simplifying the procedures associated with it so that the EU can ~~finally~~ have all the funds it needs to meet its objectives and priorities, as set out under the Treaties;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Stress~~Urges that the legislative proposals for the next MFF should be submitted as soon as possible to avoid delays in the programming for the next period; Takes the view that cohesion policy ceilings should be raised so that the EU can finally have all the funds it needs to meet its objectives and priorities, as set out under the Treaties;

Amendment 27 #

Ingeborg GRÄSSLE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Underlines the link between the quality of governance and successful public and private investment, innovation and growth; welcomes the holistic approach adopted in the 7th Cohesion Report and calls for these points to be taken fully into account in future cohesion funding;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Takes the view that cohesion policy should benefit all regions, in particular those with the greatest development delays and the Outermost Regions, and that in the most developed regions it should be directed towards the peripheral areas, which are most affected by poverty and are the least attractive in terms of development., providing in particular aid for infrastructure with a view to putting an end to their isolation; takes the view in this regard that co-financing for investments made as part of regional policy must be removed for the purposes of calculating Member States’ deficits under the Stability and Growth Pact;

Amendment 29 #

Răzvan POPA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Takes the view that ~~cohesion pol~~economicy, s~~hould benefit all regions, in particular those with the greatest development delays and the Outermost R~~ocial and territorial cohesion policy should continue to benefit all EU regions,, and that in the most developed regions it should be directed towards the peripheral areas, which are most affected by poverty and are the least attractive in terms of development. An appropriate spotlight should also be on the Outermost Regions, especially those with the greatest development delays.

Amendment 3 #

Răzvan POPA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses the crucial role economic, social and territorial cohesion policy has played in the achievement of economic and social convergence inacross the EU; expresses concern, however, that inequalities persist between rich and poor regions and between the salaries of the social categories of citizens; stresses that neither the objectives nor the EU funding of cohesion policy should be watered down and should continue to cover all European regions with a budget sufficient to face upcoming challenges. ;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

Amendment 31 #

Urmas PAET, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Stresses, therefore, that cohesion policy must not act to correct the effects of the single market or EU trade policy and the unequal competition they entail between Member States or with the Union's external partners;

Amendment 32 #

Younous OMARJEE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls for greater coherence between cohesion policy and other EU policies, which, like trade agreements, undermine efforts made as part of regional policy to achieve the objective of convergence in the EU;

Amendment 33 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Stresses that investing in and developing connectivity and infrastructure lessens the disparities between regions and peripheral areas and must be taken with high priority.

Amendment 34 #

Younous OMARJEE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Stresses the need to continue with and strengthen cohesion policy in the next multiannual programming period; is opposed to any attempts to slash the budget or distort regional policy, which remains the EU’s sole major solidarity policy.

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses the crucial role cohesion policy has played in ~~the achievement of~~improving economic and social convergence in the EU and the delivery of the UN's Sustainable Development Goals; expresses concern, however, that inequalities persist between and within rich and poor regions and ~~between the salaries of the social categories of citizens~~that inequalities have increased in and between many regions, in particular since the financial crash of 2008; stresses that neither the objectives nor the EU funding of cohesion policy should be watered down;

Amendment 5 #

Urmas PAET

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses the crucial role cohesion policy has played in the achievement of economic and social convergence in the EU; expresses concern, however, that inequalities persist between rich and poor regions and between the salaries of the social categories of citizens; stresses that neither the objectives nor the EU funding of cohesion policy should be watered down; notes with concern that in many areas, like health and income, socio- economic disparities are increasing;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses the crucial role cohesion policy has played in the achievement of economic and social convergence in the EU; expresses concern, however, that inequalities persist between rich and poor regions and between the salaries of the social categories of citizens; stresses that neither the objectives nor the EU funding of cohesion policy should be watered down; further stresses that none of them must be conditioned by other EU policies or agendas;

Amendment 7 #

Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Marc JOULAUD

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Stresses the crucial role cohesion policy has played in the achievement of economic and social convergence in the EU;~~ expresses concern~~, however,~~ that inequalities persist between rich and poor regions and between the salaries of the social categories of citizens; stresses that ~~neither~~intermediate regions have been downgraded; stresses that maintaining the objectives ~~nor~~and the EU funding of cohesion policy shwould ~~be watered down~~place a considerable burden on the Member States;

Amendment 8 #

Inese VAIDERE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses the crucial role cohesion policy has played in the achievement of economic and social convergence in the EU; expresses concern, however, that inequalities persist between ~~rich and poor region~~States with different GDP indicators and between the salaries of the social categories of citizens; stresses that neither the objectives nor the EU funding of cohesion policy should be watered down;

Amendment 9 #

Nicola CAPUTO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Recalls that the absence of a fiscal union creates a risk that cohesion policies will not have a homogeneous impact, particularly in peripheral regions of the EU, as regions affected by fiscal dumping are badly damaged by it;

source: 618.252

2018/02/28 REGI 405 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)

– having regard to the Pact of Amsterdam establishing the Urban Agenda for the EU, agreed at the Informal Meeting of EU Ministers Responsible for Urban Matters on 30 May 2016 in Amsterdam,

Amendment 1 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Believes that culture, the creative industries, tourism, education, youth and sport play a crucial role in shaping the future of the European Union and have tremendous potential in terms of generating European added value ~~and economic growth in all the EU reg~~, in accordance with the objectives set as part of the Europe 2020 programme, and economic growth and the creation of jobs and businesses in all the EU regions, along with the attractiveness of the Member States as cultural and tourist destinations, in particular within the framework of cohesion policy;

Amendment 10 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas cohesion policy aims to promote harmonious development of the whole Union, leading to a strengthening of its economic, social and territorial cohesion, in a spirit of solidarity and with the aim of promoting growth, employment and social inclusion, and reducing the backwardness of the least favoured regions;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Regrets that the Commission’s 7th report on economic, social and territorial cohesion does not make any quantitative or qualitative reference to ~~culture-~~projects linked to culture, tourism and the crelat~~ed project~~ive industries, which accounted for EUR 6 billion of cohesion policy expenditure;

Amendment 100 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Calls for greater account to be taken of certain specific territorial characteristics, such as those of island, mountain or border regions, when investment priorities are set; as well as co- financing and state aid rules; stresses that more flexibility between operational programmes and thematic priorities is needed to ensure quick reaction and alignment with the needs in practice in order to make these areas more attractive for the businesses and young people.

Amendment 101 #

Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Mercedes BRESSO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. ~~Calls~~Takes the view that the territorial dimension of cohesion policy must be strengthened in order to guarantee that a tailored approach is taken which makes it possible to address the challenges facing territories more effectively; calls, therefore, for greater account to be taken of certain specific territorial characteristics, such as those of island, mountain or border regions, when investment priorities are set;

Amendment 102 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Calls for greater account to be taken of certain specific territorial characteristics, such as those of island, mountain or border regions, and of territories in which people are required to travel long distances to avail themselves of essential services (e.g. health, education, collective mobility) when investment priorities are set;

Amendment 103 #

Tonino PICULA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Calls ~~for~~ greater account to be taken of certain specific territorial characteristics, ~~such as those of island, mountain or border regions~~namely specific measures and increased financial support, for island, mountain or border regions, in accordance with Article 174 TFEU, when investment priorities are set;

Amendment 104 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Calls for greater account to be taken of certain specific territorial characteristics, such as those of island, mountain or border regions that are isolated and not readily accessible, when investment priorities are set;

Amendment 105 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Stresses the importance of cross- border cooperation for better social cohesion between cross-border regions and local communities in the Member States;

Amendment 106 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8b. Calls for the continued implementation of the cross-border territorial cooperation programmes with candidate countries and other neighbouring countries in order to support their European aspirations and strengthen their European integration process;

Amendment 107 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Recalls that the particular structural social and economic situation of the outermost regions justifies specific measures, in accordance with Article 349 TFEU, and stresses the need to improve the specific measures for these regions by adjusting them whenever necessary; calls on the Commission to take the judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU of 15 December 2015 as the basis for ensuring that Article 349 TFEU is properly applied as regards the conditions governing access to the Structural Funds; ~~suggests in particular extending the specific allocation for the outermost regions to the social component and better tailoring the thematic concentration;~~

Amendment 108 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Recalls that the particular structural social and economic situation of the outermost regions justifies specific measures, in particular as regards the conditions governing access to the Structural Funds, in accordance with Article 349 TFEU~~, and~~; stresses th~~e need to improve the specific measures for these regions by adjusting them whenever~~at it is important that all derogations designed to compensate the outermost regions for their structural disadvantages should be continued, and adjusted where necessary; calls on the Commission and the Member States to take the judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU of 15 December 2015 as the basis for ~~ensuring that Article 349 TFEU is properly applied as regards the conditions governing access to the Structural Funds;~~maintaining the budget allocations and co-financing rates allocated to the outermost regions, and suggests in particular extending the specific allocation for the outermost regions to the social component and better tailoring the thematic concentration;

Amendment 109 #

Marc JOULAUD, Jan OLBRYCHT, Maurice PONGA, Ivana MALETIĆ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Recalls that the particular structural social and economic situation of the outermost regions justifies specific measures, in accordance with Article 349 TFEU, and stresses the need to improve the specific measures for these regions by adjusting them whenever necessary; calls on the Commission to take the judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU of 15 December 2015 as the basis for ensuring that Article 349 TFEU is properly applied as regards the conditions governing access to the Structural Funds; suggests in particular extending the specific allocation for the outermost regions to the social component, maintaining the current level of Union co-financing in those regions, and better tailoring the thematic concentration;

Amendment 11 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas cohesion policy aims to promote harmonious development of the whole Union, leading to a strengthening of its economic, social and territorial cohesion, in a spirit of solidarity and with the aim of promoting ~~growth~~sustainable growth and quality jobs, and reducing the backwardness of the least favoured regions;

Amendment 11 #

Hannu TAKKULA, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Urmas PAET, Ivan JAKOVČIĆ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Deplores the fact that, in what is the European Year of Cultural Heritage, the Commission report disregards culture and fails to highlight, by providing a breakdown by sector, the investments made by the Member States and regions in this area;

Amendment 110 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Reminds that the permanent natural and demographic situation of the northernmost regions (sparse population, cold climate, long distances to European markets) justifies specific measures in accordance with Article 174 TFEU; stresses the need to secure and extend the specific allocation for these regions in order to promote unions overall harmonious development and to enable inhabitants of the northernmost Europe to take full advantage of their regions specific characteristics;

Amendment 111 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Urges the Commission to develop an action plan to make the outermost regions a priority area for experimental projects which could be carried out in other European regions;

Amendment 112 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Recalls the role of EU macro- regional strategies and their potential in the better implementation of the territorial dimension in cohesion policy;

Amendment 113 #

Ivana MALETIĆ, Marc JOULAUD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9b. Urges the Commission to establish specific accessibility frameworks for outermost region residents, in such a way as to guarantee them convenient, affordable access to continental Europe on the same basis as other EU citizens;

Amendment 114 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Considers that the introduction of integrated strategies for sustainable urban development has been a success and should be replicated in other sub-regional territories, for example by setting an integrated territorial objective alongside the thematic objectives; stresses that possibility to introduce preparation of Operational programmes based on Integrated territorial strategies and Smart specialisation strategies should be analysed.

Amendment 115 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Considers that the introduction of integrated strategies for sustainable urban development has been a success and should be replicated in other sub-regional territories~~, for example by setting an integrated territorial objective alongside the thematic objectives~~;

Amendment 116 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Considers that the introduction of integrated strategies for sustainable urban development has been a success and should therefore be expanded and be replicated in other sub-regional territories, for example by setting an integrated territorial objective alongside the thematic objectives;

Amendment 117 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Underlines the importance of local development and its ability to involve local actors in strategies for an integrated and place-based approach; considers that Community-led local development should be made obligatory underpinned by support for empowerment of local stakeholders and its scope of application extended;

Amendment 118 #

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3

The ‘middle-income ~~trap’: fostering resilience and preventing vulnerable territories from falling behind~~regions

Amendment 119 #

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3

TPoverty, working poor and the ‘middle- income trap’: fostering resilience and preventing vulnerable territories from falling behind

Amendment 12 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas cohesion policy aims to promote harmonious development of ~~the whol~~all regions of the entire Union, leading to a strengthening of its economic, social and territorial cohesion, in a spirit of solidarity and with the aim of promoting growth, and reducing the backwardness of the least favoured regions;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Notes that the EU's cohesion and rural development policies can be instrumental in promoting the restoration of cultural heritage, supporting cultural and creative industries and financing the capacity building of cultural professionals;

Amendment 120 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Draws attention to the continuous need for less developed regions to catch up with the rest of the Union and that despite of the noted productivity growth, these regions still suffer of higher unemployment rate, risk of poverty and social exclusion and that further cohesion requires that they move up the value chain to activities with a higher skill, technology and innovation content as their economic performance is fragile and could be easily undermined by globalization, technological change and low social standards;

Amendment 121 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Notes that middle-income regions have not grown at the same rate as low- income regions and regions with very high income, as they face the challenge referred to as the ‘middle-income trap’, because of their excessively high costs in comparison with the former and excessively weak innovation systems in comparison with the latter; notes, moreover, that these territories are characterised by struggling manufacturing industries and by their vulnerability to shocks caused by socioeconomic alterations due to globaliszation;

Amendment 122 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. ~~Not~~Emphasises that middle-income regions have not grown at the same rate as low- income regions and regions with very high income, as they face the challenge referred to as the ‘middle-income trap’, because of their excessively high costs in comparison with the former and excessively weak innovation systems in comparison with the latter; notes, moreover, that these ~~territorie~~regions are characterised by struggling manufacturing industries and by their vulnerability to shocks caused by globalisation;

Amendment 123 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Underlines that the austerity measures, the imposition of the single currency and the economic constraints imposed by the European Treaties have had a depressing and destabilizing effect on the economies of the Member States and the euro area;

Amendment 124 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Is convinced that a major challenge for future cohesion policy will be to provide appropriate support to these regions, ~~and that cohesion policy must both reduce~~particularly through the creation and implementation of tailor-made strategies, programs and actions; recalls that the EU, in order to promote its overall harmonious development, shall develop and pursue actions leading to the strengthening of its economic, social and territorial cohesion and shall aim at reducing disparities and prevent vulnerable regions from falling behind, byas enshrined in article 174 TFUE, by also taking account of the different trends and dynamics;

Amendment 125 #

Martina MICHELS, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS, Martina ANDERSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Is convinced that a major challenge for future cohesion policy will be to provide appropriate support to these regions, and that cohesion policy must both reduce disparities and prevent vulnerable regions from falling behind, by taking account of the different trends and dynamics; urges the authorities of these regions to concentrate on establishing a favourable climate to attract investment;

Amendment 126 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Is convinced that a major challenge for future cohesion policy will be to provide ~~appropriate~~sufficient support to these regions to keep up their positive development paths, and that cohesion policy must both reduce disparities and prevent vulnerable regions from falling behind, by taking account of the different trends and dynamics and possibly expanding the scope of and support for the transition region category;

Amendment 127 #

Maria SPYRAKI, Marc JOULAUD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Is convinced that a major challenge for future cohesion policy will be to provide appropriate support to these regions, and that cohesion policy must both reduce disparities and prevent vulnerable regions from falling behind, by taking account of the different trends and dynamics; calls on the Commission to address the phenomenon of the middle- income trap;

Amendment 128 #

Ruža TOMAŠIĆ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Is convinced that a major challenge for future cohesion policy will be to provide appropriate support and Place- sensitive distributed development policies (PSDDP) to these regions, and that cohesion policy must both reduce disparities and prevent vulnerable regions from falling behind, by taking account of the different trends and dynamics;

Amendment 129 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Is convinced that a major challenge for future cohesion policy will be to provide appropriate support to these different types of regions, and that cohesion policy must both reduce disparities and inequalities, as well as prevent vulnerable regions from falling behind, by taking account of the different trends and dynamics;

Amendment 13 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas cohesion policy aims to promote harmonious development of the whole Union, leading to a strengthening of its economic, social and territorial cohesion, in a spirit of solidarity and cooperation and with the aim of promoting growth, and reducing the backwardness of the least ~~favour~~developed regions;

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Underlines the importance of equal access to education, training and cultural activities in delivering genuine convergence and reducing disparities and socioeconomic inequalities among European regions;

Amendment 130 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

Amendment 131 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Is convinced that a ~~major~~ challenge for future cohesion policy will be to provide appropriate support to these regions, and that cohesion policy must both reduce disparities and prevent vulnerable ~~region~~territories from falling behind, by taking account of the different trends and dynamics;

Amendment 132 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Recalls that, in order to support the middle-income regions and to offer solutions to their problems, the future cohesion policy should properly cover, support and include them in the next programming period; furthermore, the Commission should reflect on an alternative system of categorization not based on a rigorous separation, but instead guided by a continuum principle along which all the different regions might be properly placed; in this context, recalls the importance of complementary indicators to the GDP in order to offer a more precise picture of the socio- economic conditions of these specific regions;

Amendment 133 #

Ivana MALETIĆ, Marc JOULAUD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Considers that more attention should be given to an early identification of vulnerabilities and to increase the ability of regions to adapt to new circumstances; takes the view that the impacts of the recent crises, such as the financial, social and climate crisis, have to be analysed and conclusions to be drawn for the role of cohesion policy in supporting regions' resilience without jeopardising the long-term nature of cohesion policy;

Amendment 134 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Welcomes the Commission’s launch of a pilot project to provide tailored support geared to the specific challenges facing regions in industrial transition; calls on the Commission to draw lessons from the pilot project as soon as possible, and believes that smart specialisation strategies have the potential to offer better support to these regions in their development strategies and, more generally, promote differentiated implementation at regional level; stresses however that the results of Smart Specialization strategy process were, in some regions, inadequate due to the lack of resources, potential partners, tech transfer support system etc., and calls therefore for more cooperation and exchange of knowledge and experience among the regions.

Amendment 135 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Welcomes the Commission’s launch of a pilot project to provide tailored support geared to the specific challenges facing regions in industrial transition; calls on the Commission to draw lessons from the pilot project as soon as possible, and believes that smart specialisation strategies have the potential to offer better support to these regions in their development strategies and, more generally, promote differentiated implementation at regional level; believes that tailor-made support for regions in industrial transition should take a holistic approach and focus on managing the transition process including strategy building, public participation, capacity building and networking;

Amendment 136 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

Amendment 137 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Welcomes the Commission’s launch of a pilot projects such as the Vanguard Initiative to provide tailored support geared to the specific challenges facing regions in industrial transition; calls on the Commission to draw lessons from the pilot project as soon as possible, and believes that smart specialisation strategies ~~have the potential to offer better~~will support to these regions in their development strategies ~~and, more generally, promote~~with a differentiated implementation at regional level;

Amendment 138 #

Norica NICOLAI, Daniel BUDA, Maria Gabriela ZOANĂ, Dan NICA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

Amendment 139 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for territories which are lagging behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considers that cohesion policy could contribute to the promotion of social and fiscal convergence by providing incentives; calls on the Commission to take better account of this aspect in the European Semestercohesion policy is vital to implement policies that ensure the functioning of the single market, backed by appropriate structural reforms that ensure a healthy investment environment;

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas cohesion policy aims to promote harmonious and balanced development of the whole Union, leading to a strengthening of its economic, social and territorial cohesion, in a spirit of solidarity and with the aim of promoting growth, and reducing the backwardness of the least favoured regions;

Amendment 14 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Urges the Commission to continue investing in culture, ~~education, youth and sport, and to build on the positive outcomes of the two previous generations of programmes (2007-2013; 2014-2020)~~and in particular in the creative and cultural industries, with a special emphasis on very small and small and medium-sized enterprises in the sectors concerned, education, youth and sport, and to build on the positive outcomes of the two previous generations of programmes (2007-2013; 2014-2020), at the same time improving the implementation rate for programmes and selecting high-quality projects which are financially viable and can boost the economic dynamism of and the creation of high-quality jobs in the regions concerned;

Amendment 140 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for territories which are lagging behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considers thatInvites the Commission to further explore in the European Semester how cohesion policy c~~ould~~an contribute to ~~the promotion of social~~economic and ~~fisc~~social convergence by ~~providing incentives; calls on the Commission to take better account of this aspect in the European Semester;~~building on investments and structural reforms

Amendment 141 #

Marc JOULAUD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for territories which are lagging behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considers that cohesion policy could contribute to the promotion of social and fiscal convergence by providing incentives; underlines in this regard the possibility to rely for instance on the European Pilar of Social Rights concerning social convergence and, concerning fiscal convergence, to encourage Member States to put in place strategies to identify and eliminate harmful tax practices as regards European and international standards ;calls on the Commission to take better account of this aspect in the European Semester;

Amendment 142 #

Martina MICHELS, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS, Martina ANDERSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for territories which are lagging behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considers that cohesion policy could contribute to the promotion of social and fiscal convergence by providing incentives; calls on the Commission to take better account of this aspect in the European Semester; considers that urban dimension and social dimension of cohesion policy should be strengthened and better integrated with the economic policy, achieving the appropriate policy mix, taking into account also the territorial specifities.

Amendment 143 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for territories which are lagging behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considers that cohesion policy could contribute to the promotion of social and fiscal convergence by providing incentives, but reiterates its position that cohesion policy must not be subject to any conditionalities at European level that cannot be influenced by local and regional authorities and other beneficiaries; calls on the Commission to take better account of this aspect in the European Semester;

Amendment 144 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

Amendment 145 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for territories which are lagging behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considers that cohesion policy could contribute to the promotion of social and fiscal convergence by providing incentives; is of the opinion that a system of positive incentives would be more in line with the performance orientation of these policies; calls on the Commission to take better account of this aspect in the European Semester;

Amendment 146 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for territories which are lagging behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considers that cohesion policy could contribute to the promotion of social and fiscal convergence by providing incentives; calls on the Commission to take better account of this aspect in the European Semester and to properly involve local and regional authorities in order to increase efficiency and ownership of the process;

Amendment 147 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for territories which are lagging behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considers that cohesion policy could contribute to the promotion of social, economic and fiscal convergence by providing incentives to the structural reforms and smart fiscal policies; calls on the Commission to take better account of this aspect in the European Semester;

Amendment 148 #

Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Victor BOŞTINARU, Mercedes BRESSO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area, as well as the unequal conditions experienced by individual regions, may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for territories which are lagging behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considers that cohesion policy could contribute to the promotion of social and fiscal convergence by providing incentives; calls on the Commission to take better account of this aspect in the European Semester;

Amendment 149 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for territories which are ~~lagg~~falling behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; ~~considers~~points out that cohesion policy ~~could contribute to the~~is geared to promoti~~on of~~ng social ~~and fiscal convergence by providing incentives~~, economic and territorial convergence; calls on the Commission to take better account of this aspect in the European Semester;

Amendment 15 #

Martina MICHELS, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS, Martina ANDERSON

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas balanced social and economic development throughout Europe is crucial to maintain and promote social peace and an innovative, sustainable and inclusive European integration process that is based on broad public support;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Urges the Commission to ~~continu~~increase invest~~ing~~ments in culture, education, youth and sport, and to build on the positive outcomes of the two previous generations of programmes (2007-2013; 2014-2020) and taking also into due account their shortcomings and flaws;

Amendment 150 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

Amendment 151 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change and the circular economy should be further strengthened as priority areas for cohesion policy in future;

Amendment 152 #

Norica NICOLAI, Daniel BUDA, Maria Gabriela ZOANĂ, Dan NICA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)

14b. Regrets that the Commission did not come with more integrated evaluation of cross-cutting policies, and synergies between different European policies are not reported;

Amendment 153 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Supports ~~a strong~~ thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives~~, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs~~ and the achievement of fundamental European objectives under the Treaties, leaving national managing authorities the task of tailoring their growth strategies to regional requirements, as well as ensuring that cohesion policy can offer integrated and differentiated solutions at local level; stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future, while infrastructural development remains a priority for Eastern and Central European countries;

Amendment 154 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Supports ~~a strong~~the thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving ~~managing~~national authorities the task of drawing up their ~~territorial~~development strategies on the basis of their ~~needs~~territorial needs, so that the cohesion policy can offer integrated and distinct solutions at local level; stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future, while the development of infrastructure remains a priority for Eastern and Central European countries;

Amendment 155 #

Martina MICHELS, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS, Martina ANDERSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that employment, in particular for young people, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future; takes the view that, in order meet these challenges, indicators complementary to per capita GDP should be taken into account in connection with the allocation of funds;

Amendment 156 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that ~~employment,~~social integration and culture, decent employment and education, combating poverty and discrimination, civil research and innovation, support for SMEs, climate ~~change~~action and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;

Amendment 157 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change – including risk-preparedness, energy efficiency and sustainable urban mobility – and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;

Amendment 158 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Supports a ~~strong~~ thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, however giving certain flexibility and leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their ~~territorial strategi~~strategies and programmes on the basis of their needs; stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change and the circular economy, as well as social inclusion and combating inequalities should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;

Amendment 159 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. ~~Supports a str~~Calls ong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future Commission for more flexibility in selection of priorities by Member States and the European region, advocates for bilateral partnership agreements with the Commission what will better respond to the territorial strategies and geographic specifies and needs;

Amendment 16 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the 7th Cohesion Report shows that ~~regional disparities are narrowing again, but that the picture is uneven, and that certain~~GDP per head in many less developed regions converged towards the EU average, but they lost employment and that the regions with GDP per head well above the EU average have grown faster than the less developed, thus disparities persist, or are shifting or growing, between and within regions;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Emphasises that public entities must receive funding, aid and subsidies under cohesion policy primarily in response to the need to conserve natural and historical heritage, but that cohesion policy must also support projects carried out by very small and small and medium-sized enterprises in the cultural and creative innovation sector, provided that the projects in question generate substantial added value, are financially viable, enjoy significant co- financing, are of high quality, are relevant to the needs of the region concerned and do not involve the large- scale use of the most insecure forms of employment;

Amendment 160 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs and different potentials, and the regions where results can be achieved; stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;

Amendment 161 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that better employment~~, innov~~ opportunities, new skills and knowledge, innovation, industrial transformation, support for SMEs, climate change and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;

Amendment 162 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs~~; stresses that~~ in a functioning MLG framework; stresses that employment- particularly youth unemployment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;

Amendment 163 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs after inclusive consultation at local and regional levels; stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;

Amendment 164 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Supports a strong thematic concentration ~~on a limited number of priorities~~ linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs, and ensuring that it can be tailored for the least developed regions; stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;

Amendment 165 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that employment, social inclusion, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change, affordable housing and the circular economy ~~should~~ constitute priority areas for the future cohesion policy ~~in future;~~.

Amendment 166 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change ~~and~~, the circular economy and digital and transport infrastructure should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;

Amendment 167 #

Maria SPYRAKI, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, transition to new technologies, climate change and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;

Amendment 168 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change, the demographic challenge and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;

Amendment 169 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

Amendment 17 #

Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Marc JOULAUD, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Bogdan Andrzej ZDROJEWSKI, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Francis ZAMMIT DIMECH, Stefano MAULLU, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, Milan ZVER, Sabine VERHEYEN

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the 7th Cohesion Report shows that regional disparities are narrowing again, but that the p~~icture is~~attern is very uneven, and that certain disparities persist, or are shifting or growing, between and within regions, in particular in some eurozone Member States;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Calls on the Commission to fully exploit potential synergies between cohesion policy and other EU policies; points out that much more can still be done to bring about a greater synergy between the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs) and other European programmes outlined for the 2014-2020 programming period, with specific reference to Erasmus+ and Creative Europe, through the provision of better information on an EU-wide basis and by means of much more resolute implementation in the Member States and their regions;

Amendment 170 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

Amendment 171 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Supports ~~a strong~~the thematic concentration on a ~~limi~~n appropriated number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;

Amendment 172 #

Laurenţiu REBEGA, Steeve BRIOIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a ~~limi~~n appropriated number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;

Amendment 173 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Welcomes the adoption of the European Pillar for Social Rights, which represents a step forward in building a social Europe; reiterates its commitment to the ESF, the Youth Guarantee and the Youth Employment Initiative in view of their role in meeting the challenges of employment, social inclusion, learning and vocational training;deleted

Amendment 174 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

Amendment 175 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Welcomes the adoption of the European Pillar for Social Rights, which represents a step forward in building a social Europe; reiterates its commitment to the ESF as a strong integrated part of the ESI funds, the Youth Guarantee and the Youth Employment Initiative in view of their role in meeting the challenges of employment, social inclusion, learning and vocational training;

Amendment 176 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Welcomes the adoption of the European Pillar for Social Rights, which represents a step forward in building a social Europe; reiterates its commitment to the ESF, the Youth Guarantee, the European Solidarity Corps and the Youth Employment Initiative in view of their role in meeting the challenges of employment, social inclusion, learning and vocational training;

Amendment 177 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Welcomes the adoption of the European Pillar for Social Rights, which represents a step forward in building a social Europe; reiterates its commitment to the ESF as part of the ESIF, the Youth Guarantee and the Youth Employment Initiative in view of their role in meeting the challenges of employment, social inclusion, learning and vocational training;

Amendment 178 #

Hannu TAKKULA, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Ivan JAKOVČIĆ, Matthijs van MILTENBURG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Welcomes the adoption of the European Pillar for Social Rights, which represents a step forward in building a social Europe; reiterates its commitment to the ESF, the Youth Guarantee and the Youth Employment Initiative in view of their role in meeting the challenges of ~~employment~~job creation, economic growth, social inclusion, learning and vocational training;

Amendment 179 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. ~~Welcomes the adoption of the European Pillar for Social Rights, which represents a step forward in building a social Europe; reiterates its commitment to~~Acknowledges steps taken towards more social Europe; welcomes instruments such as the ESF, the Youth Guarantee and the Youth Employment Initiative in view of their role in meeting the challenges of employment, social inclusion, learning and vocational training;

Amendment 18 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the 7th Cohesion Report shows that regional disparities are narrowing again, but that the picture is uneven, and that certain disparities persist, or are shifting or growing, between ~~and~~or within regions and member states;

Amendment 18 #

Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Emphasises the huge innovation and employment potential of renewable energy sources; calls on the Commission to integrate a specific energy and environmental strategy into the EU's economic, social and territorial cohesion policies while also taking into account education and culture;

Amendment 180 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 – subparagraph 1 (new)

Strongly opposes any attempt at separating European Social Fund from cohesion policy;

Amendment 181 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16a. Calls on the Council and the Parliament to keep, in the forthcoming review of the Regulation(s), at least 20 % of the total allocation of the ESF devoted to fighting poverty and social exclusion, and also to examine, in particular in the framework of the European Social Fund and the EU Programme for Employment and Social Innovation (EaSI), the funding possibilities for helping every Member State establish a minimum income scheme where it does not exist or improve the functioning and effectiveness of existing systems;

Amendment 182 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Emphasises that future cohesion policy should focus more on protecting and supporting communities and territories adversely affected by globalisation (plant relocations, job losses) and also by intra- EU similar trends; calls for the scope for coordination between the Structural Funds and the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund to be explored and for the creation of a similar adjustment fund for intra-EU delocalization cases to be considered;

Amendment 183 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Emphasises that future cohesion policy should focus more on protecting and supporting communities and territories adversely affected by globalisation (plant relocations, job losses); calls for the ~~scope for coordination between the Structural Funds and the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund to be explored;~~Commission to explore the mainstreaming and integration of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund in the future European Structural and Investment Funds

Amendment 184 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Emphasises that future cohesion policy should focus more on protecting and supporting marginalized communities and territories adversely affected by globalisation (plant relocations, job losses); calls for the scope for coordination between the Structural Funds and the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund to be explored;

Amendment 185 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Emphasises that future cohesion policy should focus more on protecting and supporting communities and territories adversely affected by globalisation (plant relocations, job losses); calls for ~~the scope for~~ coordination between the Structural Funds and the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund ~~to be explored~~in the special cases;

Amendment 186 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Notes that vulnerability to climate change varies widely from one region to another; considers that the ESI Funds should be used as effectively as possible to help the EU meet its commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement; insists on the need for greater local and regional involvement in measures to combat climate change, accurate information for citizens regarding measures to be taken and exchanges of good practice between municipalities and regions in different parts of the Union; insists that funding under the solidarity instruments for use in the event of natural disasters should be made available as rapidly as possible;

Amendment 187 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Notes that vulnerability to climate change varies widely from one region to another; considers that the ESI Funds should continue to be used as effectively as possible to help the EU meet its commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement; in this regard, underlines the importance of continuing support for the energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy in buildings, as this represents a sector which can substantially help both in terms of reducing carbon emissions and increasing the use of renewable energy; insists that funding under the solidarity instruments for use in the event of natural disasters should be made available as rapidly as possible;

Amendment 188 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Notes that vulnerability to climate change varies widely from one region to another; considers that the ESI Funds should be used as effectively as possible to help the EU meet its commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement; insists that funding under the solidarity instruments for use in the event of natural disasters should be made available as rapidly as possible; calls, in that context, on the Commission to work together with the Member States to ensure that solidarity instruments can be deployed in a prompt, effective and coordinated manner when disasters occur;

Amendment 189 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Notes that vulnerability to climate change varies widely from one region to another; considers that the ESI Funds should be used as effectively as possible to help the EU meet its commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement; insists that funding under the solidarity instruments for use in the event of natural disasters should be made available as rapidly as possible; reminds that cohesion policy needs to take into account the COP21 agreement on climate change and the UN Sustainable Development Goals for 2030;

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the 7th Cohesion Report contains worrying information about unemployment rates, particularly youth unemployment rates, which have not reverted to the levels seen before the crisis, and about competitiveness and social inclusion;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Stresses the importance of addressing social exclusion and including persons from disadvantaged backgrounds to ensure they have full and equal access to both culture and education;

Amendment 190 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Notes that vulnerability to climate change varies widely from one region to another; considers that the ESI Funds should be used as effectively as possible to help the EU meet its commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement; insists that funding under the solidarity instruments for use in the event of natural disasters should be made available as rapidly as possible while taking into consideration intra- regional disparities, which could affect the necessary threshold for the activation of such instruments;

Amendment 191 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Notes that vulnerability to climate change varies widely from one region to another; considers that the ESI Funds should be used as effectively as possible to help the EU meet its commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement; insists that funding under the solidarity instruments for use in the event of natural disasters should be made available as rapidly as possible; stresses the need for increasing convergence between the EU Civil Protection Mechanism and the European Solidarity Fund;

Amendment 192 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Notes that vulnerability to climate change varies ~~widely~~ from one region to another; considers that the ESI Funds should be used as effectively as possible to help the EU meet its commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement and climate-related spending should be significantly increased compared to the current MFF and reach 30% as soon as possible; insists that funding under the solidarity instruments for use in the event of natural disasters should be made available as rapidly as possible;

Amendment 193 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Notes that vulnerability to climate change varies widely from one region to another; ~~considers that the ESI Funds should be used as effectively as possible to help the EU meet its commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement;~~ insists that funding under the solidarity instruments for use in the event of natural disasters should be made available as rapidly as possible;

Amendment 194 #

Marc JOULAUD, Jan OLBRYCHT, Maurice PONGA, Ivana MALETIĆ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Calls for ESI funds to be used to address demographic challenges (ageing, population loss and demographic pressure) which affect European regions in a variety of specific ways; stresses in particular the need to provide adequate support to the territories, such as some outermost regions, facing growing population pressure caused by a high birth rate and large-scale irregular migration;

Amendment 195 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Calls for ESI funds to be used to address demographic challenges (ageing, population loss and demographic pressure) which affect European regions in a variety of specific ways; to safeguard demographic sustainability, by guaranteeing an ageing population access to suitable goods and services; and to help people to maintain a work-life balance;

Amendment 196 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Calls for ESI funds to be used to address demographic challenges (ageing, population loss and demographic pressure) which affect European regions in a variety of specific ways; insists that under no circumstances can the relocation of migrants be considered an acceptable solution to the demographic problems experienced at European level.

Amendment 197 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Calls for ESI funds to be used to address properly the demographic challenges ~~(ageing, popul~~being faced by several EU regions (ageing, negative net migration, l~~oss and~~ack of sufficient adequate human capital or demographic pressure on the contrary) which affect European regions in a variety of specific ways;

Amendment 198 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Calls for ESI funds to be used to address demographic challenges (ageing, population loss ~~and~~, demographic pressure, inability to attract or retain skilled workforce) which affect European regions in a variety of specific ways;

Amendment 199 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Calls for ESI funds to ~~be us~~more actively targeted to address demographic challenges (ageing, population loss and demographic pressure) which affect European regions in a variety of specific ways;

Amendment 2 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 15 a (new)

– having regard to the Commission's reflection paper of 28 June 2017 on the Future of EU Finances;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Believes that culture, education, youth and sport play a crucial role in shaping the future of the European Union ~~and have~~, in particular in view of building a community of citizens united in diversity by the ties of solidarity and have, among others, tremendous potential in terms of generating European added value and economic gpro~~wth~~sperity in all the EU regions, in particular within the framework of cohesion policy;

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the 7th Cohesion Report contains worrying information about unemployment rates, which in many regions have not reverted to the levels seen before the crisis, and about competitiveness and social inclusion;

Amendment 20 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Constanze KREHL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Emphasises that administrative procedures must be used which make for rigorous selection and monitoring of projects supported under cohesion policy, in particular as regards the achievement of objectives set, but that, at the same time, the administrative burden must be kept to a reasonable level and not constitute an obstacle for very small and small and medium-size enterprises which are seeking to obtain funding under cohesion policy and whose projects meet the selection criteria;

Amendment 200 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Underlines that Investments through the ESIF fund support other political priorities such as research, digitalisation or combating climate change as well and stresses therefore that not only the poorest regions need support in these areas but all regions and a concentration of Cohesion policy on only the least developed regions would hinder progress in these political priorities in the whole European Union;

Amendment 201 #

Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Andrey NOVAKOV, Maria SPYRAKI, Jan OLBRYCHT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Urges the Commission to do everything required to ensure that the gender dimension is central to all aspects of cohesion policy;

Amendment 202 #

Marc JOULAUD, Jan OLBRYCHT, Maurice PONGA, Ivana MALETIĆ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Stresses the potential of investments in culture, heritage, youth and sport to create jobs and growth and to improve social cohesion;

Amendment 203 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Calls on the Commission and the Council to facilitate a timely start of the next programming period in order to prevent late payments and decommitments which hamper positive results of cohesion policy;

Amendment 204 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)

19b. Stresses the need to promote further investments in quality education, training and vocational training, further improvements in the labour market for the creation of quality jobs and to tackle youth unemployment in particular; welcomes a promotion for social inclusion and to be more ambitious to combat poverty and any form of discrimination; supports the development of cultural and creative industries that are closely linked to innovation and creativity; highlights the investment priorities of research, technological development, innovation and creativity; investments in SMEs and start-ups and investments in digitalisation of industries and societies;

Amendment 205 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)

19b. Emphasises the importance of keeping same categories of regions, namely less developed, transition and more developed regions in the future programming framework to enable comparative studies on the impact of cohesion policy post 2020;

Amendment 206 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 c (new)

19c. Stresses that although cohesion policy has mitigated the impact of the recent economic and financial crisis in the EU, and that of the austerity measures, regional disparities, as well as disparities in competitiveness and social inequalities, remain high; calls for strengthened action to reduce these disparities and prevent the development of new disparities in all types of regions, while maintaining and consolidating support for the regions so as to facilitate ownership of the policy in every type of region and to achieve EU objectives throughout the EU; considers, in this context, that more attention needs to be paid to making regions more resilient to sudden shocks;

Amendment 207 #

Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Maria SPYRAKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 c (new)

19c. Regrets that the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) has been not used to its limits; calls to explore of new opportunities to better support coastal areas;

Amendment 208 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Stresses that the 7th Cohesion Report highlights the need to take account of indicators complementary to per capita GDP for the purpose of allocating funds, in line with the challenges and needs identified, including at sub-regional level; considers that a non-exhaustive set of complementary indicators such as social progress index, poverty, demography and infrastructure quality are suitable in the process of programming the funding and for indicating the share of EU funding in order to adequately reflect the needs of the EU regions; notes the importance of taking as a basis data which are of high quality, reliable and available; supports the use of social criteria, in particular the regional unemployment rate and the youth unemployment rate; invites the Commission to assess the possibility that the set of eligibility criteria are to be considered at the NUTS levels;

Amendment 209 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Stresses that the 7th Cohesion Report highlights the need to take account of indicators complementary to per capita GDP for the purpose of allocating funds, in line with the challenges and needs identified, including at sub-regional level; notes the importance of taking as a basis data which are of high quality, reliable and available, therefore, requests to the Commission and Eurostat to provide the greatest detail and geographical disaggregation possible in statistics of relevance for devising suitable European Cohesion policies; supports the use of social criteria, in particular the unemployment rate and the youth unemployment rate; Considers that demographic criteria could also be considered;

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas the 7th Cohesion Report draws attention to the diversity of regions and territories, including within current categories of regions, owing to their specific circumstances (ultraperipherality, low income, low growth, etc.), making the EU financial support indispensable and a tailored approach essential;

Amendment 21 #

Norica NICOLAI, Daniel BUDA, Maria Gabriela ZOANĂ, Dan NICA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Notes the importance of inclusion for migrants and refugees and how offering them equal access to education, training, apprenticeships in their new state of residence, along with the unique culture of their new state of residence helps them feel welcome and to integrate and settle;

Amendment 210 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Stresses that the 7th Cohesion Report highlights the need to take account of indicators complementary to per capita GDP for the purpose of allocating funds, in line with the challenges and needs identified, including at sub-regional level, while continuing to give priority to GDP per capita indicators, taking into account the need to reduce existing disparities at European level; notes the importance of taking as a basis data which are of high quality, reliable and available; supports the use of social criteria, in particular the long- term unemployment rate and the youth unemployment rate, as well as life expectancy;

Amendment 211 #

Laurenţiu REBEGA, Steeve BRIOIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

Amendment 212 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Stresses that the 7th Cohesion Report highlights the need to take account of indicators complementary to per capita GDP for the purpose of allocating funds, in line with the challenges and needs identified, including at sub-regional level; notes the importance of taking as a basis data which are of high quality, reliable and available; supports the use of social criteria, in particular the unemployment rate and the youth unemployment rate; underlines, however, that the GDP should remain the main indicator for allocating funds;

Amendment 213 #

Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Stresses that the 7th Cohesion Report highlights the need to take account of indicators complementary to per capita GDP for the purpose of allocating funds, in line with the challenges and needs identified, including at sub-regional level; notes the importance of taking as a basis data which are of high quality, up to date, reliable and available; supports the use of social criteria, in particular the unemployment rate ~~and~~, the youth unemployment rate as well as long-term unemployment rate;

Amendment 214 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Stresses that the 7th Cohesion Report highlights the need to take account of indicators complementary to per capita GDP, which should remain the main indicator, for the purpose of allocating funds, in line with the challenges and needs identified, including at sub-regional level; notes the importance of taking as a basis data which are of high quality, reliable and available; supports the use of ~~social criteria, in particular the unemployment rate and the youth unemployment rate~~a complementary set of social, environmental and demographic indicators;

Amendment 215 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Stresses that the 7th Cohesion Report highlights the need to take account of indicators complementary to per capita GDP for the purpose of allocating funds, in line with the challenges and needs identified, including at sub-regional level; notes the importance of taking as a basis data which are of high quality, reliable, structured and available; supports the use of social criteria, in particular the unemployment rate and the youth unemployment rate;

Amendment 216 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Stresses that ~~the 7th Cohesion Report highlights the need to take account of indicators complementary to per capita GDP for the purpose of allocating funds~~GDP should continue to be the eligibility criterion to determine the national allocation; believes that additional indicators could be used at regional and sub-regional level, in line with the challenges and needs identified~~, including at sub-regional level~~; notes the importance of taking as a basis data which are of high quality, reliable and available; supports the use of social criteria, in particular the unemployment rate and the youth unemployment rate;

Amendment 217 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Advocates st~~epping up~~ronger integrated approaches, and stresses that the ESF must remain an integral component of European regional policy, by virtue of its essential territorial dimension; in this respect stresses the importance of the second pillar of CAP in contribution to the implementation of the Europe 2020 Strategy by promoting sustainable rural development and rural municipalities;

Amendment 218 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Advocates stepping up integrated approaches, and stresses that the ESF must remain an integral component of European regional policy~~, by virtue of its essential territorial dimension~~;

Amendment 219 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Advocates stepping up integrated approaches, and str~~ess~~ongly emphasizes that the ESF must remain an integral component of European regional policy, by virtue of its essential territorial dimension;

Amendment 22 #

Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Marc JOULAUD, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Bogdan Andrzej ZDROJEWSKI, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Francis ZAMMIT DIMECH, Stefano MAULLU, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, Sabine VERHEYEN, Milan ZVER, Andrea BOCSKOR

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas the 7th Cohesion Report draws attention to the diversity of regions and territories, including within current categories of regions, owing to their specific circumstances ~~(ultraperipherality, low income, low growth, etc.)~~, making a tailored territorial approach essential;

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls for the creation in the next programming period of ~~two thematic objec~~possibilitives onf funding culture ~~and~~, education, ~~explicitly referenced as such~~youth and sport via special thematic objectives to this purpose in the ESIF;

Amendment 220 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Advocates stepping up integrated approaches, and stresses that the ESF must remain an integral component of European regional policy, by virtue of its essential ~~territorial~~social cohesion dimension;

Amendment 221 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Stresses that greater consideration should be given to respect for fundamental rights in the implementation of ESIF programmes; believes that fundamental rights can only be guaranteed when appropriate principles are established and underpinned by effective follow-up action, such as ex-ante conditionality;

Amendment 222 #

Louis-Joseph MANSCOUR, Jean-Paul DENANOT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Underlines that grants must remain the main form of cohesion policy financing in the next programming period;

Amendment 223 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Emphasises that financial instruments can be an effective lever and that they should be promoted if they generate added value; stresses, however, that their effectiveness hinges on many factors (nature of the project, of the territory or of the risk) and that all regions, regardless of their level of development, must be free to determuture cohesion policy must establish the right balance between grants and financial instruments, bearing complementarity, efficiency and local circumstances in mind; takes the view, in particular, that logical conclusions should be drawn from the Commission report entitled ‘Financial instruments under the European Structural and Investment Funds’, published in December 2017, and that financial instruments should in future be less widely used for the programmes upon which they have the least impact, i.e. the ESF and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development; opposes any bindineg t~~he most appropriate method of financing; opposes any binding targets for the use of financial instruments;~~ argets for the use of financial instruments and points out that grants, which have been shown to be most effective in a number public policy areas, must be maintained as the main instrument of cohesion policy;

Amendment 224 #

Martina MICHELS, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS, Martina ANDERSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Emphasises that financial instruments can be an effective lever and that they should be promoted if they generate added value; stresses, however, that their effectiveness hinges on many factors (nature of the project, of the territory or of the risk) and thatReiterates that grants must remain the basis of the financing of cohesion policy and points out that financial instruments can play a complementary role, but stresses, that their effectiveness hinges on many factors (nature of the project, of the territory or of the risk) and that they should be used with caution, based on an appropriate ex-ante assessment; grants should be complemented only where such financial instruments demonstrate an added value, and all regions, regardless of their level of development, must be free to determine the most appropriate method of financing; opposes any binding targets for the use of financial instruments;

Amendment 225 #

Maria SPYRAKI, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Emphasises that financial instruments ~~can~~have been proven to be an effective lever and that they should be promoted if they generate added value; stresses, however, that their effectiveness hinges on many factors (nature of the project, of the territory or of the risk) and that all regions, regardless of their level of development, must be free to determine the most appropriate method of financing; calls however on the Commission to increase the administrative capacity of regions and facilitate the deployment of financial instruments; opposes any binding targets for the use of financial instruments;

Amendment 226 #

Norica NICOLAI, Daniel BUDA, Maria Gabriela ZOANĂ, Dan NICA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Emphasises that financial instruments can be an effective lever and that they should be promoted if they generate added value; notes, however, that the use of financial instruments must not become an end in itself or a substitute for grants; stresses, however, that their effectiveness hinges on many factors (nature of the project, of the territory or of the risk) and that all regions, regardless of their level of development, must be free to determine the most appropriate method of financing; opposes any binding targets for the use of financial instruments;

Amendment 227 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

Amendment 228 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Emphasises that grants should remain the main cohesion policy funding instrument, but acknowledges that financial instruments can be an effective lever and that they should be promoted if they generate added value; stresses, however, that their effectiveness hinges on many factors (nature of the project, of the territory or of the risk) and that all regions, regardless of their level of development, must be free to determine the most appropriate method of financing; opposes any binding targets for the use of financial instruments;

Amendment 229 #

Hannu TAKKULA, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Urmas PAET, Ivan JAKOVČIĆ, Matthijs van MILTENBURG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Emphasises that financial instruments can be an effective lever and that they should be promoted if they generate added value and in the areas where they are most relevant, as they are a market driven instrument; stresses, however, that their effectiveness hinges on many factors (nature of the project, of the territory or of the risk) and that all regions, regardless of their level of development, must be free to determine the most appropriate method of financing; opposes any binding targets for the use of financial instruments;

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas the 7th Cohesion Report draws attention to the diversity of regions and territories, including within current categories of regions, owing to their specific circumstances (ultraperipherality, sparse population, low income, low growth, etc.), making a tailored approach essential;

Amendment 23 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls for the creation in the next programming period of two thematic objectives on culture and education, explicitly referenced as such, in order to boost the effectiveness and efficiency of investments and projects;

Amendment 230 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

Amendment 231 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Emphasises that financial instruments can be an effective lever and that they should be promoted only if they generate added value; stresses, however, that their effectiveness hinges on many factors (nature of the project, of the territory or of the risk) and that all regions, regardless of their level of development, must be free to determine the most appropriate method of financing; opposes any binding targets for the use of financial instruments;

Amendment 232 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Emphasiszes that financial instruments can be an effective lever and that they should be promoted ~~if they generate added value; stresses, however, that their effectiveness hinges on many factors (nature of the project, of the territory or of the risk) and~~based on the appropriate ex ante assessment; stresses that all regions, regardless of their level of development, must be free to determine the most appropriate method of financing; ~~opposes any binding targets for the use of financial instruments;~~stresses the need to further optimize the synergies between the ESI Funds and financial instruments, including EFSI, as well as with the other centrally managed programmes.

Amendment 233 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. ~~Emphasis~~Underlines that financial instruments can be an effective lever and that they should be promoted if they generate added value; stresses, however, that their effectiveness hinges on many factors (nature of the project, of the territory or of the risk) and that all regions, regardless of their level of development, must be free to determine the most appropriate method of financing; opposes any binding targets for the use of financial instruments;

Amendment 234 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Emphasises that financial instruments can be an effective lever and that they shcould be promoted if they generate added value; stresses, however, that their effectiveness hinges on many factors (nature of the project, of the territory or of the risk) and that all regions, regardless of their level of development, must be free to determine the most appropriate method of financing; opposes any binding targets for the use of financial instruments;

Amendment 235 #

Norica NICOLAI, Daniel BUDA, Maria Gabriela ZOANĂ, Dan NICA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22a. Stresses that low-risk financial instruments are preferable to equity, trust funds and some types of bond and proposes promoting loans at a subsidised rate - preferably with sufficiently long payback times - and regulating and facilitating forms of crowd funding and peer-to-peer and social lending;

Amendment 236 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Calls for the conditions governing the use of financial instruments to be simplified and for the coordination of these instruments with grants ~~to be facilitated~~/non-reimbursable resources to be facilitated and the provisions of future regulations to be sufficiently flexible and to establish operational procedures allowing combination with grants for the same project; emphasises the importance of the complementary role played by national development banks and institutions in implementing financial instruments tailored to local needs; regards it as essential to harmonise the rules on financial instruments, however they are managed;

Amendment 237 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Calls for the conditions governing the use of financial instruments to be simplified and for the coordination of these instruments with grants to be facilitated and the provisions of the future regulations should be sufficiently flexible and establish operational arrangements that allow for the combination of grants for the same project; emphasises the importance of the complementary role played by national development banks and institutions in implementing financial instruments tailored to local needs; regards it as essential to harmonise the rules on financial instruments, however they are managed;

Amendment 238 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Calls for the conditions governing the use of financial instruments to be simplified and for the coordination of these instruments with grants to be facilitated; emphasises the importance of the complementary role played by national development banks and institutions in implementing financial instruments tailored to local needs; regards it as essential to harmonise the rules on financial instruments as much as possible, however they are managed;

Amendment 239 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23a. Calls for strengthening capacities ,where necessary, for the management of cohesion policy at national level in the Member States, with technical support from the Commission in order to ensure the more effective use of the available funds;

Amendment 24 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas the 7th Cohesion Report draws attention to the significant diversity of regions and territories, including within current categories of regions, owing to their specific circumstances (ultraperipherality, low income, low growth, etc.), making a tailored approach essential;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls for the creation in the next programming period of at least two thematic objectives on culture ~~and education~~, education, the creative industries and tourism, explicitly referenced as such;

Amendment 240 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23a. Calls on the Commission to retain grants as a special form of solidarity between EU regions;

Amendment 241 #

Victor BOŞTINARU, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Andrea COZZOLINO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Believes that it is both legitimate and necessary to ~~establish a link between cohesion policy and the~~ guarantee of an environment conducive to investment, effectiveness and the proper use of funds, while stressing that cohesion policy is not meant to be reduced to an instrument for serving priorities without reference to its objectives; expresses its support for a balanced link with economic governance where this helps to maximise the impact of ESI Funds; calls on the Commission to overhaul the European Semester to strengthen its territorial dimension and take account of other factors which contribute to the achievement of cohesion objectives, such as real convergence;

Amendment 242 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Believes that it is both legitimate and necessary to establish a link between cohesion policy and the guarantee of an environment conducive to investment, effectiveness and the proper use of funds, while stressing that cohesion policy is not meant to be reduced to an instrument for serving priorities without reference to its objectives; ~~expresses its support for a balanced link with economic governance where this helps to maxim~~rules out any link between the ESI Funds and economic governance that might lead to the consequence of commitments or payments being suspended despite of the regularity of the action taken by beneficiaries; emphasises th~~e impact of ESI Funds~~at such situations necessarily jeopardise the very essence and objectives of the ESI Funds and significantly weaken their impact on the ground; calls on the Commission to overhaul the European Semester to strengthen its territorial dimension and take account of other factors which contribute to the achievement of cohesion objectives, such as real convergence;

Amendment 243 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

Amendment 244 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

Amendment 245 #

Louis-Joseph MANSCOUR, Jean-Paul DENANOT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Believes that it is both legitimate and necessary to establish a link between cohesion policy and the guarantee of an environment conducive to investment, effectiveness and the proper use of funds, while stressing that cohesion policy is not meant to be reduced to an instrument ~~for~~ serving priorities without reference to its objectives, nor should it be a tool of political pressure; expresses its support for a balanced link with economic governance where this helps to maximise the impact of ESI Funds; calls on the Commission to overhaul the European Semester to strengthen its territorial dimension and take account of other factors which contribute to the achievement of cohesion objectives, such as real convergence;

Amendment 246 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Believes that it is both legitimate and necessary to establish a link between cohesion policy and the guarantee of an environment conducive to investment, effectiveness and the proper use of funds, while stressing that cohesion policy is not meant to be reduced to an instrument for serving priorities without reference to its objectivesAcknowledges the value of coordinating cohesion policy and the EU’s macroeconomic policies, while stressing that cohesion policy is not meant merely to be a European Semester instrument; expresses its support for a balanced link with economic governance where this helps to maximise the impact of ESI Funds~~; calls on the Commission to overhaul the European Semester~~ and to ensure they are used correctly; calls on the Commission to strengthen ~~its~~the territorial dimension ~~and take account of other factors which contribute to the achievement of cohesion objectives,~~of the European Semester by making it more flexible and taking into account factors such as real convergence;

Amendment 247 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Believes that ~~it is both legitimate and necessary to establish a~~establishing a positive link between cohesion policy and the guarantee of an environment conducive to investment, effectiveness and the proper use of funds~~, while stressing that cohesion policy is not meant to be reduced~~ must not on any account reduce cohesion policy to an instrument ~~for~~ serving priorities without reference to its objectives; ~~expresses its support for a balanced~~by the same token, regards a link with economic governance, where this helps to maximise the impact of ESI Funds~~; calls on the Commission to overhaul the European Semester to strengthen its territorial dimension and take accoun~~, as balanced and non-punitive; calls on the Commission to take account of the reform ideas put forward as part of othe~~r factors which contribute to the achievement of cohesion objectives, such as real convergence~~ European Semester with a view to strengthening its territorial dimension;

Amendment 248 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Believes that ~~it is both legitimate and necessary to establish~~ a link between cohesion policy and ~~the guarantee of~~ an environment conducive to investment, effectiveness and the proper use of funds is also helpful for the achievements of the cohesion policy objectives, while stressing that cohesion policy is not meant to be reduced to an instrument for serving priorities without reference to its objectives; expresses its support for a balanced link with economic governance where this helps to maximise the impact of ESI Funds; calls on the Commission to overhaul the European Semester to strengthen its territorial dimension and take account of other factors which contribute to the achievement of cohesion objectives, such as real convergence;

Amendment 249 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas almost 120 million Europeans (24%) are poor, living at-risk- of poverty, are severely materially deprived and/or live in households with low work intensity; whereas the number of working poor is increasing and the number of young unemployed people continues to be high;

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Highlights the potential of the cultural and creative sector (CCS) regarding youth employment; stresses that further promotion of and investment in the CCS may contribute substantially to improving investment, growth, innovation and employment; calls on the Commission to consider therefore the special opportunities offered by the whole CCS, including NGOs and small associations;

Amendment 250 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)

24a. Regrets the decision of the European Commission to not take into account the position of the European Parliament, which expressed its opposition to macro-conditionality in its resolution "Building blocks for a post- 2020 EU Cohesion policy" voted on 13 June 2017, and thus to not proceed with a legislative proposal concerning article 23 of the Common Provisions Regulation aimed at reviewing the very rationale of the link between the European Semester and the cohesion policy;

Amendment 251 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)

24a. Points out the unequal conditions faced by potential beneficiaries of cohesion policy resources at the regional and local levels in several Member States resulting from the insufficient application of the subsidiarity principle, unequal degrees of decentralisation and different financial capacities, which may determine whether they are able to use cohesion policy funds effectively;

Amendment 252 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)

24a. Takes note of the review of the Commission of Article 23 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013; regrets that only descriptive information has been provided not allowing for in-depth analysis including impact assessment or assessment of alternatives that might have been helpful for clarifying the specificities of the relation between cohesion policy and economic governance;

Amendment 253 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)

24a. Underlines that the use of financial instruments and of ESI funds should not favour the delocalisation of companies.

Amendment 254 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 b (new)

24b. Stresses also that the reasons underlying the decision of the Commission to not address the issue of macro-conditionality are blatantly contradictory with the findings of the 7th Report itself (which states that the budget balance of sub-national governments has been transformed from a deficit of close to 1% of GDP in 2010 to a surplus, so that the overall general government deficit in 2016, which averaged just under 2% of GDP, was solely accounted for by central government and the Social Security funds); reiterates the need of eliminating any provision for penalties which are unjust, unnecessary and penalise in particular regional and local authorities and project beneficiaries;

Amendment 255 #

Norica NICOLAI, Daniel BUDA, Maria Gabriela ZOANĂ, Dan NICA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Calls for the smart specialisation strategies to be continued~~, and acknowledges the importance of ex-ante conditionalities, which have proved their worth, but~~; takes note of the Court of auditors’ observation in its Special Report 15/2017 that the ex-ante conditionalities provided a consistent framework for assessing the Member States’ readiness to implement EU funds at the start of the 2014-2020 programming period, but it is unclear to what extent this has effectively led to changes on the ground; stresses that they have been a source of complexity and delays in the development and launching of programming; calls on the Commission to re~~duce the number~~consider the prolongation of ex -ante conditionalities, and, in ~~this field,~~case they are maintained to reduce their number and to improve compliance with the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity, making maximum use of existing strategic documents;

Amendment 256 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Calls for the smart specialisation strategies to be continued, and acknowledges the importance of ex-ante conditionalities, which have proved their worth, but stresses that they have been a source of complexity and delays in the development and launching of programming; calls on the Commission to reduce the number of ex ante conditionalities and, in this field, to improve compliance with the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity, making maximum use of existing strategic documents; notes at the same time that the conditionalities must be well defined, geared towards the investments most closely tailored to the growth and jobs agenda and accompanied by clear performance evaluation indicators to ensure equal treatment for all Member States.

Amendment 257 #

Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Victor BOŞTINARU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Calls for the smart specialisation strategies to be continued, and acknowledges the importance of ex-ante conditionalities, which have proved their worth, but stresses that they have been a source of complexity and delays in the development and launching of programming; calls on the Commission to re~~duce the number of ex ante conditionalities and, in this field, to improve compliance with~~vise and rationalise the conditionality mechanism, applying the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity more strictly, making maximum use of existing strategic documents and selecting ex ante conditionalities which have a direct bearing on the effectiveness of the investments;

Amendment 258 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Calls for the smart specialisation strategies to be continued, and acknowledges the importance of ex-ante conditionalities, which have proved their worth, but stresses that they have been a source of complexity and delays in the development and launching of programming; calls on the Commission ~~to reduce~~and the nuMember ~~of ex ante conditionalities and, in this field, to improve compliance with the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity, making~~States to make use to a maximum ~~use~~extent of existing strategic documents which could fulfil future ex ante conditionalities;

Amendment 259 #

Martina MICHELS, Martina ANDERSON, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas one of the key pieces of new information provided by the 7th Cohesion Report concerns the identification of certain areas described as being caught in the ‘middle-income trap’, which risk ~~being left behind~~stagnation or even falling back again behind the already reached level of development;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Urges that objectives be set which offer private actors, in particular very small and small and medium-sized enterprises in the creative and cultural industries, greater scope, provided that the projects submitted meet the criteria of financial soundness, quality and consistency with clearly identified local needs;

Amendment 260 #

Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Andrey NOVAKOV, Jan OLBRYCHT, Maria SPYRAKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Calls for the smart specialisation strategies to be continued, and ~~acknowledges the importance of ex-ante conditionalities, which have proved their worth, but stresses that they~~underlines that ex-ante conditionalities have been a source of complexity and delays in the development and launching of programming; calls on the Commission to reduce ~~the number of~~, clarify and tailor the ex -ante conditionalities to the national needs and, in this field, to improve compliance with the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity, making maximum use of existing strategic documents;

Amendment 261 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Calls for the smart specialisation strategies to be ~~continu~~intensified, and acknowledges the importance of ex-ante conditionalities, which have proved their worth, but stresses that they have been a source of complexity and delays in the development and launching of programming; calls on the Commission to reduce the number of ex ante conditionalities and, in this field, to improve compliance with the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity, making maximum use of existing strategic documents;

Amendment 262 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Calls for the smart specialisation strategies to be continued, and acknowledges the ~~importanc~~value of ex-ante conditionalities, ~~which have proved their worth,~~ but stresses that they have been a source of complexity and delays in the development and launching of programming; calls on the Commission to reduce the number of ex ante conditionalities and, in this field, to improve compliance with the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity, making maximum use of existing strategic documents;

Amendment 263 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25a. Is concerned that the quality of governance in some Member States has decreased with government leaders drifting away from good governance which can also have impacts on the sound implementation of EU funded programmes; calls on all Member States to take due action in order to remove any shadow of doubt on transparency, independence and professionalism of public administrations;

Amendment 264 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Notes that the quality of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to increase administrative capacities; stresses that constant and good quality education is precondition for capacity building, calls therefore the Commission to prepare action plans for educations and exchange of knowledge and best practices among the member states in the fields of project preparation, public procurement, state aid rules, project implementation, financial management etc.; underlines that final beneficiaries should have administrative support from the responsible authorities during implementation; encourages Member States to use simplified cost option since it proves to be easier to implement and resulted with no errors.

Amendment 265 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Notes that the quality and the stability of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to increase the administrative capacitiy of those who deal with ESI- funded projects at national, regional and local level; believes in the necessity for them to be incentivized, so that they remain in their post for a long period of time and ensure the completion of projects which are by definition long-term ones;

Amendment 266 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Notes that the quality of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to increase administrative capacities; believes that, particularly for lagging regions, the share earmarked for technical assistance and aimed at strengthening the administrative capacity of the Member States in the use of ESI funds should also be maintained in the new programming period and contain new performance indicators;

Amendment 267 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Notes that the quality of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to increase administrative capacities, provided that any increase is accompanied and supported by the administrative measures needed to achieve results in many territories which, more than others, encounter problems in using EU funds properly and effectively;

Amendment 268 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Notes that the quality of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to increase administrative capacities; in this context, calls on the Commission, the Member States and the regional Authorities to adopt national and regional development strategies and programmes, in order to use the best practices aimed at improving administrative capacities and governance;

Amendment 269 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Notes that the quality of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to increase administrative capacities; stresses that functional and flexible e-government solutions must be exploited. Monitoring and reporting activities should be optimized through increased digitalisation and standardisation of procedures.

Amendment 27 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Calls on the Commission to include culture and education among the priority and strategic objectives for the next programming period, as both areas of focus and horizontal dimensions of regional development policies;

Amendment 270 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Notes that the quality of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to invest into maintenance and increase of administrative capacities as well as to promote financial sustainability of local and regional authorities;

Amendment 271 #

Hannu TAKKULA, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Urmas PAET, Ivan JAKOVČIĆ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

Amendment 272 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. NPoints out that the efficiency of governance varies substantially in Member States; notes that the quality of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to increase administrative capacities;

Amendment 273 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

Amendment 274 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

Amendment 275 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Notes that the quality of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to i~~ncrease administrative capacities~~mprove the quality of governance;

Amendment 276 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Supports a shift in cohesion policy towards a greater focus on results, moving away from an accounting-based approach towards one which focuses on performance and allowing managing authorities more flexibility as to how to achieve targets while fully respecting horizontal principles, in particular on partnership and transparency;

Amendment 277 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Supports a shift in cohesion policy towards a greater focus on results and greater public investment management accountability, moving away from an accounting-based approach towards one which focuses on performance and allowing managing authorities more flexibility as to how to achieve targets;

Amendment 278 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Supports a shift in cohesion policy towards a greater focus on results and on content as opposed to form, moving away from an accounting-based approach towards one which focuses on performance and allowing managing authorities more flexibility as to how to achieve targets;

Amendment 279 #

Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Andrey NOVAKOV, Marc JOULAUD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)

27a. Emphasises the positive impact of the European Territorial Cooperation; calls on the Commission to encourage further focus on investment in infrastructure and business environment through the next generation of INTERREG;

Amendment 28 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas one of the key pieces of new information provided by the 7th Cohesion Report concerns the identification of certain areagions described as being caught in the ‘middle-income trap’, which risk being left behind;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Members States to develop, within the sphere of cohesion policy, long-term strategies in the fields of culture, education, youth and sport, which can serve as a basis for strategic investments during the 2021-2027 programming period, with the emphasis being placed on projects which boost the economic dynamism of the regions concerned and to the creation of high- quality jobs;

Amendment 280 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)

27a. Considers imperative to keep-up the fight against fraud, and urges to exert zero-tolerance for corruption;

Amendment 281 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)

27a. Calls on the Commission to evaluate the future JASPERS programme and to take into account recommendations of the European Court of Auditors by a) specifying the main objectives b) focus technical assistance on sectors and member states where administrative capacity is insufficient c) concentration on the substance rather than on project documentation d) providing the advisory services to the major projects e) mitigating the high risk of a lack of impartiality clarifying the roles of the main stakeholders;

Amendment 282 #

Norica NICOLAI, Daniel BUDA, Maria Gabriela ZOANĂ, Dan NICA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Calls on the Commission to take account of the recommendations of the High-Level Group on Simplification in its future legislative proposals; the exchange of expertise should be facilitated by establishing a knowledge-sharing portal to exchange good practice examples and guides, explaining successful simplification measures put in place in certain regions or Member States.

Amendment 283 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Calls on the Commission to take account of the recommendations of the High-Level Group on Simplification in its future legislative proposals, so as to ensure a balance between performance, simplification and safety objectives for management authorities and the beneficiaries;

Amendment 284 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Stresses the need to provide a framework which guarantees legal stability through simple, clear and predictable rules, particularly as regards management and checks; calls, in the next programming period, for a reduction in the volume of legislation and guidelines, for the relevant documents to be translated into all the EU languages and for any retrospective application and interpretation of rules to be banned; Underlines that a unified legal framework and guidelines on cross- border projects should be established and implemented over the diverse national legislation systems.

Amendment 285 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Stresses the need to provide a framework which guarantees legal stability through simple, clear and predictable rules, particularly as regards management and checks; calls, in the next programming period, for a reduction in the volume of legislation and guidelines, for all modifications to be developed in close cooperation with national authorities and partners, for the relevant documents to be translated into all the EU languages and for any retrospective application and interpretation of rules to be banned;

Amendment 286 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Stresses the need to provide a framework which guarantees legal stability through simple, clear and predictable rules, particularly as regards management and checks; calls, in the next programming period, for a reduction in the volume of legislation and guidelines, for the relevant documents to be translated into all the EU languages ~~and for any retrospective application and interpretation of rules to be banned~~;

Amendment 287 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)

29a. Underlines that the most effective simplification comes from the stability and continuity of the procedures and regulations, to which the interested subjects and managing authorities are now familiar with; calls therefore for the next cohesion policy regulations to be changed only where strictly necessary;

Amendment 288 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Stresses, at the same time, the need to make operational programmes genuine strategic documents which are more concise and more flexible, establishing a simplified procedure for their modification during programming, by cutting red tape, calling for greater flexibility as regards compliance with the macroeconomic conditions laid down as part of the European Semester and, at the same time, releasing co-financing from the budgetary straitjacket imposed by the Stability Pact;

Amendment 289 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)

Ga. whereas the 7th Cohesion Report entails a chapter on the review of the application of measures linking effectiveness of ESI Funds to sound economic governance, deriving from the Commission's obligation as set out in Article 23 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013,

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Members States to develop, within the sphere of cohesion policy, long-term and sustainable strategies in the fields of culture, education, youth and sport, which can serve as a basis for strategic investments during the 2021-2027 programming period;

Amendment 290 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Stresses, at the same time, the need to make operational programmes genuine strategic documents which are more concise and more flexible by avoiding excessive regulation, establishing a simplified procedure for their modification during programming;

Amendment 291 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

Amendment 292 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)

30a. Considers that the main principles and good practices enshrined in the article 5 of the current European Code of Conduct and concerning the involvement of relevant partners in the preparation of the Partnership Agreement and Operational Programmes should be actually implemented in the next post- 2020 framework, with particular focus on the issue of timely disclosure and easy access to relevant information, especially for civil society organizations; proposes, in this regard, a more binding European Code of Conduct on Partnerships and asks the Commission to consider setting a specific ex-ante conditionality to boost multilevel governance;

Amendment 293 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Calls for a genuine single set of rules to be introduced for the ~~various funds~~ESI Funds, including establishment of common rules for instruments that contribute to the same thematic objective; considers it necessary to streamline ESI Funds procurement through a standardised pipeline and to accelerate state aid procedure for the projects where compliance is required; supports consistent treatment of European funds under direct management and cohesion funds where State aid is concerned and, more generally, harmonised rules for European instruments aimed at the same beneficiaries; stresses the importance of greater complementarity between cohesion policy and the future EU research programme, in order to cover the full cycle from basic research to commercial applications;

Amendment 294 #

Martina MICHELS, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS, Martina ANDERSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Calls for a genuine single set of rules to be introduced for the various funds; supports consistent treatment of European funds under direct management and cohesion funds where State aid is concerned and, more generally, harmonised rules for European instruments aimed at the same beneficiaries; stresses the importance of greater complementarity between cohesion policy and the future EU research programme, in order to cover the full cycle from basic research to commercial applications; stresses on the necessity to revise state aid rules to become more consistent with the aims of regional policy and ensure a joint approach and adoption of programmes, acting also as a notification completed in the context of state aid.

Amendment 295 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Calls for a genuine single set of rules to be introduced for the various funds; supports consistent treatment of European funds under direct management and cohesion funds where State aid is concerned and, more generally, harmonised rules for European instruments aimed at the same beneficiaries; stresses the importance of greater complementarity between cohesion policy and the future EU research programme, in order to cover the full cycle from basic research to commercial applications; general exemption from state aid rules should be considered for support measures in the framework of European Territorial Cooperation (ETC);

Amendment 296 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Calls for a genuine single set of rules to be introduced for the various funds; supports consistent treatment of European funds under direct management and cohesion funds where State aid is concerned and, more generally, harmonised rules for European instruments aimed at the same beneficiaries; stresses the importance of greater complementarity between cohesion policy and the future EU research programme, in order to cover the full cycle from basic research to commercial applications; considers that thematic concentration should be preserved in order to enable synergies between different funding sources at project level;

Amendment 297 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Calls for a genuine single set of rules to be maint~~roduc~~ained and further harmonized for the ~~various~~ESI funds; supports consistent treatment of European funds under direct management and cohesion funds where State aid is concerned and, more generally, harmonised rules for European instruments aimed at the same beneficiaries; stresses the importance of greater complementarity between cohesion policy and the future EU research programme, in order to cover the full cycle from basic research to commercial applications;

Amendment 298 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)

31a. Calls on the Commission to facilitate simplified, timely and flexible procedure for transferability of resources between regions, operational programmes and programme axes in order to adequately meet changing global reality and regional demand;

Amendment 299 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)

31a. Urges the Commission to address the issues affecting the outermost regions by enabling them to make the most of cohesion policy investment and financing for research and innovation;

Amendment 3 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 a (new)

– having regard to the communication from the Commission of 14 February 2018 on "A new, modern Multiannual Financial Framework for a European Union that delivers efficiently on its priorities post-2020" (COM(2018) 98)

Amendment 3 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Believes that culture, education, youth and sport play a crucial role in promoting social cohesion, shaping the future of the European Union and have tremendous potential in terms of generating European added value and economic growth in all the EU regions, in particular within the framework of cohesion policy;

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)

Ga. whereas public investment in the EU is still below its pre-crisis level with major gaps in some of the countries most affected by the crisis as the public investment in the EU fell from 3.4 % of GDP in 2008 to 2.7 % in 2016;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Welcomes the contribution of Erasmus+ and Creative Europe to fostering mobility and cultural exchanges across the EU and with third countries; calls for better promotion and use of European tools for transparency, mobility and recognition of skills and qualifications, including those acquired through non-formal and informal learning; reaffirms that more mobility opportunities must be offered for people in vocational training, disadvantaged young people and people suffering from different and multiple forms of discrimination;

Amendment 300 #

Ruža TOMAŠIĆ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Welcomes the establishment of a task force on subsidiarity and proportionality, and looks to this working group to make practical proposals to improve compliance with these principles in the context of cohesion policy; supports the objective of ensuring effective use of the subsidiarity and proportionality principles to enable and support genuine multilevel governance in this context, which requires appropriate empowerment both for local and regional authorities as well as for the Commission and the Member States in the form of genuine partnership;

Amendment 301 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Welcomes the establishment of a task force on subsidiarity and proportionality, and looks to this working group to make practical proposals to improve compliance with these principles in the context of cohesion policy, on the basis of the closer involvement of all stakeholders, and to consolidate the vertical and horizontal partnerships in order to improve the way the strategy is implemented;

Amendment 302 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. ~~Welcom~~Notes the establishment of a task force on subsidiarity and proportionality, and looks to it~~his working group~~ to make practical proposals to improve compliance with these principles in the context of ~~cohesion~~EU policyies;

Amendment 303 #

Martina MICHELS, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS, Martina ANDERSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Calls for requirements in respect of the programming, implementation and monitoring of ESI Funds in future to be based on the principle of differentiation, in accordance with the amounts allocated to programmes, the risk profile, the quality of administration and the level of financing by recipients;deleted

Amendment 304 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Calls for requirements in respect of the programming, implementation and monitoring of ESI Funds in future to be based on the principle of differentiation, based on transparent and fair criteria, in accordance with the amounts allocated to programmes, the risk profile, the quality of administration and the level of financing by recipients;

Amendment 305 #

Norica NICOLAI, Daniel BUDA, Maria Gabriela ZOANĂ, Dan NICA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Calls for requirements in respect of the programming, implementation and monitoring of ESI Funds in future to be based on the principle of ~~differentiation~~proportionality, in accordance with the amounts allocated to programmes, the risk profile, the quality of administration and the level of financing by recipients;

Amendment 306 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

Amendment 307 #

Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Victor BOŞTINARU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

Amendment 308 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Regards it as essential that the relationship between the Commission and managing authorities should evolve towards a ‘contract of confidence’; calls on the Commission to build on the work already done in the area of sound public finance management~~, introducing the principle of a new label to reward managing authorities which have demonstrated their ability to comply with the rules~~; in relation to monitoring, calls for greater reliance on national and regional rules where their effectiveness has been verified and validated;

Amendment 309 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Regards it as essential that the relationship between the Commission and managing authorities should evolve towards a ‘contract of confidence’; in this context reminds the importance of having and adequate and functioning MLG framework; calls on the Commission to build on the work already done in the area of sound public finance management, introducing the principle of a new label to reward managing authorities which have demonstrated their ability to comply with the rules; in relation to monitoring, calls for greater reliance on national and regional rules where their effectiveness has been verified and validated;

Amendment 31 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G b (new)

Gb. whereas cohesion policy in the 2014-2020 programme plan supported 1.1 million SMEs, leading directly to the creation of a further 420,000 new jobs, helping more than 7.4 million unemployed people to find a job and helping in addition over 8.9 million people to gain new qualifications;

Amendment 31 #

Mircea DIACONU

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Urges that the selected projects should ideally complement each other and a greater synergy should be sought between the ESI funds and the financial instruments available (EBI, EFSI); stresses that the grants should not only aim at developing the infrastructure but also at creating “cultural clusters” grouping several related fields, such as cultural heritage, the cultural and creative industries, training programs, cultural tourism and local arts and crafts;

Amendment 310 #

Martina MICHELS, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS, Martina ANDERSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Regards it as essential that the relationship between the Commission and managing authorities should evolve towards a ‘contract of confidence’; calls on the Commission to build on the work already done in the area of sound public finance management, introducing the principle of a ~~new label~~"trust bonus" to reward managing authorities which have demonstrated their ability to comply with the rules; in relation to monitoring, calls for greater reliance on national and regional rules where their effectiveness has been verified and validated;

Amendment 311 #

Laurenţiu REBEGA, Mara BIZZOTTO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Regards it as essential that the relationship between the Commission and managing authorities should evolve towards a ‘contract of confidence’; calls on the Commission to build on the work already done in the area of sound public finance management, introducing the principle of a new label to reward managing authorities which have demonstrated their ability to comply with the rules; in relation to monitoring, calls for greater reliance on national and regional rules, wh~~ere their effectiveness has been verified and validated~~ile focusing more on final results;

Amendment 312 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)

34a. Underlines the importance of focusing on prevention of errors in the management and implementation of ESI funds; nevertheless considers that continuous efforts should be made in order that any irregularity attracts the obligation to pay or repay the amounts due or wrongly received;

Amendment 313 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35

35. Calls for the single audit principle to be strengthened, the implementation of e-cohesion to be speeded up and the use of simplified and standardized costs to be adopted across the board;

Amendment 314 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)

35a. Calls on the Commission to put forward ideas for improving the response of cohesion policy to unforeseen events and reiterates in this context its call for a kind of reserve which would give the regions additional flexibility without jeopardising the long-term goals of operational programmes;

Amendment 315 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)

35a. Calls on the Commission to work with the Member States to develop training models for the various types of bodies, with a view to standardising and simplifying processes and making their implementation more effective;

Amendment 316 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)

35a. Reiterates importance of smart specialisation, both as an economic concept and a policy framework providing a novel avenue to pursue investment in longer-term growth potential in a context of rapid technological change and globalisation; stresses that technologies play an essential role in strengthening existing specialisations and revealing new economic opportunities in high-tech sectors, but also in traditional industries;

Amendment 317 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 b (new)

35b. Points out that culture plays an important role in job creation, social cohesion and the economic development of the EU, and that it is essential , therefore, to make more tailored incentives available, with a view to creating partnerships and fostering cultural mobility; points out that this is all the more important when it comes to the outermost regions and rural and remote regions;

Amendment 318 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36

36. Is concerned at the Commission’s recent statements concerning the cuts to the cohesion policy budget that might be made under the next MFF and which would exclude certain regions from the scope of cohesion policy; wishes to see a budget commensurate with ~~the~~all the major challenges facing the regions, and calls for cohesion policy not to be made an adjustment variable; points out that the coverage of all EU regions is a ‘red line’ for the European Parliament; stresses that the theory of ‘economic development clubs’ confirms the importance of differentiated support for all European regions, including regions with a very high income, which must remain competitive with their global competitors;

Amendment 319 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36

36. Is concerned at the Commission’s recent statements concerning the cuts to the cohesion policy budget that might be made under the next MFF and which would exclude certain regions from the scope of cohesion policy; wishes to see a budget commensurate with the challenges facing the regions, and calls for cohesion policy not to be made an adjustment variable; points out that the coverage of all EU regions is a ‘red line’ for the European Parliament; stresses that the theory of ‘economic development clubs’ confirms the importance of differentiated support for all European regions, including regions with a very high income, which must remain competitive with their global competitors;

Amendment 32 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph –1 (new)

-1. Stresses that EU-15 financial contribution to cohesion policy is offset by direct and indirect export benefits, direct capital benefits as well as positive externalities;

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls for steps to be taken, in the next programming period, to identify specific measures concerning and to set aside resources for physical infrastructure, such as incubators, digital infrastructure, such as broad band, and intangible infrastructure, for educational, cultural and research bodies, including in connection with measures to enhance energy efficiency;

Amendment 320 #

Martina MICHELS, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS, Martina ANDERSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36

36. Is concerned at the Commission’s recent statements concerning the cuts to the cohesion policy budget that might be made under the next MFF and which would exclude certain regions from the scope of cohesion policy; wishes to see a budget commensurate with the institutional goals of Cohesion Policy and with the challenges facing the regions, and calls for cohesion policy not to be made an adjustment variable; points out that the coverage of all EU regions is a ‘red line’ for the European Parliament; stresses that the theory of ‘economic development clubs’ confirms the importance of differentiated support for all European regions, including regions with a very high income, which must remain competitive with their global competitors;

Amendment 321 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36

~~36. Is~~Is extremely concerned atby the Commission’s ~~36.~~ recent statements concerning the massive cuts to the cohesion policy budget that might be made under the next MFF and which would exclude certain or even most regions from the scope of cohesion policy; wishes to see a budget commensurate with the challenges facing the regions, and calls for cohesion policy not to be made an adjustment variable; points out that the coverage of all EU regions is a ‘red line’ for the European Parliament; stresses that the theory of ‘economic development clubs’ confirms the importance of differentiated support for all European regions, including regions with a very high income, which must remain competitive with their global competitors;

Amendment 322 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36

36. Is concerned at the Commission’s recent statements concerning the cuts to the cohesion policy budget that might be made under the next MFF and which would exclude certain regions from the scope of cohesion policy; wishes to see an ambitious budget, commensurate with the challenges facing the regions, and calls for cohesion policy not to be made an adjustment variable; points out that the coverage of all EU regions is a ‘red line’ for the European Parliament; stresses that the theory of ‘economic development clubs’ confirms the importance of differentiated support for all European regions, including regions with a very high income, which must remain competitive with their global competitors;

Amendment 323 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 a (new)

36a. Points out that the coverage of all EU regions is a ‘red line’ for the European Parliament; stresses that the theory of ‘economic development clubs’ confirms the importance of differentiated support for all European regions and that, while adequate resources must still be set aside for less-developed regions, regions with a high income, which must remain competitive with their global competitors, must also still continue to receive support;

Amendment 324 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37

37. Considers that cohesion policy can help to meet new challenges, ~~such as security or the integration of refugees under international protection,~~ with due regard for the sovereignty of the Member States; stresses, however, that cohesion policy cannot be the solution to all crises, and opposes the use of cohesion policy funds to cover short-term financing needs outside its scope; or to impose those structural reforms such as privatisation processes or interventions in the job market, whose rationale is completely inconsistent with the objectives of economic, social and territorial cohesion;

Amendment 325 #

Norica NICOLAI, Daniel BUDA, Maria Gabriela ZOANĂ, Dan NICA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37

37. Considers that cohesion policy can help to meet new challenges~~, such as security or the integration of refugees under international protection, with due regard for the sovereignty of the Member States~~; stresses, however, that cohesion policy cannot be the solution to all crises, and opposes the use of cohesion policy funds to cover short-term financing needs outside its scope;

Amendment 326 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37

37. Considers that cohesion policy can help to meet new challenges, such as security or the integration of refugees under international protection, with due regard for the sovereignty of the Member States; stresses, however, that cohesion policy cannot be the solution to all crises, and opposes the use of cohesion policy funds to cover short-term financing needs outside its scope, which relates to medium and long-term social end economic development in the European Union;

Amendment 327 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37

37. Considers that cohesion policy can help to meet new challenges, such as security or the integration of refugees under international protection~~, with due regard for the sovereignty of the Member States~~; stresses, however, that ~~cohesion policy cannot be the solution to all crises, and opposes the use of cohesion policy funds to cover short-term~~the use of ESIF should be based on the principles of cohesion policy and not to financ~~ing~~e needs outside its scope;.

Amendment 328 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37

37. Considers that cohesion policy can help to meet new challenges~~, such as security or the integration of refugees under international protection,~~ with due regard for the sovereignty of the Member States; stresses, however, that cohesion policy cannot be the solution to all crises, and opposes the use of cohesion policy funds to cover short-term financing needs outside its scope;

Amendment 329 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37

37. Considers that cohesion policy can help to meet new challenges, such as security or the integration of refugees under international protection~~, with due regard for the sovereignty of the Member States~~; stresses, however, that cohesion policy cannot be the solution to all crises, and opposes the use of cohesion policy funds to cover short-term financing needs outside its scope;

Amendment 33 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph –1 a (new)

-1a. Emphasises that cohesion policy brings economic benefits both to its recipients and to its main contributors across EU member states

Amendment 33 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to step up their efforts to reduce the causes of growing educational and social inequality, with a particular emphasis on early school leavers, ongoing training for adults and apprenticeships and training to foster the social inclusion of migrants, in all areas of education and training, including through the provision of scholarships and support services;

Amendment 330 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37

37. Considers that cohesion policy can help to meet new challenges, such as security or ~~the integration of refugees under international protection~~protection of external borders, with due regard for the sovereignty of the Member States; stresses, however, that cohesion policy cannot be the solution to all crises, and opposes the use of cohesion policy funds to cover short-term financing needs outside its scope;

Amendment 331 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37

37. Considers that cohesion policy can help to meet new challenges, such as ~~security or~~ the integration of refugees under international protection, with due regard for the sovereignty of the Member States; stresses, however, that cohesion policy cannot be the solution to all crises, and opposes the use of cohesion policy funds to cover short-term financing needs outside its scope;

Amendment 332 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 a (new)

37a. Stresses that a new post-2020 financing mechanism for the integration of migrants must be created and its scope revised in such a way as to fully reintegrate EU citizens who choose to return owing to instability or an economic or political crisis in the third country where they have been living;

Amendment 333 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 b (new)

37b. Stresses that a specific post-2020 financing mechanism must be created, within under Article 349 TFEU, to integrate migrants in the outermost regions, which have to cope with greater migratory pressure owing to their specific characteristics, and thus contribute to their sustainable development;

Amendment 334 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 c (new)

37c. Points out that although tourism creates wealth and social mobility opportunities, it still requires tailored investment programmes and policies to guarantee the sustainable development of communities and further social inclusion and cohesion;

Amendment 335 #

Martina MICHELS, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS, Martina ANDERSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38

Amendment 336 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38

38. ~~Welcom~~Notes the p~~ositive~~reliminary results of the Juncker investment plan; stresses that cohesion policy and the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) are based on different concepts and objectives which in certain cases can be complementary, but that one cannot be a substitute for the other, irrespective of the level of development of the regions; calls for maintaining clear delimitations between the EFSI and cohesion policy, together with the provision of opportunities for their combination and facilitated use where appropriate without mixing them;

Amendment 337 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38

38. Welcomes the largely positive results of the Juncker investment plan, which when implemented needs to invest in an even more transparent and targeted manner if it is to iron out regional inequalities; stresses that cohesion policy and the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) are complementary, but that one cannot be a substitute for the other, irrespective of the level of development of the regions, as the EFSI, unlike the Structural Funds, operates on the basis of loans;

Amendment 338 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38

38. ~~Welcomes the positive results of the Juncker investment plan~~Notes the extension of the scope of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) and the data on the take-up of resources, but draws attention to the consistent failure to provide information on the progress of the projects funded and the leverage effect generated by attracting private capital; stresses that cohesion policy and the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) are complementary, but that one cannot be a substitute for the other, irrespective of the level of development of the regions;

Amendment 339 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38

38. ~~Welcomes~~Takes note of the positive results of the Juncker investment plan; stresses that cohesion policy and the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) are complementary, but that one cannot be a substitute for the other, irrespective of the level of development of the regions; is concerned that the combination of EFSI with ESI Funds can put the funds in a junior position, thus covering the first- loss-piece;

Amendment 34 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph –1 b (new)

-1b. Believes that cohesion policy is the glue that holds Europe together;

Amendment 34 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Considers that post-2020 cohesion policy investments in culture and education should be more efficient and effective, in terms of both the quality and the quantity of the projects implemented and the provision of an adequate response to clearly identified local needs;

Amendment 340 #

Tonino PICULA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38

38. Welcomes the positive results of the Juncker investment plan; stresses that cohesion policy and the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) are complementary, but that one cannot be a substitute for the other, irrespective of the level of development of the regions; calls for establishing clear boundaries between the EFSI and Cohesion Policy together with clear opportunities for their combination;

Amendment 341 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38

38. ~~Welcomes~~Takes note of the positive results of the Juncker investment plan, however, is of the opinion that its contribution to more cohesion in the Union needs to be strengthened; stresses that cohesion policy and the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) are complementary, but that one cannot be a substitute for the other, irrespective of the level of development of the regions;

Amendment 342 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38

38. Welcomes the positive results of the ~~Juncker i~~European Fund for Strategic Investment ~~plan~~s (EFSI); stresses that cohesion policy and the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) are complementary, but that one cannot be a substitute for the other, irrespective of the level of development of the regions;

Amendment 343 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39

39. Reiterates its commitment to long- term programming; considers that the only viable alternative to the current period of seven years is an MFF period of 5+5 years, with a mid-term review; stresses however that the new time-frame could be introduced only for the period after 2027.

Amendment 344 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39

39. Reiterates its commitment to long- term programming; considers that the ~~only viable alternative to the current period of seven years is an MFF period of 5+5 years, with a mid-term review~~next MFF should be set for a span of seven years (2021-2027), after which a transition to a 5 + 5 cycle with a mandatory mid-term revision is a viable option;

Amendment 345 #

Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Victor BOŞTINARU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39

39. ~~Reiterates its commitment to long- term programming; considers that the only viable alternative to the current period of seven years is an MFF per~~Calls on the Commission to elaborate a clear proposal setting out the methods for the practical implementatiodn of a 5+5 ~~years, with a mid-term review~~financial framework;

Amendment 346 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40

40. Calls for every effort to be made to avoid delays in programming for the new period; stresses the importance of submitting all documents relating to the future legal framework on time in all the official languages and of simplifying the formalities which managing authorities must complete before they can start the programming process (e.g. ex-ante conditionality, designation of the managing authority itself);

Amendment 347 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40

40. Calls for every effort to be made to avoid delays in programming for the new period; stresses the importance of submitting all documents relating to the future legal framework on time in all the official languages, so as to ensure information that is as timely and accurate as possible for all concerned;

Amendment 348 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 a (new)

40a. Takes the view that any move to increase co-financing levels must take account of the problems which some Member States and regions in particular have in raising funds without placing a strain on national budgets; emphasises that any such increase must be covered by mechanisms for the netting of resources invested, excluding these from the calculation of the deficit for the purposes of the Stability and Growth Pact;

Amendment 349 #

Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Andrey NOVAKOV, Marc JOULAUD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41

41. Calls for measures to raise the public profile of cohesion policy; calls on the Commission to enhance the role of the managing authorities and of project promoters who employ innovative local communication methods to inform people about the use of the funds in the territories; emphasises the need to improve information and communication not only downstream (ESI Funds achievements), but also upstream (financing possibilities), particularly in relation to small project organisers; calls on the Commission and Member States to establish mechanisms and broad institutionalised platforms for cooperation in order to ensure better visibility and awareness-raising;

Amendment 35 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph –1 c (new)

-1c. Notes that the 7th Cohesion report clearly presents the outcome of cohesion policy in terms of growth, jobs, transport, energy, environment, education and training;

Amendment 35 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Emphasises that cohesion policy can also support the conversion or economic revitalisation of certain territories, in particular urban centres, through investment in creative industries such as design, and that investments of this kind have borne fruit in a number of European cities, including Nantes, Kortrijk or Arnhem;

Amendment 350 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41

41. Calls for measures to ~~raise the public profile of cohesion policy~~improve communication to the European citizens, thus raising the public knowledge of concrete cohesion policy achievements; calls on the Commission to enhance the role of the managing authorities and of project promoters who employ innovative local communication methods to inform people about the use of the funds in the territories; emphasises the need to increase and improve information and communication not only downstream (ESI Funds achievements), but also upstream (financing possibilities), particularly in relation to small project organisers;

Amendment 351 #

Norica NICOLAI, Daniel BUDA, Maria Gabriela ZOANĂ, Dan NICA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41

41. Calls for measures to raise the public profile of cohesion policy; calls on the Commission to enhance the role of the managing authorities and of project promoters who employ innovative local communication methods to inform people about the results of the use of the funds in the territories; emphasises the need to improve information and communication not only downstream (ESI Funds achievements), but also upstream (financing possibilities), particularly in relation to ~~small~~ project organisers;

Amendment 352 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41

Amendment 353 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41 a (new)

41a. Stresses the advantages of cohesion policy externalisation in highlighting the benefits of investment in less developed regions by Member States that are net contributors;

Amendment 354 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42

42. Notes that some European regions are particularly exposed to the impact of Brexit; stresses that the future cohesion policy must minimise the negative impact of Brexit on the other European regions, and calls for detailed consideration to be given to the possibility of continuing partnerships in the context of territorial cooperation;deleted

Amendment 355 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42

42. Notes that some European regions as well as cohesion policy as such are particularly exposed to the impact of Brexit; stresses that the future cohesion policy must minimise the negative impact of Brexit on the other European regions, and calls for detailed consideration to be given to the possibility of continuing partnerships in the context of territorial cooperation;

Amendment 356 #

Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Andrey NOVAKOV, Jan OLBRYCHT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42 a (new)

42a. Calls on the Commission to make it possible to and encourage the Member States to train specialised teams for the creation and financing of European projects;

Amendment 36 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph –1 d (new)

-1d. Notes that both cohesion policy and Horizon 2020 are equally important and complementary in supporting research and innovation;

Amendment 36 #

Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Andrey NOVAKOV, Jan OLBRYCHT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States, in the light of the significant successes achieved by the network of European regions, which has included culture and the cultural and creative industries in the smart specialisation strands of their operational programmes, to continue and step up these policies;

Amendment 37 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph –1 e (new)

-1e. Notes that cohesion policy played a substantial role in recovery of EU economy by mobilising economic activities during the crisis and therefore enabling all UE regions to meet difficult targets in all cross cutting policies;

Amendment 37 #

Martina MICHELS, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Notes that cross-border cooperation, a major EU policy objective, has helped to mitigate the adverse effects of internal borders and can lead to improvements in cross-border achievements in education and culture; believes this is especially important in EU border regions;

Amendment 38 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Considers it crucial that cohesion policy should continue to cover all European regions and remain the European Union’s main ~~investment instrument, with a budget commensurate with the challenges~~solidarity, development and investment instrument, based on long-term strategy and perspectives, and with a budget commensurate with the challenges; demands therefore that the current 1%- ceiling for the EU’s expenditure be increased to at least 1.3% of the GNI, in order to be able to continue to support existing policy areas while avoiding funding new challenges at their expense and while maintaining the share of cohesion policy at the current level, i. e. more than one third of the MFF;

Amendment 38 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6 b. Reminds the Commission of the need to promote the right to high quality inclusive education and training for all ages and types of learners, invest in outreach and provide support for the most vulnerable learners and disadvantaged individuals, such as learners with disabilities, NEETs, and young people and children with migrant backgrounds, and ensure their systematic inclusion in mainstream education;

Amendment 39 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Considers it crucial that cohesion policy should continue to cover all European regions and remain the European Union’s main investment instrument~~, with a budget~~; underlines that a budget comparable to the one for the 2014-2020 wouldn't allow to cope with the new challenges; calls therefore for the budget for the new programming period to be commensurate with the old and new challenges;

Amendment 39 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to support knowledge partnerships between universities, educational, professional and research bodies and cultural institutes in an effort to meet the growing need for new skills and for retraining in the cultural and creative sector;

Amendment 4 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 18 a (new)

– having regard to the Communication from the Commission of 14 February 2018 on A new, modern Multiannual Financial Framework for a European Union that delivers efficiently on its priorities post-2020 (COM(2018)98),

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Recalls that importance of culture and cultural heritage also with regard to the economic prosperity of cities and regions and therefore calls on the Member States to adopt all the necessary measures to effectively safeguard the tangible and intangible cultural heritage and to use in this regard all the available tools of the cohesion policy;

Amendment 40 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Considers it crucial that cohesion policy should continue to cover all European regions, while focusing on the less developed ones, and remain the European Union’s main investment instrument, ~~with a budget commensurate with the challenges~~therefore its budget should be maintained to be commensurate with the challenges; and the current EU co- financing rates should be preserved;

Amendment 40 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Emphasises that cohesion policy can also support retraining or professional training policies in the cultural and creative industries, in which innovation and change are constant;

Amendment 41 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Considers it crucial that cohesion policy should continue to cover all European regions and remain the European Union’s main investment instrument, with a budget commensurate with the challenges, thus ensuring the fulfilment of the basic goals of cohesion policy ;

Amendment 41 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Asks the Commission to include in the future regulation on the cohesion policy quality indicators for ~~culture-related investments~~investments linked to culture and cultural creation and innovation, setting realistic objectives which are accompanied by clear recommendations to the Member States concerning the application of these indicators and the resources and statistical tools to be employed, as also required by Parliament’s resolution of 8 September 2015 entitled ‘Towards an integrated approach to cultural heritage for Europe’.

Amendment 42 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Considers it crucial that cohesion policy should continue to cover all European regions and remain the European Union’s main public investment instrument, with a budget no lower than the budget for the period 2014-2020 and commensurate with the existing needs and challenges;

Amendment 42 #

Mircea DIACONU

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Asks the Commission to include in the future regulation on the cohesion policy quality indicators for culture-related investments, as also required by Parliament’s resolution of 8 September 2015 entitled ‘Towards an integrated approach to cultural heritage for Europe’.; additionally, calls on the European Court of Auditors and the National Audit authorities to focus also on performance audits in order to check not only the compliance of the investments but also their quality;

Amendment 43 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Considers it crucial that cohesion policy should continue to cover all European regions, regardless of their level of development, and remain the European Union’s main investment instrument in the future programming period, with a budget commensurate with the challenges;

Amendment 43 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Calls on the Commission to establish the cultural and creative industries (CCIs) as a horizontal priority and to use effectively the funding available under EU programmes and the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs) in order to support more projects in the CCI sector;

Amendment 44 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Considers it crucial that cohesion policy should continue to cover all European regions and remain the European Union’s main investment instrument, with a budget which is commensurate with the challenges and at least equal to the current budget;

Amendment 44 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Calls for greater theoretical and practical scope to offered for medium- and long-term projects in the cultural, audiovisual and creative sphere, by making provision for the combined use of the Structural Funds and the EFSI;

Amendment 45 #

Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Marc JOULAUD, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Bogdan Andrzej ZDROJEWSKI, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Francis ZAMMIT DIMECH, Stefano MAULLU, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, Milan ZVER, Sabine VERHEYEN, Andrea BOCSKOR

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Considers it crucial that cohesion policy should continue to cover all European regions and remain the European Union’s main investment instrument, with an ambitious budget, commensurate with the challenges;

Amendment 45 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7 b. Underlines that regions have a proved capacity in developing clusters and cross-border cooperation in the field of CCIs, and in this context notes the positive effects of smart specialisation in CCI as a motor of growth for regions;

Amendment 46 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Considers it crucial that cohesion policy should continue to adequately cover all European regions and remain the European Union’s main investment instrument, with a budget commensurate with the challenges;

Amendment 46 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7b. Calls for cohesion policy measures to place greater emphasis on investment in the cultural and education sectors, in particular in urban and outlying areas, through the use of retraining and inclusion tools;

Amendment 47 #

Norica NICOLAI, Daniel BUDA, Maria Gabriela ZOANĂ, Dan NICA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Underlines that budgetary appropriations for cohesion policy post- 2020 for the EU-27 have to be ensured at least at the level of the 2014-2020 budget at constant prices;

Amendment 47 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)

7 c. Calls on the Commission to exploit the capacity of the European Regional Development Fund to support the development of sport infrastructure and promote sustainable sport and outdoor activities as a tool for regional and rural development, and the European Social Fund to strengthen the skills and employability of workers in the sport sector;

Amendment 48 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods and to the Treaty objective of reducing disparities; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for regions that are falling behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considers that cohesion policy could contribute to the promotion of social and fiscal convergence by providing incentives; calls on the Commission to take better account of this aspect in the European Semester;

Amendment 48 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)

7c. Urges the Member States to set aside a share of cohesion policy funding for high-quality cultural and education projects which, although suitable, do not receive EU support owing to a lack of funding;

Amendment 49 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods and to the Treaty objective of ~~reducing disparitie~~strengthening EU's economic, social and territorial cohesion, particularly to the aim of reducing disparities between the levels of development of the various regions and the backwardness of the least favoured regions;

Amendment 49 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 d (new)

7d. Calls on the Member States to support these integrated territorial cultural projects, such as cultural itineraries, which foster high-quality territorial development, and public-private partnerships in the area of cultural tourism;

Amendment 5 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 18 a (new)

– having regard to the Commission Staff Working document of 10 April 2017 on “Competitiveness in low-income and low-growth regions: the Lagging Regions report” SWD (2017) 132,

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Stresses the importance of equality of opportunity for persons that may be physically or geographically disadvantaged to ensure they have equal access to both culture and education;

Amendment 50 #

Ivana MALETIĆ, Marc JOULAUD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that cohesion policy ~~investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods and to the Treaty objective of reducing disparities~~should supply concrete answers to citizen’s needs, thus contributing to the Treaty objective of reducing disparities; underlines the need to properly evaluate which funds could be better managed at national level, in order to guarantee full respect of the subsidiarity principle;

Amendment 51 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods ~~and to~~, the Treaty objective of reducing disparities and spill-over benefits to non-cohesion countries from the increased trade generated and strengthening the Single Market;

Amendment 52 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods and to the Treaty objective of reducing disparities; emphasises the notable spill- over effects of ESI Funds investments across the Single Market;

Amendment 53 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments ~~provide European added value by contributing to European public goods and to the Treaty objective of reducing disparitie~~have as their priority objective, as laid down in the Treaties, reducing disparities between regions, but that they also provide European added value and can help to produce European public goods;

Amendment 54 #

Marc JOULAUD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods (such as growth, social inclusion, innovation and environmental protection) and to the Treaty objective of reducing disparities;

Amendment 55 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods ~~and~~, to the Treaty objective of reducing disparities, and to the UN Sustainable Development Goals;

Amendment 56 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods and tohat they are a fundamental tool in order to achieve the Treaty objective of reducing disparities;

Amendment 57 #

Martina MICHELS, Martina ANDERSON, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods and to the Treaty objective of reducing disparities and the backwardness of the less favoured regions;

Amendment 58 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods and to the Treaty objective of reducing disparities towards the upward adaptation of living standards;

Amendment 59 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods and to the Treaty objective of reducing disparities, as well as for combating growing inequalities;

Amendment 6 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 31 a (new)

– having regard its resolution of 13 March 2018 on "lagging regions in the EU";

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Underlines that investments in culture, education, youth and sport significantly improve social cohesion in the European Union, especially by facilitating social integration of European citizens;

Amendment 60 #

Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Andrey NOVAKOV, Jan OLBRYCHT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods and priorities and to the Treaty objective of reducing regional disparities;

Amendment 61 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that cohesion policy ~~investments~~ provides European added value by contributing to European public goods, to public and private investments and to the Treaty objective of reducing disparities;

Amendment 62 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to ~~European public goods and to~~ the Treaty objective of reducing disparities;

Amendment 63 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Reiterates its commitment to shared management and the principles of partnership and subsidiarity, which contribute to the added value generated by cohesion policy; stresses that the added value of this policy stems primarily from its ability to take account of the needs and specificities of each territory and to bring the European Union closer to its citizens as well as from the fact that it is the only European policy which is capable of supporting smart, sustainable and inclusive growth at the same time;

Amendment 64 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Reiterates its commitment to shared management and the principles of partnership and subsidiarity, and especially Multi Level Governance (MLG), which contributes substantially to the added value generated by cohesion policy; stresses that the added value of this policy stems primarily from its ability to take account of the needs and specificities of each territory and to bring the European Union closer to its citizens;

Amendment 65 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Reiterates its commitment to shared management which should be maintained and strengthened for post 2020 and the principles of partnership and subsidiarity, which contribute to the added value generated by cohesion policy; stresses that the added value of this policy stems primarily from its ability to take account of the needs and specificities of each territory and to bring the European Union closer to its citizens;

Amendment 66 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Reiterates its commitment to shared management and the principles of partnership and subsidiarity, which contribute to the added value generated by cohesion policy; stresses that the added value of this policy stems primarily from its ability to take into account ofnational development needs along with the needs and specificities of each territory and to bring the European Union closer to its citizens;

Amendment 67 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Reiterates its commitment to shared management and the principles of partnership, multi-level governance and subsidiarity, which contribute to the added value generated by cohesion policy; stresses that the added value of this policy stems primarily from its ability to take account of the needs and specificities of each territory and to bring the European Union closer to its citizens;

Amendment 68 #

Laurenţiu REBEGA, Mara BIZZOTTO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Reiterates its commitment to shared management and the principles of partnership and subsidiarity, which contribute to the added value generated by cohesion policy; stresses that the added value of this policy stems primarily from its ability to take account of the needs and specificities of ~~each~~individual regions and local territoryies and to bring the European Union closer to its citizens;

Amendment 69 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Reiterates its commitment to shared management and the principles of partnership and subsidiarity, which contribute to the added value generated by cohesion policy; stresses that the added value of this policy stems primarily from its ability to take account of the needs and specificities of each territory ~~and to bring the European Union closer to its citizens~~;

Amendment 7 #

Martina MICHELS, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas cohesion policy ~~aims~~is the European Union’s key toolkit to express the EU’s solidarity as one of the fundamental principles of the Union, by pursuing its Treaty based objective to promote harmonious development of the whole Union, leading to a strengthening of its economic, social and territorial cohesion, in a spirit of solidarity and with the aim of promoting growth, and reducing the backwardness of the least favoured regions;

Amendment 7 #

Norica NICOLAI, Daniel BUDA, Maria Gabriela ZOANĂ, Dan NICA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Recognises the importance of safeguarding both natural and cultural heritage and harnessing their potential as an economic driver;

Amendment 70 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Reiterates its ~~commitment to~~firm support for shared management and the principles of partnership and subsidiarity, which contribute to the added value generated by cohesion policy; stresses that the added value of this policy stems primarily from its ability to take account of the needs and specificities of each territory and to bring the European Union closer to its citizens;

Amendment 71 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Considers that the partnership principle should be strengthened by establishing binding minimum standards for partnership involvement from the outset of programming;

Amendment 72 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises that European added value is also reflected in European territorial cooperation, in all its dimensions; calls for an increase in its share of the budget allocated to cohesion policy, while improving coordination between different programmes ~~to avoid overlaps~~, by means of ambitious tailored strategies, funding and measures which help to generate increased synergies with other EU funds, to avoid overlaps and attract complementary financial support under the post-2020 multiannual programming period;

Amendment 73 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises that European added value is also reflected in European territorial cooperation (ETC), in all its dimensions; calls for an increase in its share of the budget allocated to cohesion policy~~, while improving coordination~~ and stresses the need to consider linkages with macro regions strategies within ETC, while improving coordination and simplifying and harmonizing rules and procedures between different programmes to avoid overlaps; and ensure smooth implementation.

Amendment 74 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises that European added value is also reflected in European territorial cooperation, in all its dimensions; calls for an increase in its share of the budget allocated to cohesion policy, while improving coordination between different programmes to avoid overlaps and enhancing possibilities to adapt support measures in view of addressing particular challenges of regions;

Amendment 75 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises that European added value is also reflected in European territorial cooperation, in all its dimensions; calls for an increase in its share of the budget allocated to cohesion policy, while improving coordination between different programmes to avoid overlaps; reminds the importance of macroregional strategies in the achievement of the cohesion policy objectives;

Amendment 76 #

Hannu TAKKULA, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Urmas PAET, Ivan JAKOVČIĆ, Matthijs van MILTENBURG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises that European added value is also reflected in European territorial cooperation, in all its dimensions; calls for an increase in its share of the budget allocated to cohesion policy, ~~whil~~more effective implementation of programmes, the simplification of the procedure, and the implementation of specific projects, while at the same time improving coordination between different programmes to avoid overlaps;

Amendment 77 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises that European added value is ~~also~~strongly reflected in European territorial cooperation,; in all its dimensions (cross-border, transnational, interregional co-operation); calls for an increase in its share of the budget allocated to cohesion policy, while improving coordination between different programmes to avoid overlaps;

Amendment 78 #

Laurenţiu REBEGA, Mara BIZZOTTO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises th~~at European added value is also reflected in~~e importance of the European territorial cooperation, in all its dimensions; calls for ~~an increase in its share of the budget allocated to cohesion policy, while~~the creation a frame work with clear, simple and transparent rules and improving coordination between different programmes to avoid overlaps;

Amendment 79 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises that European added value is also reflected in European territorial cooperation, in all its dimensions; calls for ~~an increase in its share of~~stability in the budget allocated to cohesion policy, while improving coordination between different programmes to avoid overlaps;

Amendment 8 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas cohesion policy aims to promote harmonious development of the whole Union, leading to a strengthening of its economic, social and territorial cohesion, in a spirit of solidarity and with the aim of promoting growth, and reducing the backwardness of the least favoured regions in accordance with Article 174 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union;

Amendment 8 #

Mircea DIACONU

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Regrets that the Commission’s 7th report on economic, social and territorial cohesion does not make any quantitative or qualitative reference to culture-related projects, which accounted for EUR 611 billion of cohesion policy expenditure for the programming periods 2007-2013 and 2014-2020;

Amendment 80 #

Marc JOULAUD, Jan OLBRYCHT, Maurice PONGA, Ivana MALETIĆ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Notes that the implementation of cohesion policy in a region can generate spill-over benefits elsewhere in the EU due to the increased trade generated; points out, however, that these benefits vary considerably from one Member State to the other, depending in particular on geographic proximity and the structure of the Member States’ economies;

Amendment 81 #

Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Underlines the need to develop a “Cost of non-Cohesion Policy” methodology in order to provide additional quantifiable evidence on the European Added Value of Cohesion Policy, following the example of the work done by the European Parliament on the "cost of the non-Europe";

Amendment 82 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that ~~cities combine 5. opportunities and challenges, because of the concentration of people facing serious economic difficulties and the existence of~~urban areas combine on one hand major growth, investment and innovation opportunities and, on the other, various environmental, economic and social challenges; highlights the existence of disparities inside urban areas, such as pockets of poverty~~, including~~ in relatively prosperous cities;

Amendment 83 #

Martina MICHELS, Martina ANDERSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that cities, towns and urban areas combine opportunities and challenges, because of the concentration ~~of people facing serious economic~~serious social, economic, environmental difficulties and the existence of pockets of poverty, including in relatively prosperous cities;

Amendment 84 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Expresses its concern on the findings of the 7th Report, which highlights that, despite positive signs, the risk of poverty or social exclusion remains a key challenge especially in the Baltic and southern Member States and that inequalities are growing especially in cities;

Amendment 85 #

Tonino PICULA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Emphasises that European territorial cooperation adds substantial added value to realise EU objectives and encourages solidarity between European regions and its neighbours;

Amendment 86 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Emphasises that efforts to consolidate the territorial dimension of cohesion policy require greater attention to be paid to peri-urban and rural problems, with a particular focus on to medium-sized towns; recognises that municipalities have the expertise necessary to coordinate major projects involving partnerships for developing urban-rural joint cooperation initiatives;

Amendment 87 #

Martina MICHELS, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS, Martina ANDERSON

Amendment 88 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Emphasises that efforts to consolidate the territorial dimension of cohesion policy require greater attention to be paid to peri-urban, cross border and rural problems, with a particular focus on to medium-sized towns;

Amendment 89 #

Hannu TAKKULA, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Urmas PAET, Ivan JAKOVČIĆ, Matthijs van MILTENBURG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses the importance of supporting rural areas in all their diversity, by valuing their potential, improving transport connectivity with particular emphasis on public transport and very high-speed broadband and providing support to help them meet the challenges they face: rural de~~sertific~~population, the destruction of city- centre communities, adecreas ~~without health care~~e in accessibility and quality of public services, such as health care and education, lack of employment and entrepreneurship incentives, etc.;

Amendment 9 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas cohesion policy aims to promote harmonious development of the whole Union, leading to a strengthening of its economic, social and territorial cohesion, in a spirit of solidarity and with the aim of promoting growth, and reducing disparities between the levels of development of the various regions and the backwardness of the least favoured regions;

Amendment 9 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Regrets that the Commission’s 7th report on economic, social and territorial cohesion does not make any quantitative or qualitative reference to culture-related projects, which accounted for at least EUR 65 billion ~~of cohesion policy expenditure~~from the European Regional Development Fund for the period 2014- 2020;

Amendment 90 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses the importance of supporting rural areas in all their diversity, by valuing their potential, improving transport connectivity and very high-speed broadband and providing support to help them meet the challenges they face: rural desertification, the destruction of city- centre communities, areas without health care, etc.; highlights that ensuring high- speed Internet connection in remote rural areas can greatly lessen their backwardness and improve their competitiveness;

Amendment 91 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses the importance of supporting rural areas in all their diversity, by valuing their potential, improving transport connectivity and very high-speed broadband and providing support to help them meet the challenges they face: rural desertification, the destruction of city- centre communities, areas without health care, etc.; calls, with that aim in view, for an even greater degree of integration between the instruments available at EU level;

Amendment 92 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses the importance of supporting rural areas in all their diversity, by valuing their potential, improving transport connectivity and very high-speed broadband and providing support to help them meet the challenges they face: rural desertification, the destruction of city- centre communities, social exclusion, lack of work and affordable housing, areas without health care, etc.;

Amendment 93 #

Michela GIUFFRIDA, Andrea COZZOLINO, Mercedes BRESSO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses the importance of supporting rural areas in all their diversity, by valuing their potential, improving transport connectivity and very high-speed broadband and providing support to help them meet the challenges they face: rural desertification, social inclusion, lack of job opportunities, population loss, the destruction of city- centre communities, areas without health care, etc.;

Amendment 94 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses the importance of supporting rural areas in all their diversity, by valuing their potential and supporting projects which boost local economies, improving their transport connectivity and very high-speed broadband and providing support to help them meet the challenges they face: rural desertification, the destruction of city- centre communities, areas without health care, etc.;

Amendment 95 #

Maria SPYRAKI, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses the importance of supporting rural areas in all their diversity, by valuing their potential, encouraging investments in improving transport connectivity and very high-speed broadband and providing support to help them meet the challenges they face: rural desertification, the destruction of city- centre communities, areas without health care, depopulation etc.;

Amendment 96 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses the importance of supporting rural areas in all their diversity, by valuing their potential, improving transport connectivity and very high-speed broadband and providing support to help them meet the challenges they face: rural desertification, the destruction of city- centre communities, the need to ensure access routes, areas without health care, etc.;

Amendment 97 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Calls on the Commission to make cohesion policy more flexible so that it can provide a response to the ongoing rural exodus in a number of Member States; calls, in that connection, for programmes to be created specifically for rural and less populated areas and the outermost regions, with a view, in particular, to promoting employment and the establishment of small and medium-sized enterprises;

Amendment 98 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Calls for greater account to be taken of certain specific territorial characteristics,- such as those of ~~island, mountain or border regions, when investment priorities are set~~regions which suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps, island, mountain or border regions, when investment priorities are set; underlines the importance of creating tailor-made strategies, programmes and actions for these different regions, focused on their territorial particularities and idiosyncrasies, using smart specialization strategies, consequently accelerating their convergence and assuring the best solutions for job creation, economic growth and sustainable development of their territories;

Amendment 99 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Calls for greater account to be taken of certain specific territorial characteristics, such as those of island, mountain or, rural and border regions, when investment priorities are set; underlines the importance of exploring the possible launch of new specific agendas, following the example set by the Urban Agenda for the EU and the Pact of Amsterdam, in order to face the challenges of specific territories and to formalise a structured approach towards those territorial specificities;

source: 618.191

2018/03/01 EMPL 84 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Ivo VAJGL, António MARINHO E PINTO

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. wWhereas ~~unemploy~~Eurostat estimates that 17.978 million ment and ~~youth unemploy~~woment in the ~~Union have been falling gradually since 2013, but are still above 2008 levels, with considerable differences among~~EU28, of whom 14.153 million in the Euro area, were unemployed in December 2017; whereas the employment recovery rate remains very unequal across Member States to the benefit of those countries which have not adopted the single currency or have not been subject to deep European structural reforms; whereas from 2002 to 2016 the number of part- time workers aged between 20 and ~~with~~64 in the ~~Member States~~EU-28 rose slowly but steadily from 14.9% to 18.9%;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas the employment rate in the EU has been growing for four consecutive years and now surpasses the 2008 figure at 71%, but still remains below the pre-crisis level in ~~half~~some2a of the Member States; whereas ~~regional disparities have started to narrow;~~while there remain marked differences in the average employment rate between more and less developed regions, regional disparities have started to narrow; _________________ 2a http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics- explained/index.php/File:Employment_ra te,_age_group_20_%E2%80%93_64,_201 6_%28%25%29_YB17.png

Amendment 11 #

Geoffroy DIDIER, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Jérôme LAVRILLEUX, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas the employment rate in the EU ~~has been growing for four consecutive years and now surpasses the 2008 figure, but~~ still remains below the pre-crisis level in half of the Member States; whereas regional disparities ~~have started to narrow~~are a consequence of economic, financial and cultural centralization, and only an effective and fair rent redistribution policy will solve it;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Recital B

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)

B a. whereas part-time work has increased 11% compared to 2008, and full-time employment has dropped by 2% in the same period, while involuntary part-time work still represents almost one- third of this type of contracts; whereas labour market segmentation between permanent and atypical jobs remains worrying, with countries showing a percentage of temporary contracts ranging from 10% to 20%, with particularly low transition rates towards permanent contracts and temporary jobs representing "dead ends" rather than "stepping stones" towards permanent jobs; whereas this phenomenon is impeding large numbers of workers to benefit from secure, relatively well-paid employment and good prospects, creating a wage gap between permanent and temporary workers; whereas labour market segmentation worsen due to many EU countries adopting two-tier reforms in employment protection legislation, easing the use of temporary contracts.

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)

B a. whereas shrinking employment disparities followed by shrinking disparities in GDP per head are evident at regional level across the EU;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Recital B b (new)

B b. whereas gender employment gap still remains above 10pps, scoring 11.6 % for the EU, with a 76.9% employment rate for men and 65.3% for women, and even wider gaps among non-EU born and Roma women;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Recital B c (new)

B c. whereas increasing in-work poverty remains in Europe as a whole, with highest levels recorded in Spain (13.1%), Greece (14%) and Romania (18.6%), showing that employment alone is not always sufficient to lift people out of poverty and reflecting different labour market patterns, including part-time and/or temporary jobs, wage levels, and work intensity in the households and poor working conditions;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Recital C

C. whereas while the risk of poverty or social exclusion in the EU has fallen back to its pre-crisis level, it remains very high and far from reaching the Europe 2020 poverty and social exclusion target; whereas, according to the Commission publication ‘Employment and Social Developments in Europe 2017’, in 2015 there were 118,8 million people at risk of poverty or social exclusion (AROPE), 1,7 million above the 2008 level and far from the Europe 2020 Strategy target of reducing AROPE by 20 million, with wide disparities between Member States ranging from 5% or less in the Czech Republic or Germany to around 20 % in Greece and Spain; whereas children AROPE rate (0-17) in 2016 is 26,4%, higher than 24,2% of adult people (16-64) and almost 10pps higher than AROPE rate of 18,3% for elder people (65+); whereas, the number of children experiencing poverty remains alarmingly high in Europe, currently standing at more than 25 million and whereas the impact of poverty on children can last a lifetime and perpetuates the intergenerational transmission of disadvantage;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Recital C

C. whereas ~~while the~~almost 24% of EU population is at risk of poverty or social exclusion and inequalities continue to rise, and despite the proportion is at risk of poverty in the EU hasving fallen back to its pre-crisis level, it remains very high and far from reaching the Europe 2020 poverty and social exclusion target;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Recital C

C. whereas while the risk of poverty or social exclusion in the EU has fallen back to its pre-crisis level, it remains very high and far from reaching the Europe 2020 poverty and social exclusion target; whereas the whole EU has subscribed to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, with one of these goals being to end poverty in all its forms everywhere;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas unemployment and youth unemployment in the Union have been falling gradually since 2013, but are still above 2008 levels, with considerable differences among and within the Member States; whereas regional disparities have started to narrow; whereas the vary on unemployment rates is still relevant, ranging from around 4% in Germany to almost 20% in Spain and 23.6% in Greece; whereas hidden unemployment was at 20% in 2016 (unemployed, willing to work but not actively searching for employment)

Amendment 20 #

Geoffroy DIDIER, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Jérôme LAVRILLEUX, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Recital C

C. whereas ~~while~~ the risk of poverty or social exclusion in the EU ~~has fallen back to its pre-crisis level, it~~ remains very high and far from reaching the Europe 2020 ~~poverty and social exclusion~~ target;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Recital C

C. whereas while the risk of poverty or social exclusion in the EU has fallen back to its pre-crisis level, it remains very high including in more developed regions and far from reaching the Europe 2020 poverty and social exclusion target;

Amendment 22 #

Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Ivo VAJGL, António MARINHO E PINTO

Draft opinion
Recital C

C. whereas ~~while~~ the risk of poverty or social exclusion in the EU ~~has fallen back to its pre-crisis level, it~~ remains very high and far from reaching the Europe 2020 poverty and social exclusion target;

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Recital C

C. whereas while the risk of poverty or social exclusion in the EU has fallen back to its pre-crisis level, it remains ~~very~~too high and far from reaching the Europe 2020 poverty and social exclusion target;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas gross disposable household income (GDHI) per capita has still not recovered in several Member States from its pre-crisis levels, several of them recording levels from 20 to 30pps lower than in 2008; whereas income inequalities increases have not been reversed from the onset of the crisis in several Member States, and in some cases even have worsened; whereas in the EU as a whole the richest 20% of households received an income share that is 5.1 times that of the poorest 20%, with ratios of 6.5 or above in some Eastern and Southern European countries, almost twice as high as values for some Centre Europeans and Nordic best performers countries;

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas the main objective of cohesion policy is strengthening economic, social and territorial cohesion by reducing regional disparities both within and between Member States, improving the well-being of EU citizens and providing them with equal opportunities regardless of their place of residence;

Amendment 26 #

Geoffroy DIDIER, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Jérôme LAVRILLEUX, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas differences in unemployment and income across the EU encourage people to move to find better opportunities; whereas unbalanced and rapid change in population associated with brain drain creates complications for mostly rural regions in the EU13.

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)

C a. Whereas infra-regional disparities are growing, including in more prosperous regions which contain pockets of poverty; whereas most prosperous regions allow driving effects in favor of growth;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas a concrete positive impact of the cohesion policy investments funds cannot be achieved without a more effective involvement of all partners at national, regional and local level;

Amendment 29 #

Verónica LOPE FONTAGNÉ

Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)

C a. Whereas there is a need for the Commission and the Member States to reach a stronger commitment to applying Article 174 and 175 of the TFEU

Amendment 3 #

Theodoros ZAGORAKIS

Draft opinion
Recital A

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Recital C b (new)

C b. whereas policies to reconcile the work-life balance are of paramount importance in removing single parents and families from poverty and combating the worrying phenomena of the falling birth rate and ageing population;

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
Recital C b (new)

C b. Whereas Cohesion policy has played an important role in tackling the financial, economic and social crisis of the past years by providing much-needed opportunities for public investment;

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. IHighlights that Cohesion policy is the base to guarantee upward social convergence and shared prosperity in the EU and must concentrate on major societal challenges such as living conditions, unemployment, precariousness, poverty, exclusion, discrimination, migration and climate change; is of the opinion that Cohesion Policy, as the main investment policy of the Union~~, should be maintained at at least a similar budgetary level~~ in these objectives, should not only be maintained but increased in the future multiannual financial framework; considers that the European Social Fund (ESF) should be ~~retained~~substantially increased to at least 30% of the cohesion policy envelop as the main EU instrument for the integration and reintegration of workers into the labour market as well as for supporting measures for social inclusion, combating poverty and inequalities; believes that a scenario merging the ESF into one single social investment fund is a threat to the integrity of Cohesion policy, whose objective of social cohesion, enshrined in the Treaties, is mainly achieved through ESF funding; stresses that the ESF must therefore continue to be an integral part of Cohesion Policy to ensure that the EU’s renewed focus of Social Europe can be realised on the ground

Amendment 33 #

Geoffroy DIDIER, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Jérôme LAVRILLEUX, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Is of the opinion that Cohesion Policy, as the main investment policy of the Union, should be maintained at at least a similar budgetary level in the future multiannual financial framework; considers that the European Social Fund (ESF) should be retained as the main EU instrument for the integration and reintegration of workers into the labour market as well as for supporting measures for social inclusion, combating poverty and inequalities, and the creation of equal opportunities, with a continued 20% earmarked funding for the fight against poverty and social exclusion; considers therefore that the ESF share should be increased so that at least 30% of the combined ESI funds resources at EU level should be allocated to the ESF in each Member State;

Amendment 34 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Is of the opinion that Cohesion Policy, as the main investment policy of the Union, should be maintained at at least a similar budgetary level in the future multiannual financial framework; considers that the European Social Fund (ESF) should be retained as the main EU instrument for the integration and reintegration of workers into the labour market as well as for supporting measures for social inclusion, combating poverty and inequalities; defends the consideration of social criteria for the allocation of funds, in particular the unemployment rate and the youth unemployment rate, in addition to GDP per capita;

Amendment 35 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Is of the opinion that Cohesion Policy, as the main public investment policy of the Union, should be maintained at at least a similar budgetary level in the future multiannual financial framework; considers that the European Social Fund (ESF) should be retained as the main EU instrument for social cohesion and the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights, including the integration and reintegration of workers into the labour market as well as for supporting measures for social inclusion, combating poverty and inequalities;

Amendment 36 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Is of the opinion that Cohesion Policy, ~~as the main~~should be the focus of investment policy of the ~~Union,~~EU and should be ~~maintained at at least a similar budgetary level~~strengthened in the future multiannual financial framework; considers that the European Social Fund (ESF) should be retained as the main EU instrument for the integration and reintegration of workers into the labour market as well as for supporting measures for social inclusion, combating poverty and inequalities;

Amendment 37 #

Ádám KÓSA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Is of the opinion that Cohesion Policy, as the main investment policy of the Union, should be maintained at at least a ~~similar~~t the current budgetary level in the future multiannual financial framework and the GDP should remain the main indicator for allocating funds; considers that the European Social Fund (ESF) should be retained as the main EU instrument for the integration and reintegration of workers into the labour market as well as for supporting measures for social inclusion, combating poverty and inequalities;

Amendment 38 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Recalls that public investment in the EU is still below pre-crisis levels, making regions and Member States in need for more support to take up the current and future challenges; believes that given the growing social divergences across the EU, the social investment approach must be put at the centre of a coherent policy framework aligning the EU governance framework and its budget with the social investment imperative; stresses that these types of investment with long-term return are key to the future competitiveness of EU regions.

Amendment 39 #

Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Ivo VAJGL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Takes note of the data provided in the 7th Cohesion report showing signs of general improvement in the social situation, but also for remaining social divergences among Member States, aggravated as a result of the harmful impact of the economic crisis and years of austerity measures; observes with concern that despite positive signs, the risk of poverty or social exclusion remains a key challenge, being one of the main challenges to social cohesion together with an increase in inequalities in many Member States;

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas unemployment and youth unemployment in the Union have been falling gradually since 2013, but are still slightly above 2008 levels, at 7.3% and 16.1% respectively1a, and with considerable differences ~~among~~between and within the Member States; _________________ 1a http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/29 95521/8631691/3-31012018-BP- EN.pdf/bdc1dbf2-6511-4dc5-ac90- dbadee96f5fb

Amendment 40 #

Arne GERICKE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. demands the creation of a comparable regionally adjusted indicatorsystem, through which the status quo and the desired condition along the fourjustice dimensions (distribution justice, procedural justice, equalopportunities and intergenerational justice) can be measured. If the status quoand the desired state diverge from one another, nations and regions should havethe opportunity to take appropriate measures, in order to eradicate this discrepancy;

Amendment 41 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Considers that binding cohesion policy programming to quantifiable Europe 2020 targets, such as the reduction of poverty, was one of the main achievements of the 2014-2020 programming period; believes that contributing to economic, social and territorial cohesion in the EU should be the main objective of a Europe post-2020 strategy, based on the adopted international Sustainable Development Goals;

Amendment 42 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. States the reinforcement of EU budget, based on contributions that takes into account the Gross National Income of the Member States, aiming at public investment that supports national productive sectors, contributing to the reduction of multiple structural dependencies, promoting employment with rights, quality public services and the full use of Member-States' global potential;

Amendment 43 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. States that some of the more relevant employment and social imbalances and social divergences in Europe, as labour market segmentation, wage dispersion or child poverty, have not been resolved but have worsened, evidencing that public policies at the national level and European mechanisms are insufficient for building a stronger social cohesion and a fairer European labour market; highlights that stronger and wider policies at European level are needed to complement current national efforts; stresses that fiscal flexibility to support social investment in social rights is vital as well as mainstreaming all principles enshrined in the European Pillar of Social Rights effectively at all stages.

Amendment 44 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Is of the opinion that cohesion policy and particularly ESF have contributed to reaching certain level of recovery by Member States and regions corresponding to the pre-crisis situation, however, the share of ESF from the next cohesion envelope and the share from the ESF for combating poverty and social exclusion should be increased for further reduction of disparities and inequalities, and for achieving the Europe 2020 targets for inclusive growth;

Amendment 45 #

Arne GERICKE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. stresses the importance of the compatibility of family and career in the economic advancement and cohesion of all regions;

Amendment 46 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1 c. Is of the opinion that the Social Progress Index should be evaluated and considered as an additional indicator to complement the GDP indicator for allocation of ESIF, given that increase in GDP per head does not correspond to the same extent of increase in employment for all regions, and is not sufficient itself for measuring the new types of inequalities between EU regions, and that the economic growth does not impact on certain determinants of social progress as, for example, access to education, and that there are other important factors which determinate inclusion and social progress;

Amendment 47 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1 c. Recalls that inequalities threaten the future of the European project, erode its legitimacy and can damage trust in the EU as an engine of social progress and that the reduction of inequalities must be one of the main priorities at the European level, as recently stated by the Parliament; considers essential to improve the process of policy coordination in order to better monitor, prevent and correct negative trends that could increase inequalities and weaken social progress and social cohesion or negatively affect social justice, putting in place preventive and corrective measures when necessary;

Amendment 48 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)

1 d. highlights that the social dimension of EU policies has become a priority with the proclamation of the Pillar of Social Rights, agreed in part as a response to the harmful impact of the economic crisis and years of austerity measures which have aggravated social divergences across Europe; considers the creation of the European Pillar of Social Rights as a positive step towards a more social Europe; warns that social and employment policies at national, regional and local level need to be supported with sound EU cohesion funding for all EU regions.

Amendment 49 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Regret~~Underlines the sluggish implementation of the 2014-2020 programmes; ~~consi~~reiterates its concern regarding the funding unders th~~at faster implementation, a smoother transition between programming periods, genuine simplification and capacity development are necessary~~e EU budget and its role in supplying concrete answers to the needs of citizens; underlines the need to properly evaluate which funds could be better managed at national level in order to guarantee full respect of the subsidiarity principle; urges for the future programming of cohesion policy more transparency, accountability and genuine simplification;

Amendment 5 #

Jasenko SELIMOVIC, António MARINHO E PINTO

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas unemployment and youth unemployment in the ~~Union have been falling gradually since 2013, but~~European Union are still above 2008 levels, with considerable differences among and within the Member States;

Amendment 50 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Regrets the sluggish implementation of the 2014-2020 programmes with just 39% of the total funding allocated as at July 20173a; considers that faster implementation, a smoother transition between programming periods, clear targets, benchmarks and result indicators, genuine simplification and capacity development are necessary; _________________ 3a http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/source s/docoffic/official/reports/cohesion7/7cr.p df, p. 175

Amendment 51 #

Jasenko SELIMOVIC, António MARINHO E PINTO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Notes, in this regard, the suggestion of the Commission’s reflection paper on the future of EU finances4a that coherence could be improved via a single rule book for cohesion policy and other funding instruments with programmes or projects of the same type which would ensure stronger complementarity between cohesion policy and innovation and infrastructure spending and simplification for beneficiaries; further notes, the paper’s suggestion that new criteria for the allocation of funds could be considered such as unemployment and social inclusion to better integrate cohesion policy with current areas identified for EU action; believes that more efficient and flexible implementation of the funds will be crucial in the new MFF period; _________________ 4a https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta -political/files/reflection-paper-eu- finances_en.pdf, p. 24

Amendment 52 #

Geoffroy DIDIER, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Jérôme LAVRILLEUX, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. believes that before linking social funding to policy priorities agreed with Member states in the European Semester, regional authorities must be involved and changes into the indicators for social progress in cohesion policy must be introduced; stresses that Country Reports and Country Specific Recommendations cannot become the only reference documents for programming EU investments on the ground, especially social investment.

Amendment 53 #

Verónica LOPE FONTAGNÉ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Calls on the Commission to introduce policies designed to combat demographic decline and the dispersion of the population; stresses that the European Union’s cohesion policy should prioritise attention for regions suffering demographic decline; Therefore, calls for strategic investment, in particular broadband access, with a view to making them more competitive, improving industry and territorial structure

Amendment 54 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Recalls that the principle of proportionality must prevail in the management and control of cohesion programs; calls on the Commission and the Member States to explore the possibilities of an online system of application more conducive to administrative simplification for project managers;

Amendment 55 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Calls the Commission not to consider in the calculation of the public spending deficit the co-financing of EU programs for the purpose of complying with the Maastricht criteria, thus facilitating negotiations and improving the implementation of these programs;

Amendment 56 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Stresses that of the numerous challenges the European regions will face in the coming years, social inclusion and poverty as well as rising inequalities, both between and within regions as well as among citizens, are of particular relevance to cohesion policy;

Amendment 57 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Takes the view that the job creation potential of Union funds is still insufficient and should therefore be further strengthened through more efficient and results-based policy-making and implementation focusing in particular on future-oriented sectors with a net quality job creation potential, in particular the green and circular economy, care sector and digital sector; considers, moreover, that access to funding should be eased for all beneficiaries, especially social economy actors and SMEs;

Amendment 58 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Takes the view that the job creation potential of Union funds is still insufficient and should therefore be further strengthened through more efficient and results-based policy-making and implementation; considers, moreover, that access to funding should be eased for all beneficiaries, especially SMEs, NGOs and smaller municipalities;

Amendment 59 #

Verónica LOPE FONTAGNÉ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Takes the view that the job creation potential of Union funds is still insufficient and should therefore be further strengthened through more efficient and results-based policy-making and implementation; considers, moreover, that access to funding should be eased for all beneficiaries, especially SMEs and self- employed;

Amendment 6 #

Jasenko SELIMOVIC, António MARINHO E PINTO

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

A a. whereas long-term unemployment remains, sharing above 50% of total unemployment in some Member States and represents 45,6% in the EU and 49,7% in the EA; whereas unemployment rate only tracks individuals who do not have a job and have actively looked for work in the last 4 weeks and long term unemployment rate only measures the share of the economically active population aged 15 to 74 who has been unemployed for 12 months or more

Amendment 60 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Takes the view that the job creation potential of Union funds is still insufficiently leveraged and should therefore be further strengthened through more efficient and results-based policy- making and implementation; considers, moreover, that access to funding should be eased for all beneficiaries, especially SMEs;

Amendment 61 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Takes the view that the job creation potential of EU~~nion~~ funds is still insufficient and should therefore be further strengthened through more efficient ~~and results-based policy-making and implementation~~implementation, supported by effective technical assistance; considers, moreover, that access to funding should be eased for all beneficiaries, especially SMEs;

Amendment 62 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 63 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. considers that it is essential, in the framework of the discussions for the new MFF, to carry out a reflection around the EU cohesion policy and how effective is to be a driver for social progress and deliver on the EU's social objectives; points out that despite the intensified efforts of the EU to align cohesion policy with social objectives, strong socio-economic disparities still remain across Europe and new geographical divides are appearing across the EU, accelerated by the economic crisis; believes that inclusion and social progress, can only be achieved through well-balanced redistributive policies; calls on the Commission and the Member States to reconsider whether GDP per capita is really the right criteria to determine where and how EU funding should be allocated or if other types of criteria and indicators need to be incorporated.

Amendment 64 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Calls on the Member States to invest more in skills that improve economic growth by narrowing the skills gap and reducing child poverty and social exclusion; calls on the Member States to pay increased attention to the rural regions which have not sufficiently benefited from the economic growth.

Amendment 65 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to incorporate new indicators to measure social convergence, including the Social Progress Index which aims to measure the multiple dimensions of social progress while helping regions identify the main issues they are confronted with.

Amendment 66 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Calls on Member States to start or continue structural reforms to improve competition, business environment and skills potential, particularly in the Member States with low productivity levels;

Amendment 67 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3 c. Calls on the Commission to also use new indicators in the social scoreboard to get a fine and precise overview of the social situation in each region and as a determinant for the allocation of EU funding to thematic objectives with a social dimension; considers that in the state of ex post evaluation, social indicators should also be used as a tool to assess the success of EU funding in achieving better social outcomes and that adapting a criteria of distribution to the set of objectives is therefore essential to give more prominence to social developments in EU cohesion policy.

Amendment 68 #

Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Ivo VAJGL, António MARINHO E PINTO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3 c. Insists that transparent public procurement is essential to promote development and fair competition; takes the view that public procurement is best suited to fostering socially and environmentally beneficial effects of investments.

Amendment 69 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission and the 4. Member States to continue initiatives aimed at increasing access to better education~~, skills, and quality, sustainable employment, especially for young people~~ including tertiary education, VET and work-based learning and acquiring and updating skills particularly digital skills, as a driver for economic growth and quality, sustainable employment, especially for young people, low-qualified and older workers; notes the importance of the New Skills Agenda and particularly its Upskilling Pathways initiative in this regard; points out that training programmes financed under the ESF should be tailored to the needs of the labour market;

Amendment 7 #

Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Ivo VAJGL, António MARINHO E PINTO

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

A a. whereas in the current financial period, cohesion policy is expected to help support 1.1 million SMEs, 7.4 million unemployed people find a job, 8.9 million people gain new qualifications, invest €16 billion in the digital economy and make substantial investments in social infrastructure;

Amendment 70 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to continue initiatives aimed at increasing access to ~~better education, skills~~quality public education and training, and quality, sustainable and inclusive employment, especially for young people; points out that training programmes financed under the ESF should be tailored to the needs of the workers and the unemployed in their integration and progression in the labour market;

Amendment 71 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to continue initiatives aimed at increasing access to better education, ~~skills, and quality, sustainable~~training services, and quality, non precarious, decent employment, especially for young people; points out that training programmes financed under the ESF should ~~be tailored to the needs of the labour market~~contribute to employability, involving all relevant stakeholders, namely workers' representatives, in its definition;

Amendment 72 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to continue initiatives aimed at increasing access to better education, skills, and quality, sustainable employment, especially for young people; points out that training programmes financed under the ESF should be tailored to the needs of the ~~labour market~~individual as well as take into account labour market opportunities;

Amendment 73 #

Theodoros ZAGORAKIS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to continue initiatives aimed at increasing access to better education, skills, and quality, innovative entrepreneurship, and sustainable employment, especially for young people; points out that training programmes financed under the ESF should be tailored to the needs of the labour market;

Amendment 74 #

Ádám KÓSA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to continue initiatives aimed at increasing access to better and inclusive education, skills, and quality, sustainable employment, especially for young people; points out that training programmes financed under the ESF should be tailored to the needs of the labour market;

Amendment 75 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Reiterates its concern about the rising trend towards underemployment and hidden unemployment, the chronification of long term unemployment and the level of youth unemployment and long-term unemployment; recalls the importance of investment in plans prioritising the reduction of long term unemployment combining vocational training with personalised guidance

Amendment 76 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Calls for the strengthening of budget lines that promote effective responses to the reception and social inclusion of refugees and migrants; rejects all budgetary and political measures that promote the externalization of EU borders, such as FRONTEX, or the recent arms' race and militarization of international relations measures proposed by the EU;

Amendment 77 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Calls the Commission to pay particular attention to the important relationship between the cohesion policy and the most geographically and demographically disadvantaged areas, suffering from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps, such as islands and mountain regions;

Amendment 78 #

Geoffroy DIDIER, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Jérôme LAVRILLEUX, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Considers Council's recommendation of 2016 on "Upskilling Pathways" together with Member States' response and follow-up crucial to improving skills of EU adult population and increasing participation in lifelong learning by lower-qualified adults.

Amendment 79 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Underlines that social and fiscal convergence contribute to the cohesion objective and that divergent practices in this area are liable to cause further problems for territories most vulnerable to globalisation;

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas the employment rate in the EU has been growing for four consecutive years and now surpasses the 2008 figure, but still remains below the pre-crisis level in half of the Member States; whereas regional disparities have started to narrow; whereas, employment rates diverge widely, ranging from much below the EU average of 65% in Greece, Croatia, Italy and Spain, to higher than 75% in the Netherlands, Denmark, United Kingdom, Germany and Sweden; whereas employment measured in terms of hours worked per employee remains 3% below the pre-crisis level in the EU and 4% in the Euro Area due to increases in part- time work and reductions in the hours worked by full-time employees; whereas young people are more often employed under non-standard and atypical forms of employment, including temporary jobs, involuntary part-time work and lower wage jobs

Amendment 80 #

Arne GERICKE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. stresses the necessity of retaining school and educational institutions close to one’s own residence and demands a nationwide policy of retention of those, if possible supported by the European structural funds;

Amendment 81 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. underlines that combating poverty and social exclusion should be a top priority for EU and its Member States; considers that all EU funds should contribute to the implementation of this priority;

Amendment 82 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to reinforce the partnership with social partners and civil society at all levels and in all stages of the process, including in the preparation, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the programmes, to ensure a successful implementation of cohesion policy and the ESF in particular, in the future; calls to this end for sufficient resources and technical assistance to be made available for all relevant partners to effectively participate in the process;

Amendment 83 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Rejects the imposition of any conditionality to the implementation of EU cohesion funds by Member States; states that cohesion funds must take into account Member States' strategic development perspectives, both inside of their own borders or in a transnational perspective;

Amendment 84 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5 b. Stresses that to effectively tackle social problems, such as combating poverty and social exclusion within communities, a bottom-up approach is needed as these issues require a tailor- made response and the active involvement of the level of government directly concerned;

Amendment 9 #