Progress: Procedure completed
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | REGI | GOZI Sandro ( Renew) | DORFMANN Herbert ( EPP), CREȚU Corina ( S&D), CUFFE Ciarán ( Verts/ALE), PANZA Alessandro ( ID), TOMASZEWSKI Waldemar ( ECR), KIZILYÜREK Niyazi ( GUE/NGL) |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 47
Legal Basis:
RoP 47Subjects
Events
The Committee on Regional Development adopted the own-initiative report by Sandro GOZI (Renew, FR) with recommendations to the Commission on amending the proposed mechanism to resolve legal and administrative obstacles in a cross-border context.
Internal border regions cover 40 % of the EU’s territory, account for 30 % of its population (150 million people) and are home to almost 2 million cross-border workers. Despite Parliament’s adopted mandate on the proposed European Cross-Border Mechanism in 2018 and repeated calls on the Council to adopt its first-reading position, Member States halted this draft legislation. Moreover, in light of recent trends on intra-EU labour mobility, and in order to face various demographic, social, economic and environmental challenges, to reduce disparities, and prevent brain drain, the Union needs to step up its efforts to address persisting cross-border legal and administrative obstacles in the broader context of cohesion through a far more efficient cooperation of border region authorities as well as a new effective instrument.
In order to ensure that a new legislative proposal aimed at removing cross-border obstacles in the EU is prepared by the European Commission, Members suggest this new regulation using legislative initiative procedure.
The removal of complex cross-border obstacles requires a high degree of cooperation among Member States. The underlying assumption of the draft report is that this task could be carried out more easily and rapidly by allowing national, regional and local authorities of the Member States concerned to formulate ad-hoc solutions in a joint effort. The direct involvement of regional and local authorities would additionally rule out the need to establish regional Cross-border Coordination Points, while the collective formulation of the solution to a cross-border obstacle would avert protracted exchanges of draft texts between national authorities.
Cross-border Coordination Points
Members consider that the establishment of Cross-border Coordination Points is crucial to provide public authorities, civil society, citizens, and private bodies with an interlocutor capable of addressing legal or administrative obstacles hampering the implementation of a joint project. They maintain that through Cross-border Coordination Points, Member States should assess on a voluntary and a case-by-case basis whether and how to address the request for assistance in removing the obstacles and administrative burden. A way to boost multilevel governance, innovation, and stronger cooperation between border regions is to enable Cross-border Coordination Points to establish Cross-border Committees when addressing a complex obstacle that requires higher cooperation among the relevant authorities of border regions on all levels.
Public and private bodies, organisations supporting cross-border cooperation and initiatives would be able to come up with projects identifying obstacles halting cross-border development. The Cross-border Coordination Point would analyse it and suggest the next steps. If the solution required cooperation of another Member State, national Cross-border Coordination Point can ask its counterpart to set up a Cross-border Committee representing all authorities that would need to be involved to design a joint solution. However, Member States will be free to decide whether to use the cross-border mechanism or not. Moreover, countries could also decide to follow the same arrangements for border regions with candidate countries.
The report also called on the European Commission to be in touch with cross-border coordination points, provide technical assistance, promote best practices and set up a public database listing all ad-hoc solutions.
Documents
- Text adopted by Parliament, single reading: T9-0327/2023
- Decision by Parliament: T9-0327/2023
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary: A9-0252/2023
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE749.290
- Committee draft report: PE740.608
- Committee draft report: PE740.608
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE749.290
- Text adopted by Parliament, single reading: T9-0327/2023
Activities
- Rainer WIELAND
- Corina CREȚU
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Niyazi KIZILYÜREK
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Vlad-Marius BOTOŞ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Ciarán CUFFE
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Elżbieta KRUK
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Chris MACMANUS
Plenary Speeches (1)
Votes
Modification du mécanisme proposé visant à lever les obstacles juridiques et administratifs dans un contexte transfrontalier - A9-0252/2023 - Sandro Gozi - Proposition de résolution #
Amendments | Dossier |
157 |
2022/2194(INL)
2023/06/06
REGI
157 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 4 a (new) – having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1082/2006 on a European grouping of territorial cooperation (EGTC), as amended by Regulation (EU) 1302/2013,
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. Whereas some Member States have already concluded and can resort to bilateral or plurilateral treaties and agreements to set up structures and procedures for
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution Article 4 – point 1 – point b (b) establish
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution Article 4 – point 1 – point c (c) entrust
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution Article 4 – point 1 – point c (c) entrust an appropriate authority or body with the additional tasks as
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution Article 4 – point 2 2. The Member States shall inform the Commission of the identity of the Cross- border Coordination Point or Points within three months of the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution Article 4 – point 2 2. The Member States shall inform the Commission of the identity of the Cross- border Coordination Points within three months of the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution Article 4 – point 2 2. The Member States shall inform the Commission of the identity of the Cross- border Coordination Point within
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution Article 4 – point 2 a (new) 2a. The Member States shall ensure that the authority or body which is established as, or takes on the additional tasks of, a Cross-Border Coordination Point receives the necessary capacity building and support to carry out the tasks described in Article 5.
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution Article 5 – point 1 – introductory part 1. Each Cross-border Coordination Point shall
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution Article 5 – point 1 – point a (a) carry out a preliminary analysis of all initiative documents received, and maintain records of same;
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution Article 5 – point 1 – point b (b) coordinate the preparation, consultation, conclusion, and implementation for all ad-
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. Whereas some Member States have already concluded and can resort to bilateral or
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution Article 5 – point 1 – point c a (new) (ca) maintains contacts with citizens seeking solutions in cases of cross-border administrative blockages;
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution Article 5 – point 1 – point d a (new) (da) identify and liaise with relevant non-governmental organisations and civil society representatives in the respective field;
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution Article 5 – point 1 – point e a (new) (ea) liaise with the initiator and ensure transparency and access to documentation
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution Article 5 – point 2 – introductory part 2. Each Member State may decide to entrust the Cross-border Coordination Points with the following additional tasks:
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution Article 5 – point 2 – point a (a)
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution Article 5 – point 2 – point a (a)
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution Article 6 – point 1 1. Together with their their competent local and regional authorities concerned Member States shall decide by mutual agreement, and on the basis of a case-by-case assessment pursuant to Article 11(1), point (c), and to Article 12, to set up a Cross-border committee tasked with the formulation of an ad-hoc solution to address one or more obstacles identified through an initiative document.
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution Article 6 – point 1 1. Member States shall decide by mutual agreement, together with the local and regional authorities concerned, and on the basis of a case-by-case assessment pursuant to Article 11(1), point (c), and to Article 12, to set up a Cross-border committee tasked with the formulation of an ad-hoc solution to address one or more obstacles identified through an initiative document.
Amendment 118 #
1. Member States shall decide by mutual agreement, and on the basis of a case-by-case assessment pursuant to Article 11(1), point (
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution Article 6 – point 2 2. The draft ad-hoc solution shall lay down legal or administrative arrangements to address solely the obstacle set out in an initiative document. The conclusion and implementation of the ad-hoc solution shall be entrusted to the competent authorities of the Member States concerned, in full compliance with their legislative and constitutional frameworks.
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C a (new) Ca. Whereas, in addition to the support provided by EU funds, there are numerous instruments to promote cross- border activities and reduce trade barriers: specific contractual agreements, declarations of intent, joint ventures or sectoral policy measures could also be used;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution Article 6 – point 2 2. The draft ad-hoc solution shall lay down legal or administrative arrangements to address solely the obstacle set out in an
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution Article 6 – point 3 3. Cross-border Committees shall be composed of representatives of the national, regional or local authorities designated by the Cross-border Coordination Points of the Member States concerned. The Cross-border Coordination Points shall make all necessary efforts to allow the participation of regional and local authorities to the Cross-border Committee where the removal of the obstacle falls within their competences or within their territory. Failing their participation, the Cross-border Coordination Points will ensure to keep the relevant local and regional authorities informed of the outcomes of Cross-border Committee meetings.
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution Article 6 – point 3 3. Cross-border Committees shall be
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution Article 6 – point 3 3. Cross-border Committees shall be composed of representatives of the national, regional or local authorities designated by the
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution Article 7 – point 1 – point b (b) provide, if requested, practical information and
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution Article 7 – point 1 – point e (e) create, publish and keep an up- dated public database of all national Cross- border Coordination Points and their contact details, and of all ad-hoc solutions.
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution Article 7 – point 1 – point e (e) create, publish and keep an up- dated database of all
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution Article 8 – point 1 1. The initiator shall identify
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution Article 8 – point 2 – point b (b) one or more local or regional authorities, including the educational, health and safety authorities, in a given cross-border region;
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution Article 8 – point 3 3. The initiator shall prepare an initiative document drafted in accordance with Article 9. In doing so, the initiator shall take into account the requests of the natural and legal persons concerned.
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution Article 8 – point 4 4. The initiator shall submit the initiative document to the Cross-border Coordination Points of its Member State and send a copy to the Cross-border Coordination Points of the bordering Member State or States concerned. In cases referred to in Article 8(2), points (c) and (d), the initiator shall be free to decide to which Cross-border Coordination Points of the Member States concerned it shall send the initiative document.
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution Article 9 – point 1 – point c a (new) (ca) a list of the legislative and administrative provisions that should be taken into account for the envisaged ad- hoc solution
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution Article 10 – point 2 2. Within one month of receipt of an initiative document, the Cross-border Coordination Points of the bordering Member State concerned shall send its preliminary reaction to the Cross-border Coordination Point of first contact.
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution Article 10 – point 2 2. Within
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution Article 10 – point 3 – point a (a) in cases where the initiative document was prepared in accordance with Article 9, inform the initiator within one month that it is admissible, and therefore that an obstacle exists;
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution Article 10 – point 3 – point b – point ii (ii) where it considers that the revised initiative document is still not prepared in
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution Article 10 – point 3 – point c (c) inform the initiator within three months about its assessment that there is no obstacle, while setting out in writing the reasons for its decision, the means of review available at national level to challenge its decision, and, where relevant, recommendations on how to proceed; this decision shall be kept on record to be made publicly available upon request.
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution Article 10 – point 3 – point c (c) inform the initiator within three months about its assessment that there is no obstacle, while setting out in writing the reasons for its decision, the means of review available at national level to challenge its decision, and, where relevant,
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution Article 10 – point 3 – point c (c) inform the initiator within three months about its assessment that there is no obstacle, while setting out in writing the reasons for its decision, the means of review available at national level
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution Article 11 – point 1 – introductory part 1. Following the receipt of an initiative document complying with the requirements set out by Article 9, and the notification of its positive preliminary analysis pursuant to Article 10(3), points (a) and (b), the Cross-border Coordination Point of first contact shall, within
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. Whereas a Union legislative act laying down general provisions and procedural arrangements for Member States to address cross-border obstacles would benefit Member Sta
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution Article 11 – point 1 – point a a (new) (aa) The information transmitted under paragraph 1 shall be made public.
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution Article 11 – point 1 – point d (d) expresses its commitment to do utmost, with
Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution Article 11 – point 1 – point d (d) express its commitment to the initiator to remove the obstacle by triggering the procedures to formulate an ad-hoc solution with the relevant authorities of the bordering Member State concerned by setting up a Cross-border Committee; the Cross-border Coordination Point of first contact shall inform in writing the Cross-border Coordination Points of the bordering Member States, listing the national, regional and local authorities of the Member State of first contact which would take part in the preparation of the ad-hoc solution;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution Article 11 – point 1 – point e (e) inform the initiator
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution Article 11 – point 1 – point e – point i (new) i) Commit to address the obstacle by taking all necessary measures in full compliance with its legislative framework, and liaise with the competent national, regional or local authority to that end;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution Article 11 – point 1 – point e – point ii (new) ii) decide not to address the obstacle while setting out in writing the grounds of its decision, and the means of review available at national level to challenge its decision;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution Article 11 – point 3 3. Member States shall inform the Commission of any decision taken under this Article by the Cross-border Coordination Point of first contact
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution Article 12 – point 1 1. Upon notification of the Cross- Border Coordination point of first contact of its request to draft an ad-hoc solution in the context of a Cross-border Committee pursuant to Article 11(1), point (c), the Cross-border Coordination Points of the bordering Member State concerned shall decide whether to initiate the procedures referred to in Article 13 within one month of that notification, and communicate its decision in writing to the Cross-border Coordination Point of first contact. If the Cross-border Coordination Points of the bordering Member State concerned decide
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution Article 12 – point 1 1. Upon notification of the Cross- Border Coordination point of first contact of its request to draft an ad-hoc solution in the context of a Cross-border Committee pursuant to Article 11(1), point (c), the Cross-border Coordination Point of the bordering Member State concerned shall decide whether to initiate the procedures referred to in Article 13 within
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution Article 12 – point 1 1. Upon notification of the Cross- Border Coordination point of first contact of its request to draft an ad-hoc solution in the context of a Cross-border Committee pursuant to Article 11(1), point (
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D a (new) Da. Whereas it would also benefit communities and civil society actors in cross-border regions across the Union who would have a dedicated course of action open to them to signal and address cross-border obstacles;
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution Article 12 – point 2 2. Where the Cross-border Coordination Points of the bordering
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution Article 13 – point 1 – point c (c) the proposed ad-hoc solution, including all necessary actions to be taken by the competent authorit
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution Article 13 – point 1 – point g Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution Article 14 – point 2 2. A copy shall be sent for information to the initiator by the Cross- border Coordination Point of first contact, and to the relevant local and regional authorities where they have not been participants in the Cross-border Committee.
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution Article 15 a (new) Article15a Third countries or Accession countries participation 1. This Regulation would apply in the same conditions to Third countries or Accession countries if they decide to trigger the procedural arrangements laid down in Chapter II to address an obstacle as referred to in paragraph 1 of Article 1. 2. The country concerned shall in that case inform the Commission and the Member States concerned in the form of a letter about its intention laid down in paragraph 1 of this Article.
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution Article 17 – paragraph 2 Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution Annex II – point 3 – paragraph 2 Looking at data between 2014-2019, this study finds that removing obstacles would bring significant benefits for NUTS3
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. Whereas the Commission issued a proposal for a regulation on a mechanism to resolve legal and administrative obstacles in a cross-border context (‘ECBM proposal’) in 2018; however since then new challenges of unprecedented nature had emerged, such as BREXIT, COVID pandemic or war in Ukraine with an impact on cross-border context that should be reflectd in its new amended version;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Recital H H. Whereas, nonetheless, Council has raised some understandable legal concerns
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I I. Whereas Parliament has made all necessary efforts to start inter-institutional negotiations with the Council in an open and constructive way; whereas Parliament has repeatedly called on the Commission to present a new amended legislative proposal in numerous resolutions and in formal and informal exchanges at the highest political level; whereas the adoption of such a legislative act is as well unfortunately part of the proposals contained in the Final Report of the Conference on the future of Europe22; _________________ 22 Final report of the Conference on the
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 13 a (new) – having regard to its resolution of 19 June 2020 on measures needed to protect cross-border and seasonal workers in the EU, in the context of COVID-19,
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Consider
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Considers that, in order to face various demographic challenges, reduce disparities, impede brain drain, increase birth rate and their ever-closer consequences, the Union needs to step up its efforts to address persisting cross-border legal and administrative obstacles in the broader context of cohesion through a far more efficient cooperation of border region authorities as well as a new effective instrument;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Considers that, in order to face various social, economic, environmental and demographic challenges, and their ever-closer consequences, the Union needs to step up its efforts to address persisting cross-border legal and administrative obstacles in the broader context of
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Considers that, in order to face various social, demographic, economic and climate challenges, and their ever- closer consequences, the Union needs to step up its efforts to address persisting cross-border legal and administrative obstacles in the broader context of cohesion through a far more efficient cooperation of border region authorities as well as a new effective instrument;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Considers that, in order to face various demographic, energy, economic and social challenges
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Notes that despite territorial cross- border activities developed over decades, supported and facilitated by the Union with legal and financial instruments, citizens from border regions more often face a discrimination by not having access to the closest and most essential public services, which happens to be on the other side of the border, or their businesses enjoy fewer opportunities;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Notes that despite territorial cross- border activities developed over decades, supported and facilitated by the Union with legal and financial instruments, citizens
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Recalls that workers in border regions still face tax and administrative issues that require better coordination between Member States’ administrations; stresses that the development of teleworking in particular leaves these workers and their businesses in legal uncertainty, which can lead to discrimination;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Considers the b-solutions initiative
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. Whereas the persistency of cross- border obstacles of administrative and legal nature
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Stresses that a Union-wide coordination framework is needed to
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Stresses that a Union-wide coordination framework is needed to ensure cohesion of the Union and to provide all border regions with a long- awaited solution that allows them to remove obstacles that require a higher degree of effort, due to administrative burdens or blockages, and cooperation between the Member States concerned;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Stresses that a Union-wide coordination framework is needed to ensure cohesion of the Union and to provide all border regions with equal access to a long-
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Maintains that the amendment to the ECBM proposal should concentrate on creating a simple and straightforward coo
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Maintains that the amendment to the ECBM proposal should concentrate on creating a simple and straightforward coordination framework allowing authorities at various levels to remove legal and administrative obstacles, while preventing the duplication of bodies and authorities
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Believes that, in order to be a genuine cohesion instrument, such a coordination framework shall fully respect the constitutional and legislative prerogatives of the Member States, taking into account the institutional differences as regards the areas of intervention of the national administrative bodies concerned, and the allocation of competences between the Union and the Member States;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Suggests to call the new coordination framework:
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. Whereas the persistency of cross- border obstacles of administrative and legal nature severely affects EU border regions’ livelihood and their sustainable economic and social potential and limits the exercise of rights granted by the Treaties to border regions’ citizens and communities;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Stresses that regional and local authorities should be involved in a meaningful and inclusive way in the formulation and implementation of measures aimed at removing cross-border obstacles, and that local civil society actors and community groups should be consulted and kept duly informed of the process;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Stresses that regional and local authorities are key players and therefore they should be more involved in a meaningful and inclusive way in the formulation of measures aimed at removing cross-border obstacles that also significantly contribute to territorial cohesion;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Stresses that regional and local authorities, and the educational, health and safety authorities, as well as NGOs operating on the ground, should be involved in a meaningful and inclusive way in the formulation of measures aimed at removing cross-border obstacles;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Stresses that regional and local authorities should be involved, to the maximum extent possible, in a meaningful and inclusive way in the formulation of measures aimed at removing cross-border obstacles;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Stresses that regional and local authorities
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Believes that the establishment of Cross-border Coordination Points is crucial to provide public authorities, civil society, citizens, and private bodies with an interlocutor capable of addressing legal or administrative obstacles hampering the implementation of a joint project;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Maintains that through Cross- border Coordination Points, Member States shall assess on a voluntary and a case-by- case basis whether and how to address the request for assistance in removing the obstacles and administrative burden;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Maintains that through Cross- border Coordination Points, Member States shall assess on a case-by-case basis whether and how to address the request for assistance in
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Is of the opinion that a way to boost multilevel governance, innovation, and
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Underlines that Member States are not obliged to trigger the instrument to address the obstacle, rather their response can vary from deciding not to address it, addressing it through the review of its administrative or legal framework through unilateral actions taken at the national level, soft-law instruments, through existing bilateral or multilateral treaties, or finally through the setting up of a Cross- border Committee tasked with the drafting of an ad-hoc solution to address one or more of the obstacles identified;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A a (new) Aa. whereas the existence of these obstacles and their effects undermine the confidence of people living in border regions in European integration and the effectiveness of public authorities in general;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Underlines that Member States
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Underlines that Member States are not obliged to trigger the instrument to address the obstacle, rather their response can vary from
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Emphasises that the adoption of a decision on the implementation of any ad- hoc solution drafted by the Cross-border Committee shall remain at the discretion of the competent authorities at national level, and shall in any case be carried out by
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Emphasises that the adoption of a decision on the implementation of any ad- hoc solution drafted by the Cross-border Committee shall remain at the discretion of the competent authorities at
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Emphasises that the adoption of a decision on the implementation of any ad- hoc solution drafted by the Cross-border Committee shall remain at the discretion of the competent authorities at national level, and shall in any case be carried out by Member States in full compliance with their legislative and constitutional framework;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Notes that some Member States, for example, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Luxembourg and Malta, which are single NUTS level 2 regions, are being excluded from Commission’s proposal original geographical scope of NUTS 3 level, whereas in Germany NUTS 1 regions correspond to the federal States, NUTS 2 to governmental regions and NUTS 3 regions are generally districts; argues that in the case of cross-border obstacles, NUTS 3 level is not always the optimal level to solve legal and administrative obstacles in various cross-border situations; stresses, therefore, that the future coordination framework must allow for a certain flexibility in its implementation in order to be as relevant and effective as possible by targeting the most suitable territory in each case;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15a. Notes that the revised ECBM proposal should also include those cross- border areas characterised by a border outside the EU, such as the Austria, France, Germany and Italy border with Switzerland;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Requests that the Commission submit, on the basis of third paragraph of Article 175 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, a proposal for a regulation on a Border Regions’ Instrument for Development and Growth in the EU, following the recommendations set out in the Annex hereto; stresses that any legislative proposal on this matter must clearly define the entities concerned, in order to ensure the necessary legal certainty for local actors;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Requests that the Commission submit, on the basis of third paragraph of Article 175 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, a proposal for a
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. Whereas it was estimated that the setting up of a legislative tool at Union level to address cross-border obstacles, combined with existing tools, could bring about economic benefits of 123 billion euros, while removing all obstacles would bring up benefits up to 460 billion euros; whereas internal border regions cover 40 % of the EU’s territory, account for 30 % of its population (i.e. 150 million people) and are home to almost 2 million cross-border workers; whereas the removal of cross-border obstacles would as well bring about a positive impact on social rights, equal opportunities, and an improved access to high-quality public services for citizens living and working in border regions20, and particularly cross- border workers; _________________ 20 European Parliamentary Research
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Recalls the commitment of the Commission President to Parliament’s right of initiative and of her pledge to follow up Parliament’s own-initiative legislative reports with a legislative act, in line with principles of Union law, contained in the Political Guidelines for the next European Commission 2019-2024;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Is of the view that sufficient funding for the proposals set out herein is required, particularly regarding capacity building in the relevant local and regional authorities, and national authorities where these take on the role of Cross Border Coordination Points, and considers that the financial implications of the requested proposals should be covered by the relevant Union budgetary allocation. Calls in this regard on the Commission to assess whether the implementation of the new Regulation could be facilitated through the mobilisation of Technical Assistance and Information Exchange instrument of the European Commission (TAIEX) or of the Technical Support Instrument, with a view to promote capacity-building of Member States’ authorities at all levels;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Instructs its President to forward this resolution
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Instructs its President to forward this resolution and the accompanying recommendations to the Commission and the Council and to the European Committee of the Regions.
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – subheading 2 Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – paragraph 1 Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 174, the third paragraph of Article 175 thereof,
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 1 (1) The third paragraph of Article 175 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provides for specific actions to be adopted outside the Funds which are the subject of the first paragraph of that Article, in order to achieve the objective of economic, social and territorial cohesion set out in the TFEU. The harmonious development of the entire Union territory and greater economic, social and territorial cohesion imply the strengthening of territorial cooperation.
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 1 a (new) (1a) To this end, measures shall be taken to improve the implementation conditions for actions of territorial cooperation, including: (a) Enhancing the exchange of best practices and knowledge-sharing among Member States, regions, and local authorities involved in territorial cooperation initiatives; (b) Facilitating and promoting cross- border, transnational, and interregional cooperation projects that contribute to the harmonious development of the Union territory; (c) Providing financial support and technical assistance to territorial cooperation initiatives, ensuring that adequate resources are allocated to support their implementation; (d) Strengthening the coordination mechanisms and governance structures for territorial cooperation, including the involvement of relevant stakeholders at all levels; (e) Promoting the integration of territorial cooperation objectives into relevant EU policies and strategies, such as regional development, transport, environment, and employment.
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. Whereas it was estimated that the setting up of a legislative tool at Union level to address cross-border obstacles, combined with existing tools, could bring about economic benefits of 123 billion euros, while removing all obstacles would bring up benefits up to 460 billion euros; whereas, however, the removal of cross- border obstacles would a
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 1 b (new) (1b) The European Union institutions, Member States, and regional and local authorities shall work together to ensure the effective implementation and monitoring of actions of territorial cooperation, with a view to achieving a more cohesive and integrated Union territory.' The same level of cooperation shall be done, on voluntary basis, between EU Member States and candidate states neighbouring the MS frontier.
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 4 (4) The Commission also highlighted that numerous legal barriers still exist in border regions, especially those related to health services, cross-border health crisis, labour regulation, taxes, business development, and barriers linked to differences in administrative cultures and national legal frameworks. Neither European Territorial Cooperation funding nor the institutional support to cooperation by the European groupings of territorial cooperation (EGTCs) is sufficient on its own to address the resolution of those barriers which constitute real obstacles to effective cooperation.
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 4 (4) The Commission also highlighted that numerous legal barriers still exist in border regions, especially those related to health services, labour regulation, environmental protection, taxes, business development, and barriers linked to differences in administrative cultures and national legal frameworks. Neither European Territorial Cooperation funding nor the institutional support to cooperation by the European groupings of territorial cooperation (EGTCs) is sufficient on its own to address the resolution of those barriers which constitute real obstacles to effective cooperation.
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 11 (11) In its assessment of data between 2014-2019, the relevant European Added Value Assesment (EAVA) study by the European Parliamentary Research Service found that removing obstacles would bring significant benefits for NUTS3 border regions and to the entire Union economy. More precisely, a total Gross Value Added (GVA) benefit of a complete removal of legal and administrative barriers would yield around €457 billion, representing 3, 8 % of total 2019 EU GVA. Removing 20% of obstacles for all border regions, would result in a total GVA benefit of €123 billion, representing around 1% of total 2019 EU GVA, as well as total employment benefit of 1 million jobs representing around 0,5% of total employment at
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 11 (11) In its assessment of data between 2014-2019, the relevant European Added Value Assesment (EAVA) study by the European Parliamentary Research Service found that removing obstacles would bring significant benefits for NUTS3 border
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 14 (14) Even though a number of effective treaties, agreements and instruments for cross-border cooperation already exist at inter-governmental, regional and local level in certain regions of the Union, they do not cover all border regions of the Union. Furthermore, the financing instruments (mainly Interreg) and the legal instruments (mainly EGTCs) provided so far at Union level have not been sufficient to resolve cross-border obstacles throughout the Union. In order to complement the existing systems, while removing procedural obstacles to the development of border areas, it is therefore necessary to set up a voluntary coordination framework laying down general provisions and clear procedural arrangements Member States may use in order to address obstacles hampering the
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 15 a (new) (15a) To improve the life of citizens in cross-border regions between the Member States and candidate countries and to strengthen cooperation, a Member States may on a voluntary basis apply this Regulation and its provisions to resolve legal and administrative obstacles to border regions of the Union with candidate countries, while respecting Union law;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 16 (16) In order to coordinate the tasks of different authorities, which in some Member States will include national and regional legislative bodies, within a given Member State and between those of one or more neighbouring Member States, each Member State should be required to
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 16 (16) In order to coordinate the tasks of different authorities, which in some Member States will include national and regional legislative bodies, within a given Member State and between those of one or more neighbouring Member States, each Member State should be required to establish or designate a national Cross- border Coordination Point either
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 16 (16) In order to coordinate the tasks of different authorities, which in some Member States will include national and regional legislative bodies, within a given Member State and between those of one or more neighbouring Member States, each Member State should be required to establish or designate a
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. Whereas it was estimated that the setting up of a legislative tool at Union level to address cross-border obstacles, combined with existing tools, could bring about economic benefits of 123 billion euros, while removing all obstacles would bring up benefits up to 460 billion euros; whereas the removal of cross-border obstacles would as well bring about a positive impact on social rights, equal opportunities, environmental protection and an improved access to high-quality public services for citizens living in border regions20
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 16 (16) In order to coordinate the tasks of different authorities, which in some Member States will include national and regional legislative bodies, within a given Member State and between those of one or more neighbouring Member States, each Member State should be required to establish or designate
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 19 (19) Following the receipt of an initiative document, the Cross-border Coordination Point of first contact should liaise with all relevant national, regional and local authorities in its Member State and with the Cross-border Coordination Point in the bordering Member State(s) concerned. The Cross-border Coordination Point of first contact should provide the initiator with a preliminary assessment regarding whether the initiative document complies with the requirements set out in this Regulation, and whether the obstacle exists. This preliminary assessment should be made publicly available upon request. The Cross-border Coordination Point of first contact should then be able to decide whether a procedure leading to the conclusion of an ad-hoc solution is to be launched, whether a solution is to be found at national level, or that it considers the removal of one or more obstacles hampering the implementation of a joint project falls within the remit of existing international arrangements. It should also be recalled that the Member State may decide not to address the obstacles. Any decision remains within the discretion of the Member States concerned and should be duly justified and communicated in due time to all the stakeholders involved, and made publicly available upon request .
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 19 (19) Following the receipt of an initiative document, the Cross-border Coordination Point of first contact should liaise with all relevant national, regional and local authorities in its Member State and with the Cross-border Coordination Points in the bordering Member State(s) concerned. The Cross-border Coordination Point of first contact should provide the initiator with a preliminary assessment regarding whether the initiative document complies with the requirements set out in this Regulation, and whether the obstacle exists. The Cross-border Coordination Point of first contact should then be able to decide whether a procedure leading to the conclusion of an ad-hoc solution is to be launched, whether a solution is to be found at national level, or that it considers the removal of one or more obstacles hampering the implementation of a joint project falls within the remit of existing international arrangements. It should also be recalled that the Member State may decide not to address the obstacles. Any decision remains within the discretion of the Member States concerned and should be duly justified and communicated in due time to all the stakeholders involved.
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 23 (23) The conditions for territorial cooperation should be created in accordance with the subsidiarity principle enshrined in Article 5(3) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and with the principle of proportionality, as set out in
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution Article 1 – point 1 1. This Regulation sets up a coordination framework that lays down general provisions and procedural arrangements for Member States, in close cooperation with their competent local and regional authorities, to address an obstacle that hampers the planning, development, staffing, financing or functioning of a joint project in a cross- border context.
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution Article 1 – point 1 1. This Regulation sets up a coordination framework that lays down general provisions and procedural arrangements for Member States, in cooperation with their local and regional authorities, to address an obstacle that hampers the planning,
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution Article 1 – point 1 1. This
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution Article 1 – point 2 2. Member States shall assess on a voluntary and case-by-case basis whether to trigger the procedural arrangements laid down in Chapter II to address an obstacle as referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article.
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution Article 1 – point 4 a (new) 4a. Member States may on a voluntary basis apply this Regulation and its provisions to resolve legal and administrative obstacles to border regions of the Union with candidate countries, while respecting Union law;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1 (1) 'cross-border region' means the territory covered by bordering land or maritime border regions in two or more Member States at NUTS level 2 and 3 regions or any other relevant level depending on the project concerned;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) Ba. Whereas the removal of cross- border obstacles would as well facilitates accessibility between neighbouring countries, e.g. by realising the still missing links between certain border regions. A better interconnection of border regions would make European integration more tangible and offer citizens the possibility of effective and environmentally friendly cross-border mobility;
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 (2) 'joint project' means any item of infrastructure with an impact in a given cross-border region or any service of general economic interest provided in a given cross-border region
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 (3) 'obstacles in a cross-border context' means any legal or administrative provision with regard to the planning, development, staffing, financing or functioning of a joint project that obstructs the inherent potential of a border region when interacting across the border; [for the sake of legal consistency of this legislative act and motion for a resolution, the concerned definition should apply consequently and precisely throughout the entirety of the text whenever any form of 'obstacles' are adressed]
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 (3) 'obstacle' means any leg
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4 (4) 'initiator' means the actor who identifies one or more obstacles and triggers the coordination framework by submitting an initiative document
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 6 (6) 'area of application' means the area in one or more Member States where an ad hoc legal or administrative solution shall apply, limited to what is strictly necessary for the implementation of the joint project;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 6 (6) 'area of application' means the territorial area in one or more Member States where an ad hoc legal solution shall apply, limited to what is strictly necessary for the implementation of the joint project;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution Article 4 – point 1 – point a Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution Article 4 – point 1 – point a (a) designate, at
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution Article 4 – point 1 – point a (a) designate, at
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution Article 4 – point 1 – point b (b) establish a Cross-border Coordination Point within an existing
source: 749.290
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
docs/2 |
|
events/3 |
|
events/4 |
|
forecasts |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Parliament's voteNew
Procedure completed |
forecasts/0 |
|
forecasts/0 |
|
forecasts/0 |
|
forecasts/0 |
|
forecasts/1 |
|
docs/2 |
|
events/2/summary |
|
docs/2 |
|
events/2/docs |
|
events/2 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament's vote |
events/1 |
|
procedure/Other legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
docs/1 |
|
commission |
|
docs |
|
forecasts |
|
committees/0/shadows/4/name |
Old
TOMAŠEVSKI ValdemarNew
TOMASZEWSKI Waldemar |
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|