Jan OLBRYCHT
Constituencies
-
Poland
Platforma Obywatelska
2009/07/14 - 9999/12/31
Show earlier Constituencies...
-
Poland
Platforma Obywatelska
2004/07/20 - 2009/07/13
-
Poland
Platforma Obywatelska
2004/07/20 - 2009/07/13
Groups
-
PPE
Vice-Chair
Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats)
2012/02/03 - 9999/12/31
Show earlier groups...
-
PPE
Member of the Bureau
Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats)
2009/09/16 - 2012/02/02
-
PPE
Member
Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats)
2009/07/14 - 2009/09/15
-
PPE-DE
Member of the Bureau
Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats
2006/02/06 - 2009/07/13
-
PPE-DE
Member
Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats
2004/07/20 - 2006/02/05
-
PPE-DE
Member
Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats
2004/07/20 - 2006/02/05
-
PPE-DE
Member
Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats
2006/02/06 - 2009/07/13
Committees
| Role | Committee | Start | End |
|---|---|---|---|
| Member of | Committee on Regional Development | 2012/01/19 | 9999/12/31 |
| Substitute of | Committee on Budgetary Control | 2012/01/19 | 9999/12/31 |
| Substitute of | Committee on Budgets | 2012/01/19 | 9999/12/31 |
Show earlier commitees...
Delegations
| Role | Delegation | Start | End |
|---|---|---|---|
| Member of | Delegation for relations with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo | 2010/09/06 | 9999/12/31 |
| Substitute of | Delegation for relations with the United States | 2013/01/28 | 9999/12/31 |
Show earlier delegations...
| Role | Delegation | Start | End |
|---|---|---|---|
| Substitute of | Delegation for relations with the Maghreb countries and the Arab Maghreb Union | 2009/09/16 | 2013/01/27 |
| Vice-Chair of | Delegation for relations with Japan | 2010/03/24 | 2010/09/05 |
| Member of | Delegation for relations with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo | 2009/09/16 | 2010/03/23 |
| Member of | Delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China | 2007/03/14 | 2009/07/13 |
| Substitute of | Delegation for relations with Australia and New Zealand | 2007/03/15 | 2009/07/13 |
| Member of | Delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China | 2004/09/15 | 2007/03/13 |
| Substitute of | Delegation to the EU-Bulgaria Joint Parliamentary Committee | 2005/03/29 | 2006/12/31 |
| Member of | Delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China | 2004/09/15 | 2007/03/13 |
| Substitute of | Delegation to the EU-Bulgaria Joint Parliamentary Committee | 2005/03/29 | 2006/12/31 |
| Member of | Delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China | 2007/03/14 | 2009/07/13 |
| Substitute of | Delegation for relations with Australia and New Zealand | 2007/03/15 | 2009/07/13 |
Contact
Online
- Homepage
- http://www.janolbrycht.pl
- [javascript protected email address]
Brussels
- Phone
- +322 28 45511
- Fax
- +322 28 49511
- Office
- Bât. Altiero Spinelli 14E103
- Full Address
-
- City
- Bruxelles/Brussel
- Zip
- B-1047
- Street
- 60, rue Wiertz / Wiertzstraat 60
Strasbourg
- Phone
- +333 88 1 75511
- Fax
- +333 88 1 79511
- Office
- Bât. Louise Weiss T11009
- Full Address
-
- City
- Strasbourg
- Zip
- CS 91024 - F-67070
- Street
- 1, avenue du Président Robert Schuman
Postal
- Parlament Europejski
- Rue Wiertz
- Altiero Spinelli 14E103
- B-1047 Bruksela
Rapporteur
| Opinion | 2012/2167(DEC) | 2011 discharge: EU general budget, Section III, Commission |
| Responsible | 2011/0275(COD) | European Regional Development Fund (ERDF): support to the Investment for growth and jobs goal |
| Opinion | 2010/0395(COD) | Financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union |
| Opinion | 2010/0154(COD) | Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Union (repeal. Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002). Recast |
| Opinion | 2009/2068(DEC) | 2008 discharge: EU general budget, section III, Commission |
| Opinion | 2008/2186(DEC) | 2007 discharge: EU general budget, Section III, Commission |
| Opinion | 2008/2041(INI) | Towards a new culture for urban mobility |
| Responsible | 2004/0168(COD) | Cross-border cooperation, economic and social cohesion: European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) |
Born
1952/09/21 Rybnik- Doctorate in sociology, Jagiellonian University (1984).
- Lecturer: University of Silesia (1979-1990), Jagiellonian University (1985-1989), University of Bielsko-Biała (2002-2004); University of Economics in Katowice (2002-2004).) Traineeship at the École des hautes études en sciences sociales, Paris (1988-1989).
- Mayor of Cieszyn (1990-1998). Member of Cieszyn Council (1990-1998).
- Member of the Śląskie Provincial Assembly (1998-2004).
- Leader of the Śląskie Provincial Executive (1998-2002).
- Chairman of the Policy Council of the Solidarity Electoral Action (AWS) Social Movement (2002-2004). Member of the Civic Platform (PO) National Council (since 2004).
- Member of the Political Bureau of the European People's Party - European Democrats (2006-2009).
- MEP (2004-2009 and 2009-2014), member of the Bureau of the Group of the European People's Party in the EP (since 2006); Vice-Chairman of the Polish delegation to the EPP Group in the EP; Vice-Chairman of the EPP Group's Budget and Structural Policies Working Group; Vice-Chairman of the Committee on Regional Development (2004-2009), founder member and Chairman of the URBAN Intergroup.
- Chairman of the European Ideas Network's Values and Freedoms Working Party; member of the Board of the EPP Robert Schuman Foundation for closer cooperation between Christian Democrats in Europe.
- Vice-Chairman of the Council of European Municipalities and Regions (CEMR) (1995-2001). Head of the Polish delegation to the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe (1990-1998). Member of the Bureau of the Assembly of European Regions (ARE) (2000-2004).
- Member of the National Regional Policy Council (2000-2004). Member of the Committee for National Spatial Planning, Polish Academy of Sciences (2003-2008).
- Knight's Cross of the Order of Poland Reborn (2000). Chevalier de l'Ordre National du Mérite (2002); Emperor Maximilian award for contribution to European local and regional politics (2005); Golden Ribbon of the Association of Polish Towns - honorary award for outstanding services to local government (2007); MEP of the Year 2007 - awarded by The Parliament Magazine in the Regional Policy category; Winner of the Silesian Quality Award (2007); Honorary Silesian of the Year (2008); Hungarian Government István Pálfi award for special contribution to closer regional cooperation (2010).
Amendments
| Amendments | Dossier |
| 2 |
2009/2002(BUD) 2010 budget: section III, Commission
2009/02/10
BUDG
2 amendments...
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Stresses that the financing of the second phase of the European Economic Recovery Plan is a priority for the European Parliament; intends to use the tools foreseen in the IB and IIA in order to guarantee its financing; recalls, in this context, that the European Council was not able to present its plans in its draft budget; recalls that the financing agreement should not jeopardise the financial envelopes of the co-decided programmes nor the annual budgetary procedure as outlined in the declaration agreed by the budgetary authority on the financing of the European Recovery Plan of 2 April 2009; recalls also its view on the principles and the prudence required when using available margins under a particular heading;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Regrets the cuts introduced by the Council to the PDB in a period when structural and cohesion funds should be used for stimulating economic growth and recovery; proposes systematic increases to payments on the main lines (ERDF, ESF, Cohesion Fund) to boost implementation of structural
source: PE-428.297
|
| 1 |
2009/2068(DEC) 2008 discharge: EU general budget, section III, Commission
2010/02/03
REGI
1 amendments...
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
source: PE-439.361
|
| 2 |
2009/2096(INI) A sustainable future for transport
2010/03/02
REGI
2 amendments...
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Supports the Commission’s initiative to outline a strategy for a future sustainable transport policy in the EU; stresses the importance of the relationship between cohesion and transport policy in achieving the broader goal of sustainable regional development throughout the EU;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Notes the increasing trend of urbanisation in Europe; stresses the need to ensure high quality and accessible transport services to citizens in urban areas; highlights the EU’s role in fostering cooperation between urban areas to allow for sharing and exchanging of best practice to make transport systems more sustainable; stresses, in this connection, the significance of the Action Plan on Urban Mobility adopted on 30 September 2009, and expects the measures proposed therein to be introduced swiftly;
source: PE-438.466
|
| 2 |
2009/2167(INI) Protection of the Communities' financial interests. Fight against fraud - Annual Report 2008
2009/11/12
REGI
2 amendments...
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Takes note of the European Court of Auditor's report on the implementation of the 2008 budget and deplores the
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Urges the Commission and the Member States to act with full responsibility and strengthen their efforts to avoid irregularities, administrative errors and failings and asks for a better demarcation between the concepts of irregularity
source: PE-430.961
|
| 3 |
2009/2175(INI) New developments in public procurement
2010/02/02
REGI
3 amendments...
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Stresses that the Court of Auditors regularly indicate
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Considers that it is not only costs and complexity which can be prohibitive, but also the time needed to complete the public procurement process,
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Deplores the fact that in some cases Structural Fund allocations for infrastructure projects undertaken in the context of a Public Private Partnership (PPP) and related contracts with private operators based on public procurement carried out at sub-national level have, as a result of very complex procurement procedures, led to a loss of European Union subsidies previously available to fund infrastructure development; believes that it is vital to remove obstacles to and establish clear rules for PPPs if the European Union wants to have any chance of making the necessary investments in infrastructure and quality services; calls on the Commission to ensure that public procurement and Structural Fund implementation rules set a clear framework for PPPs in order to create legal certainty for all stakeholders and reduce the pressure on public budgets, in the context of the principle of co-financing and in the aftermath of the global economic crisis;
source: PE-438.443
|
| 2 |
2009/2230(INI) European Union strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and the role of macro-regions in the future cohesion policy
2010/03/30
REGI
2 amendments...
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers that all actions regarding sector policies with a territorial dimension are of key importance to the Strategy’s success and the achievement of the ambitious goals of further micro-regional strategies, including the common agricultural policy, fisheries policy
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21a. Proposes that the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region should be regarded as a European Union strategy, based upon several EU policies, which should have a defined time frame and goals; given its horizontal nature, the strategy could be treated as macro-regional and its coordination linked to regional policy;
source: PE-440.046
|
| 1 |
2010/0816(NLE) European External Action Service EEAS: organisation and functioning
2010/01/07
AFET
1 amendments...
Amendment 121 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Article 6 – paragraph 6 6.
source: PE-443.165
|
| 7 |
2010/2142(DEC) 2009 discharge: EU general budget, Section III, Commission
2011/02/21
REGI
3 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Notes that cohesion funds are subject to particularly complex rules and are implemented differently from other EU spending areas, which makes them more vulnerable to errors; draws attention to the fact that the error rate in cohesion spending
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Is concerned that the Directorate General for Regional Policy (DG REGIO) states in its Declaration of Assurance of the Annual Activity Report 2009 that for 38 out of the 79 programmes concerned, DG REGIO does not have reasonable assurance on the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions in relation to reimbursements in 2009 of expenditure declared; asks for further details on missing information with regard to reimbursements in 2009; notes that Member States have an obligation to provide sufficient information in their Annual Activity Reports and asks the Commission to propose a penalty system in case information provided does not
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. In the context of the revision of the Financial Regulation, stresses the need to harmonise rules and management schemes
source: PE-458.855
2011/10/03
CONT
4 amendments...
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Notes that the most likely error rate estimated by the Court of Auditors for the policy group ‘Cohesion’ (EUR 23 081 000 000 reimbursed certified expenditure) is above 5 %; however, underlines that the error limit for ‘Cohesion’ decreased from 11 % in 2008 to 3 % in 2009;
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Notes that the present declaration of assurance (DAS) is an expression of the
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 64 64. Notes that the Court of Auditors estimates that the most likely error rate for the Cohesion policy area is above 5 %; however, further notes that the lower error limit for Cohesion decreased from 11 % in 2008 to 3 % in 2009;
Amendment 196 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 67 67. Notes that infringements of procurement procedures reveal a failure to complete the Union internal market and that the reason for these irregularities could be a conflict of interest between the Union and the Members States; asks the Commission and the Court of Auditors to set up a platform for the consultation process on methodology used with regard to the seriousness of the infringements detected in public procurement domain;
source: PE-460.797
|
| 22 |
2010/2155(INI) Objective 3: A challenge for territorial cooperation - the future agenda for cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation
2011/02/22
REGI
22 amendments...
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Recital H H. whereas territorial cooperation, i.e. cooperation between the inhabitants of different regions, is an ongoing learning process which creates a feeling of community and of having a shared future,
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I I. whereas citizens must be placed at the centre of the priorities of territorial cooperation, and therefore a place-based approach should be advocated,
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Recital J J. whereas closer territorial cooperation is dependent on progress made with European integration and coordination in all fields,
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Is convinced of the European added value of territorial cooperation and the key role it plays in deepening the internal market and fostering closer European integration
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Believes that territorial cooperation has proved its effectiveness and that its potential as a source of competitiveness has so far been insufficiently tapped as a result of the inadequate resources allocated to it; calls for the budget for the ‘territorial cooperation’ objective to be at least
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Considers that a distinction should continue to be made between the cross- border component, which meets the local needs of cross-border population catchment areas, and the transnational component, including the so-called macroregional scale, which facilitates cooperation over wider strategic areas;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Calls nonetheless – with a view to ensuring the coherence and continuity of territorial cooperation measures and given the strategic nature of the projects in question – for greater flexibility in exploiting the scope offered by Article 21 of the ERDF Regulation with regard to the location of cross-border and transnational cooperation activities; to that end, calls for
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls for funds
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Stresses once again the importance of interregional cooperation, but deplores the lack of funds allocated to it; calls for a reduction from 75% to 60% in the Community cofinancing rate of this programme for participants from the regions covered by the ‘competitiveness and employment’ objective
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Invites the Commission to look into ways of i
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Believes that
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Points out that the concept of macro- regions, a Council initiative, came into being as an experimental, logical way of coordinating common projects covering a very large territory, with a view to
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15a. Points out that the Territorial Co- operation Objective can accommodate the co-operation on a macroregional scale, especially within its transnational strand;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Asks the Commission to conduct an in- depth study of the results of the first strategies implemented; believes that the process has met with a level of interest that should be built on; advocates the use of transnational programmes to support these territorial strategies by coordinating the work of devising, framing and steering
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19.
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 – indent 1 – clarifying the status of EGTC
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Calls for the allocation of global grants to EGTCs in order to enable them to directly manage Structural Fund appropriations
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Believes that the implementation of territorial cooperation programmes remains overly complicated and considers that Objective 3 needs
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Invites the Commission to propose specific measures which simplify rules on auditing and control, with "one management authority per programme" as a guiding principle, authorise more systematic standard-rate costing, lay down more detailed rules on eligibility for EU funding, make for greater flexibility in the implementation of automatic decommitments,
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Stresses, furthermore, that arrangements for involving private stakeholders must
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Considers that, by contributing to helping to fulfil the Europe 2020 strategy's objective of intelligent and inclusive growth, cooperation on education and culture would raise the level of participation of citizens and NGOs as well as to contribute to the raising of the profile of territorial cooperation a
source: PE-458.829
|
| 1 |
2010/2158(INI) European Urban Agenda and its Future in Cohesion Policy
2011/04/18
REGI
1 amendments...
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas the EU contributes through its policies to the sustainable development of urban areas
source: PE-462.880
|
| 16 |
2010/2211(INI) Investing in the future: a new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for a competitive, sustainable and inclusive Europe
2011/04/13
SURE
4 amendments...
Amendment 298 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31 31. Stresses, however, that the current content of the Europe 2020 strategy, such as the headline targets, flagship proposals, bottlenecks and indicators remain of a very general nature; underlines that this set of initiatives can only be achieved through concrete commitments from Member States in their National Reform Programmes and concrete and consistent legislative proposals, as well as policies with proven delivery mechanisms;
Amendment 359 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 c (new) 37c. Recognises the role of cities in generating, attracting and retaining the highly-qualified talent Europe needs to sharpen its competitive edge and drive innovation; emphasises the importance of social and public sector innovation alongside technological innovation;
Amendment 370 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 38 38. Stresses the need to enhance, stimulate and secure the financing of research and development in the Union via a significant increase in relevant expenditure from 2013, namely for the Eighth Research Framework Programme; emphasises that this increase of funds must be coupled with a more result-oriented, performance-driven approach and with a radical simplification of funding procedures; highlights that more than one fourth of the total cohesion funding in the current programming period is dedicated to investments on R&D and innovation and stresses that the catalytic role the EU cohesion policy can play, in this respect, in the next MFF should be continued and strengthened;
Amendment 400 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42 42. Calls for SMEs and entrepreneurs to be placed at the heart of the Europe 2020 strategy; demands, accordingly, enhanced support in the next MFF for all programmes and instruments aimed at fostering SMEs, in particular the Competitiveness and Innovation Programme (CIP), as well as in the framework of EU cohesion policy; proposes a better bundling of Community instruments and funds for SMEs in the EU budget; stresses, further, the need for greater accessibility to and adaptation of financing instruments to the needs of SMEs, inter alia through the extension and expansion of the CIP's guarantee instruments and the RSFF under the Research Framework Programme; asks the Commission for a stronger emphasis on mezzanine financial instruments in the next MFF and to support them with risk- sharing funds and facilities;
source: PE-462.729
2011/04/27
SURE
2 amendments...
Amendment 867 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 85 85. Considers that building close and effective relations with neighbouring countries should remain a priority in the Union's external agenda; emphasises that stepped up financial commitments are needed for the Union to live up to major challenges -support to democratic transition and consolidation, good governance, human rights- and high expectations deriving from its moral responsibility towards its neighbours; furthermore, is of the firm opinion, that any expenditures in this respect ought to be subject to conditionality, taking into account the level of involvement of the partner in question, as well as its progress in fulfilling the obligations hitherto undertaken;
Amendment 1064 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 116 116. Considers that the main aim of the reform is to achieve a fairer, more transparent and simpler system; stresses that
source: PE-462.732
2011/05/04
SURE
6 amendments...
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas the challenges faced by the Union and its citizens, such as the global economic crisis, the rapid rise of emerging economies, the transition to a low-carbon society, ageing populations threatening the sustainability of its social model, the shift in the global distribution of production and savings to emerging economies, still existing social, economic and territorial disparities, as well as the threats of terrorism and organised crime, require a strong response from the Union and its Member States,
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Highlights that EAV can be generated not only by expenditure, but also by European legislation and by coordination of national
Amendment 662 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 64 a (new) 64a. Draws attention to the importance of integrated policy approach; points in this respect to the cohesion policy as a factor integrating other policies; stresses therefore, that all the investments foreseen for the post-2013 programming period would have to be coordinated with the investments undertaken within the framework of cohesion policy in that programming period; underlines, that this policy is already conducted with a due care, drawn to tried and tested instruments and forms that are important in this respect, such as shared management; underlines as well the need to move towards better performance under multi-level governance, that will additionally contribute to the effects that such application of the cohesion policy can bring;
Amendment 678 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 65 65. Stresses that a successful and strengthened cohesion policy needs adequate funding, which should not be less than in the current financial programming period; reiterates, in this context, its strong request to ensure that, in the next MFF, the unspent or decommitted resources of cohesion funds remain in the cohesion budget and not be returned to the Member States; is furthermore convinced in this respect, that in order to achieve the cohesion policy objectives, return to the multi-fund approach ought to be thoroughly considered;
Amendment 702 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 67 67. Considers of utmost importance using resources in the most effective and efficient manner possible, improving coordination and creating greater synergies among the ERDF, the ESF, the cohesion fund, the EAFRD and the European Fisheries Fund (EFF); believes, accordingly, that the creation of a common strategic framework setting out common investment priorities for all these funds represents an important step in this direction; is convinced that the ESF must remain an integral component of cohesion policy at all stages of its programming, implementation and management;
Amendment 708 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 67 e (new) 67e. Believes that territorial cooperation is a source of European Added Value and has proved its effectiveness, therefore it ought to be appropriately funded;
source: PE-462.731
2011/08/04
SURE
4 amendments...
Amendment 439 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46 46. Takes the view that the flagship initiative on new skills and jobs should allow wider focus on youth, early-school leavers, older people, disadvantaged and disabled people and migrants; emphasises that the European Social Fund (ESF) should provide adequate resources for measures aimed at improving labour market access, combating unemployment, and social exclusion; underlines the need to keep ESF within cohesion policy and the importance of improved coordination between ESF and ERDF to promote an integrated approach and to enable the combination of place-based and people- based actions;
Amendment 478 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 49 49. Calls on the Commission to present proposals for a reformed CAP, which aim at
Amendment 519 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 52 52. Points to the fact that the fisheries sector and its activities are often the only source of livelihood and employment, in particular in coastal, island and remote regions; considers that, in order to achieve its medium and long-term goals which aim at a stable and sustainable fisheries sector, and in order to facilitate the recovery of its fish stocks and to tackle the social aspects linked to the necessary reduction of fishing effort, the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) will need adequate financial resources post 2013; recognises the need of increased coordination with cohesion policy; underlines the need to shift support towards more sustainable fishery practices, expects that the expenses linked to the economic diversification in regions where fisheries are declining and those for coordination of controls will increase over the period of the next MFF;
Amendment 570 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 57 a (new) 57a. Reiterates the importance of a diverse EU energy mix, fully respecting the choice of each Member State, that should aim at achieving security of supply, competitiveness and sustainability in the long-term; recognises, in this context, the necessity for a thorough consideration of energy security as cross cutting issue that ought to follow EU-wide priorities;
source: PE-462.730
|
| 14 |
2011/0177(APP) Multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020
2012/05/10
BUDG
14 amendments...
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Stresses that the EU budget is an investment budget and that 94 % of its total returns are invested in the Member States themselves or for external priorities of the Union; emphasises that, for the regions and Member States, public investment would be minimised or impossible without the contribution of the EU budget; which represents significant and sometimes even dominant share of public investment, believes that any decrease of the EU budget would inevitably hamper the growth and competitive strength of the entire Union economy;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Recalls that delivering on the Europe 2020 strategy’s seven flagship initiatives will require a huge amount of future- oriented investment, estimated at no less than EUR 1 800 billion up to 2020 ; sees the significant investment role of the Cohesion Policy in this respect; stresses that one of the main objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy, namely, to promote jobs and high-quality employment for all Europeans, will only be achieved if the necessary investment in education, in favour of a knowledge society, and in research and innovation, SMEs
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Considers that the Commission proposal, which represents a freeze of the MFF 2014- 2020
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Reaffirms, in this context, its position in favour of a significant increase - notably through the Connecting Europe Facility - in the funding available for the Union programmes in the fields of competiveness, SMEs and infrastructures, which are at the heart of the Europe 2020 strategy; strongly believes that further cuts with respect to the Commission proposal will seriously jeopardise the EU’s credibility and its political commitment in favour of growth and jobs; Urges however for the amount transferred from the Cohesion Fund to the Connecting Europe Facility to be spent at least during the first years respecting the national allocations under Cohesion Policy;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Recalls its position that, given the wide array of tasks, challenges and objectives that the CAP is called on to respond to, the amounts allocated to the CAP in the budget year 2013 should be at least maintained during the next financial programming period; supports an idea of converging direct payments between and within the Member States; stresses, in this context, the important role played by the second pillar of the CAP, which makes a significant contribution to investment and job creation in rural areas and to enhancing the effectiveness and competitiveness of the farming industry and to the process of overcoming development gaps in rural areas between Member States;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Recalls its position that, given the wide array of tasks, challenges and objectives that the CAP is called on to respond to, the amounts allocated to the CAP in the budget year 2013 should be at least maintained during the next financial programming period; supports an idea of converging direct payments between and within the Member States; stresses, in this context, the important role played by the second pillar of the CAP, which makes a significant contribution to investment and job creation in rural areas and to enhancing the effectiveness and competitiveness of the farming industry;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 a (new) 22a. Is firmly opposed to any cut in funding for the second pillar of the CAP, as this would undo the achievements of previous CAP reforms and drastically reduce the policy's efficiency and effectiveness, particularly in the light of the new challenges referred to, inter alia, in the Europe 2020 strategy;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 a (new) 23a. Believes that the programme of assistance to the most deprived persons in the Union should continue after 2013; points out that, in addition to providing tangible proof of the fact that the EU feels a responsibility towards its most deprived citizens, the programme has for more than 20 years been helping to ensure EU food security and agricultural market stability, promote a spirit of solidarity and build a civil society, and is thus helping to meet the Europe 2020 strategy goals; takes the view that the Union budget for this purpose should not be cut;
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Reiterates its position that the new responsibilities conferred on the EU by the Treaties will require appropriate additional funding compared to MFF 2007-2013, so as to allow the Union to fulfil its role as a global actor and ensure its ambitions in promoting democracy, peace, solidarity, stability and poverty reduction in neighbourhood and partner countries, whilst upholding the undertakings it has already given, notably the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals by 2015; underlines the complementary nature of EU assistance to that provided by the Member States, and its catalyst effect in terms of intervening in regions where bilateral assistance is not delivered; is particularly supportive of joint programming between Member States and EU actions;
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 28. Is of the
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41 41. Stresses the need for a
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 59 – point 6 Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 64 a (new) 64 a. Opposes any attempt to include policy related provisions under the ordinary legislative procedure into the MFF negotiations;
source: PE-496.663
|
| 2 |
2011/0268(COD) European Social Fund (ESF) 2014-2020
2012/05/06
REGI
2 amendments...
Amendment 201 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 4 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new) Point (c) of this Article shall also apply to those regions whose GDP per capita for the 2007-13 period was less than 75% of the average GDP of the EU-25, for the reference period, but which are eligible under the category of transition or more developed regions as defined in points (b) and (c) of Article 82(2) of Regulation (EU) No [ ]/2012 [CPR] in the 2014-2020 period.
Amendment 265 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 12 – paragraph 2 2. Complementing ERDF interventions as referred to in Article 7 of Regulation (EU) No [ERDF], the ESF may support sustainable urban development through strategies setting out integrated actions to tackle the economic, environmental, climate, demographic and social challenges affecting urban areas of cities which are listed in the partnership contract.
source: PE-491.059
|
| 4 |
2011/0274(COD) Cohesion Fund 2014-2020
2012/06/06
REGI
4 amendments...
Amendment 36 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point b (b) investment aimed at achieving the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in installations falling under Annex I of Directive 2003/87/EC except district heating and cooling, and combined heat and power plants;
Amendment 47 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – point a – subpoint ii (ii) promoting energy efficiency and renewable energy use in
Amendment 51 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – point a – subpoint iii (iii) supporting energy efficiency and renewable energy use in public infrastructures, historical buildings and in the housing sector;
Amendment 89 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – point d – subpoint iii (iii) developing and rehabilitation of a comprehensive, high quality and interoperable railway systems;
source: PE-491.027
|
| 3 |
2011/0275(COD) European Regional Development Fund (ERDF): support to the Investment for growth and jobs goal
2012/07/06
REGI
3 amendments...
Amendment 788 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 13 – paragraph 2 2. The
Amendment 789 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 13 – paragraph 3 3. The delegation of power referred to in Article 9(3) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision
Amendment 790 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 13 – paragraph 5 5. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 9(3) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of t
source: PE-491.055
|
| 43 |
2011/0276(COD) Structural instruments: common provisions for ERDF, ESF, Cohesion Fund, EAFRD and EMFF; general provisions applicable to ERDF, ESF and Cohesion Fund
2012/01/06
BUDG
8 amendments...
Amendment 37 #
Proposal for a regulation Recital 57 (57) It is necessary to fix the limits of those resources for the ‘Investment for growth and jobs’ goal and to adopt objective criteria for their allocation to regions and Member States. In
Amendment 42 #
Proposal for a regulation Recital 90 (90) The Commission should be empowered to adopt, by means of implementing acts, as regards all CSF Funds, decisions approving the Partnership Contracts, decisions on the allocation of the performance reserve, decisions suspending payments linked to Member States' economic policies, and, in the case of decommitment, decisions to amend decisions adopting programmes; and as regards the Funds, decisions identifying the regions and Member States fulfilling the Investment for growth and jobs criteria, decisions setting out the annual breakdown of commitment appropriations to the Member States,
Amendment 46 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 2 – article 4 – paragraph 7 7. The part of the Union budget allocated to the CSF Funds shall be implemented within the framework of shared management between the Member States and the Commission, in accordance with Article 53(b) of the Financial Regulation, with the exception of
Amendment 77 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 3 Amendment 79 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 Amendment 80 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 81 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 82 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 4 source: PE-491.060
2012/04/06
REGI
7 amendments...
Amendment 299 #
Proposal for a regulation Recital 57 (57) It is necessary to fix the limits of those resources for the ‘Investment for growth and jobs’ goal and to adopt objective criteria for their allocation to regions and Member States. In
Amendment 319 #
Proposal for a regulation Recital 65 (65) Where an urban or territorial development strategy requires an integrated approach because it involves investments under more than one priority axis of one or several operational programmes, action supported by the Funds should be carried out as an integrated territorial investment
Amendment 343 #
Proposal for a regulation Recital 87 (87) The frequency of audits on operations should be proportionate to the extent of the Union's support from the Funds. In particular, the number of audits s carried out should be reduced where the total eligible expenditure for an operation does not exceed EUR
Amendment 351 #
Proposal for a regulation Recital 90 (90) The Commission should be empowered to adopt, by means of implementing acts, as regards all CSF Funds, decisions approving the Partnership Contracts, decisions on the allocation of the performance reserve, decisions suspending payments linked to Member States' economic policies, and, in the case of decommitment, decisions to amend decisions adopting programmes; and as regards the Funds, decisions identifying the regions and Member States fulfilling the Investment for growth and jobs criteria, decisions setting out the annual breakdown of commitment appropriations to the Member States,
Amendment 392 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 2 – article 4 – paragraph 7 7. The part of the Union budget allocated to the CSF Funds shall be implemented within the framework of shared management between the Member States and the Commission, in accordance with Article 53(b) of the Financial Regulation, with the exception of
Amendment 421 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 2 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new) (ca) churches and religious communities active in the areas of transnational cooperation, education, culture and social inclusion.
Amendment 602 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 2 – article 14 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii (ii) the arrangements to ensure an integrated approach to the use of the CSF Funds for the territorial development of different types of territories including urban, rural, coastal and fisheries areas and areas with particular territorial features, in particular the implementation arrangements for Articles 28, 29 and 99 accompanied, where appropriate, by a list of the cities to participate in the urban development platform referred to in Article 8 of the ERDF Regulation;
source: PE-489.656
2012/05/06
REGI
11 amendments...
Amendment 785 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 2 – article 26 – paragraph 2 2. The Commission shall assess the information provided in accordance with paragraph 1, taking account of the justification provided by the Member State. The Commission may make observations and the Member State shall provide to the Commission all necessary additional information. In accordance with Fund- specific rules, the Commission shall approve requests for amendment of a programme no later than
Amendment 793 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 2 – article 27 a (new) Article 27a Integrated territorial investment 1. Where an urban development strategy or other territorial strategy or pact as defined in Article 12(1) of Regulation...[ESF] requires an integrated approach involving investments under more than one priority axis of one or more operational programmes, the action shall be carried out as an integrated territorial investment (an 'ITI'). 2. The relevant operational programmes shall identify the ITIs planned and shall set out the indicative financial allocation from each priority axis to each ITI. 3. The Member State or the managing authority may designate one or more intermediate bodies, including local authorities, regional development bodies or non-governmental organisations, to carry out the management and implementation of an ITI. 4. The Member State or the relevant managing authorities shall ensure that the monitoring system for the operational programme provides for the identification of operations and outputs of a priority axis contributing to an ITI.
Amendment 1068 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 2 – article 55 – paragraph 4 Amendment 1092 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 2 – article 59 – paragraph 3 – point c (c) value added tax. However, VAT amounts shall be eligible where they are not recoverable under national VAT legislation
Amendment 1274 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 3 Amendment 1290 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 Amendment 1293 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 1295 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 1297 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 4 Amendment 1434 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 90 – paragraph 1 As part of an operational programme or operational programmes, the ERDF and the Cohesion Fund may support an operation comprising a series of works, activities or services intended in itself to accomplish an indivisible task of a precise economic or technical nature which has clearly identified goals and whose total eligible cost exceeds EUR 50 000 000, and in case of operations contributing to the thematic objective set out in point 7 of Article 9 where the total eligible cost exceeds EUR 75 000 000 (a ‘major project’). Financial instruments shall not be considered major projects.
source: PE-491.054
2012/06/06
REGI
13 amendments...
Amendment 1461 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 92 – paragraph 4 4. Expenditure relating to major projects
Amendment 1492 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 99 – paragraph 1 Amendment 1493 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – chapter 4 – title Territorial development 1 __________________ 1 The whole chapter IV "Territorial development" shall be moved to Part One of the Regulation.
Amendment 1499 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 99 – paragraph 2 Amendment 1505 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 99 – paragraph 3 Amendment 1508 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 99 – paragraph 4 Amendment 1610 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 110 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 The co-financing rate
Amendment 1707 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 124 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b (b) in 2015:
Amendment 1714 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 124 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c (c) in 2016:
Amendment 1723 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 127 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 The Commission shall decommit any part of the amount calculated in accordance with the second subparagraph in an operational programme that has not been used for payment of the initial and annual pre-financing, interim payments and annual balance by 31 December of the
Amendment 1729 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 127 – paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. When the Commission takes a decision to authorise a major project, the amounts potentially concerned by automatic decommitment shall be reduced by the annual amounts concerned by such major projects. For these annual amounts, the starting date for the calculation of the automatic decommitment deadlines referred to in point 1 shall be the date of the subsequent decision necessary in order to authorise such major projects.
Amendment 1787 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 137 – paragraph 6 Amendment 1796 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 140 – paragraph 1 1. Operations for which the total eligible expenditure does not exceed EUR
source: PE-491.057
2012/08/06
REGI
4 amendments...
Amendment 1935 #
Proposal for a regulation Annex -I (new) – Part 1 – Section 1.6 – Paragraph 1.6.2 a (new) 1.6.2a To fully address the principle of territorial cohesion, the integrated approach to promoting smart, sustainable and inclusive growth needs to reflect the role of cities, rural areas, fisheries and coastal areas, areas facing specific geographical or demographic problems, and take account of the specific challenges of the outermost regions, the northernmost regions with a very low population density and of island, cross- border or mountain regions. It also needs to address urban-rural linkages, in terms of access to affordable, quality infrastructures and services.
Amendment 1944 #
Proposal for a regulation Annex -I (new) – Part 1 – Section 1.6 – Paragraph 1.6.5 1.6.5 So as to foster good policies which are tailored to specific regional needs, Member States and regions must further develop an integrated territorial approach to policy design and delivery, taking account of relevant contextual aspects but focusing on the basis of the following central elements: a) an evaluation of the region's Europe 2020 development potential and capacity; b) an evaluation and assessment of implementation of new territorial instruments such as Integrated territorial investments, Joint Action Plans and Community-led local development; c) an assessment of the development challenges facing the region and its ability to address them; d) consideration of the appropriate territorial scale and context for policy design and delivery, according to the subsidiarity principle; e) design of the multi-level governance arrangements necessary to ensure effective policy delivery; f) the choice of appropriate result and outcome indicators, to be used for policy monitoring and evaluation.
Amendment 2002 #
Proposal for a regulation Annex -I (new) – Part 3 – Paragraph 3.2 3.2 Ministries and managing authorities responsible for the implementation of the Funds covered by the CPR must work closely together in the preparation, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the Partnership Contract and programmes. In particular, they must: a) ensure the development of coordination mechanism between the CSF funds, i.e. the coordination between cohesion policy (Cohesion Fund and structural funds), rural development (European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development) and maritime policy (European Maritime and Fisheries Fund); b) identify areas of intervention where the Funds covered by the CPR can be combined in a complementary manner to achieve the thematic objectives set out in this Regulation; c) develop the multi-fund operational programmes; d) promote the involvement by managing authorities responsible for one of the Funds covered by the CPR of other managing authorities and relevant ministries in the development of support schemes to ensure synergies and avoid overlaps; e) establish joint monitoring committees for programmes implementing Funds covered by the CPR, and the development of other joint management and control arrangements to facilitate coordination between authorities responsible for the implementation of Funds covered by the CPR; f) make use of joint eGovernance solutions aimed at applicants and beneficiaries and "one-stop shops" for advice on the opportunities of support available through each Fund of the Funds covered by the CPR.
Amendment 2009 #
Proposal for a regulation Annex -I (new) – Part 4 – Paragraph 4.4 4. Priorities for territorial coordination (cross-border, transnational and interregional) 4.1 Great potential for regional development, job creation and cohesion lies in cooperation that goes beyond administrative borders and attempts to overcome the natural ones. Co-operation based on a shared need in a shared territory is often the most effective one. 4.2 Cross-border cooperation derives from an understanding that many challenges do not stop at administrative borders. An effective response requires joint, cooperative action and sharing of knowledge at the appropriate territorial level. 4.3 Furthermore, the embedded potential of border regions may be tapped through locally oriented support measures. 4.4 Overcoming barriers needs to be part of the programming of the Funds covered by the CPR – the objectives of the existing macro-regional strategies must be reflected in the needs analysis and goal setting for the relevant operational programmes from the planning phase on. Those strategies will not have served their purpose unless the objectives of the macro-regional strategies form part of the strategic planning in cohesion policy programmes in the regions and Member States concerned. 4.5 At the same time, Member States and regions must ensure that territorial cooperation programmes make an effective contribution to the Europe 2020 objectives. Member States and regions can thus foster cooperation as well as test, pilot and introduce new solutions, making sure that cooperation is organised in support of the wider policy goals. Where needed, territorial cooperation must be used to bring together policy-makers from across borders to work towards overcoming common problems. 4.6 Member States and regions must view the territorial cooperation programmes primarily as useful tools in overcoming barriers to co-operation, which would in turn support national and regional policy goals with impact beyond the programme area.
source: PE-491.163
|
| 7 |
2011/0302(COD) Connecting Europe Facility
2012/09/20
REGI
7 amendments...
Amendment 39 #
Proposal for a regulation Recital 13 (13) Experience with the current financial framework shows that many Member States, which are eligible to the Cohesion Fund, are facing significant obstacles in delivering on time complex cross-border transport infrastructure projects with a high Union added value. Therefore, in order to improve the delivery of transport projects, in particular cross-border ones, with a high Union added value, part of the Cohesion Fund allocation (EUR
Amendment 41 #
Proposal for a regulation Recital 13 (13) Experience with the current financial framework shows that many Member States, which are eligible to the Cohesion Fund, are facing significant obstacles in delivering on time complex cross-border transport infrastructure projects with a high Union added value. Therefore, in order to improve the delivery of transport projects, in particular cross-border ones, with a high Union added value, part of the Cohesion Fund allocation (EUR 10 billion) should be transferred to finance transport projects on the transport core network in the Member States eligible to the Cohesion Fund
Amendment 78 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) transport: EUR 31 694 000 000, out of which EUR
Amendment 80 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) transport: EUR 31 694 000 000, out of which EUR 10 000 000 000 shall be transferred from the Cohesion Fund to be spent
Amendment 84 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph 3 3. Following the mid-term evaluation according to Article 26.1, the Commission may transfer appropriations between the sectors of the allocation set out in paragraph 1, with the exception of the EUR
Amendment 114 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 11 – paragraph 1 1. As regards the EUR
Amendment 120 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 11 – paragraph 3 – introductory part 3. By the way of derogation from Article 10, and as regards the EUR
source: PE-496.462
|
| 1 |
2011/0455(COD) Staff Regulations of European Union officials: amendment of the Regulations
2012/06/03
CONT
1 amendments...
Amendment 59 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union Article 27 – paragraph 2 The principle of the equality of Union's citizens shall allow each institution to adopt corrective measures following the observation of a long lasting and significant imbalance between nationalities among officials, taking into account the breakdown into each category and into each grade, which is not justified by objective criteria. These corrective measures shall never result in recruitment criteria other than those based on merit. Before such corrective measures are adopted, the appointing authority of the institution concerned shall adopt general provisions for giving effect to this paragraph in accordance with Article 110.
source: PE-483.645
|
| 47 |
2011/2035(INI) EC 5th Cohesion Report and Strategy for the post-2013 Cohesion Policy
2011/04/20
REGI
47 amendments...
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 17 a (new) - having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Fifth Cohesion Report’, adopted on 1 April 2011,
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas the cohesion and structural policies have proved flexible in crisis situations and have made a defining contribution to various national recovery and training programmes, and whereas it is important to maintain this flexibility,
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) Ba. whereas European structural policy contributes greatly to overcoming the economic and financial crisis, as it tends to be oriented towards innovation and removing disparities, strongly encouraging the European regions to upgrade infrastructure, increase regional innovation potential and boost sustainable ecological development,
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B b (new) Bb. whereas Europe’s regions together face the challenges of globalisation, demographic change and conserving resources, and whereas the intrinsic potential of all regions should be exploited to boost growth and regional and social cohesion,
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas gearing the structural funds to the Lisbon Strategy objectives has proved effective, as is evident from the impressive commitment rates for the Convergence and the Regional Competitiveness and Employment objectives, a
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F F. whereas the existing system of cohesion and structural policy objectives (Convergence, Regional Competitiveness and Employment, and European Territorial Cooperation), combined with a multi-level governance approach and security to plan on the basis of reliable funding and an agreed time frame (seven years), has
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Recital H H. whereas a comprehensive European cohesion policy continues to be essential, given the
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Recital H H. whereas a comprehensive and well- funded European cohesion policy continues to be essential, given the significant imbalances between regional economies and in social terms, as well as specific structural problems and geographical disadvantages, and it is also a requirement under the Lisbon Treaty,
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Recognises, too, that European funding adds value where projects supported at regional level contribute to the achievement of pan-European objectives in the fields of European integration, economic growth, research, environmental protection, culture, resource management, demographic change, energy supply sustainability, social cohesion or cross- border development and this would not have been realised without the European stimulus;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Sees the achievement of European objectives in accordance with the principle of multi-level governance as one of the major advantages of cohesion policy and thus as a form of added value in itself;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Emphasises that, despite the trend towards a narrowing of inter-regional disparities, major imbalances still exist – and in some Member States are actually growing – so cohesion policy must continue to concentrate on
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Emphasises that the Union will be able to hold its own in the face of global competition only if its cohesion policy can tap the development potential of all the regions and cities in response to the challenges of the EU 2020 strategy;
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Sees macroregional strategies as affording a major opportunity to harness forms of trans-regional potential and adopt a joint approach to challenges stemming from the natural environment, e.g. in relation to environmental protection; economic, social and territorial cohesion; highlights the need to link territorial cooperation programmes more effectively with territorial strategies that are based on a shared commitment from regional stakeholders; considers that better coordination of existing support mechanisms can create scope for more targeted use of the EU Structural Funds;
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Sees macroregional strategies as affording a major opportunity to harness forms of trans-regional potential and adopt a joint approach to shared challenges s
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Sees macroregional strategies as affording a major opportunity to harness forms of
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Doubts whether specific operational programmes for functional geographical entities such as metropolitan regions or sea or river basins will yield additional benefits; is particularly aware, in relation to such programmes, of the absence of political bodies (including democratically elected bodies) with a sufficiently wide- ranging remit to implement them; calls instead for closer coordination of macroregional or natural-environment strategies at inter-governmental levels; calls for cross-border groupings to be involved in devising the operational programmes for cross-border programmes, on the basis of the EGTC Regulation;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Doubts whether specific operational programmes for functional geographical entities such as
Amendment 161 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Stresses the key role
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Rejects the use of obligatory quotas in particular for national allocations under ESF/ERDF programmes, for local and urban development, for the countryside or otherwise according to categorisation on the basis of population density or territorial function
Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Emphasises that support from the Cohesion Fund and the Structural Funds must be more strongly oriented towards the educational and socio-political challenges of the EU 2020 strategy while keeping with the Treaty’s Cohesion as overarching EU objective; takes the view, however, that across-the-board ‘Europeanisation’ of the relevant policy areas would be a doomed endeavour purely on financial grounds; calls, therefore, for the further place based local development
Amendment 212 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Sees scope under the Structural Funds for
Amendment 213 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15a. Also considers that cohesion policy has a responsibility to do what is needed to fill gaps and remove bottlenecks in a core TEN network of main routes of European significance, particularly in the border regions which have until now been badly neglected in this regard;
Amendment 216 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Emphasises that the trans-European transport networks play a decisive role in European regional cohesion and that development of TEN infrastructure, Motorways of the Sea and designated E- roads must therefore be stepped up and access to them improved, especially in border regions
Amendment 223 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16a. supports economic development and employment in SMEs and micro- enterprises; therefore requests that the fundamentals of the Small Business Act for Europe (SBAE), i.e. "Think Small First" and "Only once ", are considered as one of the bases of cohesion policy and considers that these principles should be applied by Member States and regions in the definition of their operational programs;
Amendment 249 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Takes the view that GDP must be retained as the key criterion in the definition of areas eligible for maximum support (those with GDP/PE below 75% of the EU average) and, where appropriate, cohesion countries (GDP/PE below 90% of the EU average); points out that the competent national authorities must
Amendment 270 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Calls for a strengthening of Objective 2 (Regional Competitiveness and Employment), which is based on a cross- cutting approach
Amendment 277 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 Amendment 293 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Takes the unequivocal view that efforts under Objective 3 (European Territorial Cooperation) need to be stepped up at all EU internal borders and at all three levels of such cooperation (cross-border, inter- regional and trans-national) and calls for the relevant share of the structural funds to be increased to 7%; calls for the allocation of funding for each territorial cooperation programme to be based on harmonised criteria in order to provide a strategic and integrated response to the needs and specificities of each geographical territory and area concerned; stresses the importance of the border regions in terms of achievement of the EU 2020 objectives; considers that there is a need
Amendment 302 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 a (new) 24a. Considers that EGTCs represent a unique, highly valuable territorial governance instrument which responds to the needs for structured cooperation, and must be promoted as a tool to set up systems of cross-border governance, ensuring the ownership of the different policies at regional and local level;
Amendment 313 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Draws attention to the synergies achievable through integrated approaches, notably linking the ESF and the ERDF, and calls for the option of cross-financing between these funds – specifically with a view to integrated development planning – to be facilitated; calls, furthermore, for better synergies between the EDF and the ERDF;
Amendment 316 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Draws attention to the synergies achievable through integrated local and regional development approaches, notably linking the ESF and the ERDF, and calls for the option of cross-financing between these funds – specifically with a view to integrated development planning – to be facilitated;
Amendment 320 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 a (new) 27a. Calls for the sake of increasing synergies for a greater integration of sectoral policies (transport, energy, research, environment, education) in the cohesion and structural policy creating more effectiveness and better coordination between the Structural Funds, the CIP and the Framework Programmes for Research and Development, suggests that multi-fund programming could contribute to work in a more integrated manner and would increase the effectiveness between these different funds; considers the national / regional development partnerships as an appropriate instrument to bring together the various policies; in this respect underlines the need to set clear objectives and to assess whether the goals were achieved in the Member States;
Amendment 321 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 c (new) 27c. Proposes that research and development policies be territorialised; therefore stresses the importance of adapting the cohesion policy and research and innovation policies to the specific needs of the territories; since a stronger involvement of regional and local authorities in the design and execution of the regional development funds and research and innovation programmes becomes crucial noticing the impossibility of applying the same strategy for development to all the regions;
Amendment 343 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 30. Calls, in the interests of efficiency, for the
Amendment 347 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 a (new) 30a. Calls for the revision of the Regulation for cross border cooperation at the outside borders and the actual ENPI, integrating these funds into the Objective 3 for territorial cooperation;
Amendment 360 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 33. Calls for the mandatory involvement of
Amendment 379 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 35. Calls, in the event that certain binding priorities are set for all Member States, for these to cover innovation, infrastructure and resource management and to be tailored in each case to regions
Amendment 407 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 a (new) 37a. Takes the view that new conditionality shall not result in extra administration burdens for the actors involved; encourages development of consistent, standard systems of conditionality for both the ERDF and ESF that should be objectively assessable as well;
Amendment 431 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41 41. C
Amendment 460 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 43 43. Recognises the leverage effect of new financial instruments and their potential to mobilise investment, supports increased financing from credit in principle, and calls for the use of revolving financial instruments to be extended to more areas eligible for funding (including research and infrastructure); calls for procedures to be simplified to that end and for a greater degree of legal certainty throughout the entire funding period; takes the view that at the end of a funding period, at the latest, responsibility for how the funds are spent should transfer to national level or project level; under the current period, not all member states adopted a decentralised approach to dealing with financial instruments such as JESSICA; emphasises the need for direct access for cities.
Amendment 468 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46 46. Sees global grants at subregional level as an appropriate tool for developing independent innovation strategies in line with European structural-policy objectives;
Amendment 485 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 49 49. Regards the integration of the EU 2020 objectives into the existing system of objectives and funds as entirely feasible;
Amendment 524 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 54 a (new) 54a. Calls on the Commission to maintain an annual public 'failure scoreboard' of inadequate and/or late execution of reporting and disclosure requirements and of irregularities, abuse and fraud in the use of monies from the cohesion fund; calls for this information to be broken down by Member State and Fund;
Amendment 534 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 55 55. Supports the Commission’s proposal that national authorities should not receive reimbursement until the EU funding has been paid out to the beneficiaries; envisages that this will speed up payment procedures and will be a crucial incentive to carry out stringent national auditing; notes, however, that cashflow problems could potentially arise at Member State or
Amendment 538 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 55 c (new) 55c. Calls for diversification of the penalty mechanisms, including among other aspects a bonus system for those Member States which comply with the implementation requirements, in particular through administrative concessions;
Amendment 547 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 56 56. Supports the Commission's proposal that the N+2 rule should be applied systematically possibly at the level of Member States allocations to provide for more flexibility, except in the first year of funding and that derogations from it should be abolished; considers this will guarantee that a balance is struck between high- quality investment and smooth and speedy programme implementation;
Amendment 551 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 57 57. Emphasises the importance in terms of cohesion policy of the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) promoting cross-border cooperation with states outside the EU; is convinced of the ultimate necessity to reincorporate the ENPI cross-border cooperation programmes into the cohesion policy's Territorial Cooperation Objective; sees infrastructure (transport and energy) links with neighbouring countries as having particularly positive effects on the European border regions; calls for ENPI funding to focus more closely on strategic needs in relation to energy and to transport infrastructure; calls on the Commission to look into the feasibility of establishing better synergies between ERDF initiatives, the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance, the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) and the European Development Fund (EDF);
source: PE-462.896
|
| 8 |
2011/2043(INI) Seventh EU programme for research, technological development and demonstration
2011/03/23
ITRE
2 amendments...
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 14 a (new) - having regard to its Resolution of 20 May 2010 on the implementation of the synergies of research and innovation earmarked Funds in Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 concerning the European Fund of Regional Development and the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Development in cities and regions as well as in the Member States and the Union1, 1 Texts adopted on that date. P7_TA(2010)0189
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G G. whereas delayed investment in Europe compared with other global powers is essentially due to a lack of private investment and the attractiveness of FP7 for the industrial sector is thus not fully demonstrated; but also, beyond the sums involved, there is a clear need for better coordination between the Union, the Member States, and the
source: PE-460.952
2011/03/24
ITRE
6 amendments...
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Welcomes the results of FP7 in favour of SMEs, as regards both the 15% target set in the ‘Cooperation’ chapter and the ‘Eurostars’ programme; is of the opinion that better coordination between FP7 and the Structural Funds could facilitate the participation of under-represented Member States; consequently, calls on the Commission and the national and local authorities to improve the link between the cohesion funds and the Research Framework Programme as these funds should be used to enhance research infrastructure to enable research to reach the level of excellence necessary for access to research funds; in this respect underlines the need to set clear objectives and to assess whether the goals were achieved in these Member States;
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Welcomes the results of FP7 in favour of SMEs, as regards both the 15% target set in the ‘Cooperation’ chapter and the ‘Eurostars’ programme; is of the opinion that better coordination, coherence and synergy between FP7 and the Structural Funds could facilitate the participation of under-represented Member States;
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16a. In this respect, stresses the importance of cohesion policy as this has become a major source of European support in the field of Research & Development and Innovation, as the Member States – in conformity with the second Community Strategic Guideline on cohesion – have devoted a significant amount of their total financial allocations to R&D&I of a knowledge-based economy, resulting in 246 national or regional operational programmes with around EUR 86 billion allocated to R&D&I;
Amendment 200 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Proposes that research and development policies be territorialised; therefore stresses the importance of adapting the research and innovation policies to the specific needs of the territories; notes that since the involvement of regional and local authorities in the design and execution of the research and innovation programmes becomes crucial due to the impossibility of applying the same strategy for development to all the regions;
Amendment 249 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Is of the opinion that commercialisation should be included in the parameters of future calls for projects under FP7 in the field of research and innovation;
Amendment 253 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 a (new) 22a. Stresses the importance of better assistance in the implementation of policies and programmes that enhance the synergies within the research and development value chain (infrastructures - innovation - job creation);
source: PE-462.545
|
| 1 |
2011/2179(INI) Evolution of EU macro-regional strategies: present practice and future prospects, especially in the Mediterranean
2012/04/06
REGI
1 amendments...
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 source: PE-491.017
|
| 1 |
2011/2195(INI) Role of Cohesion Policy in the outermost regions of the European Union in the context of EU 2020
2012/06/03
REGI
1 amendments...
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 source: PE-483.761
|
| 9 |
2011/2201(DEC) 2010 discharge: EU general budget, Section III, Commission
2012/02/02
REGI
3 amendments...
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Notes the different approaches taken by the Court of Auditors and the Commission to quantify errors; calls for the harmonisation of methodology in order to ensure transparency;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Notes the lack of precision in the Court of Auditors' communication about the most likely level of error over recent years, and references to either the lower error limit or to the average error limit calculated by the Court of Auditors; calls for clear and consistent methodology to be applied in this respect to ensure the comparability and a reliable analysis of the evolution of data over the years;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Welcomes the explanation by the Commission which states, for the first time, that the large majority of errors are concentrated in only three Member States and only in several operational programmes.
source: PE-480.806
2012/07/03
CONT
6 amendments...
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Attributes this development mainly to the increase of the most likely error rate in the area of Cohesion, Energy and Transport which marked a significant increase to 7,7 %;
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 58 58. Notes, furthermore, that the co- financing rates for Member States in difficulties were increased for the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), the Structural Funds, the Cohesion Fund and the European Fisheries Fund;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 76 a (new) 76a. Encourages the Court of Auditors to examine the possibility to respond to the ongoing problem of multiannuality of the implementation of funds and the annuality of the Court's audits; stresses that during the implementation period the error rate tends to be higher than at the closure when the expenditure has undergone all levels of control;
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 81 81. Deplores the fact that the error rate in Cohesion
Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 86 Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 88 – indent 1 source: PE-483.775
|
| 4 |
2011/2311(INI) Urban re-development as contribution to economic growth in the framework of the EU cohesion policy
2012/01/10
REGI
4 amendments...
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9 a. Encourages the Commission to promote networking and exchange of experience between cities; stresses however that existing programmes and bodies should be used for this purpose before creating new structures;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10.
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11.
source: PE-496.575
|
| 4 |
2011/2312(INI) Optimising the role of territorial development in cohesion policy
2012/09/26
REGI
4 amendments...
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9 a. Highlights the importance of strengthening existing and promoting new urban-rural linkages;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 b (new) 9 b. Underlines the potential of European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) in strengthening territorial cooperation within the EU;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 30. Welcomes further clarification on the scope of ITIs and the potential for the instrument, if it fits local needs, to be used in non-urban areas; is of the opinion that the implementation of ITIs should be possible with the use of all funds covered by the CPR;
source: PE-494.845
|
| 1 | 2012/0202(COD) Greenhouse gas emission allowance trading: timing of auctions |
| 1 |
2012/0244(COD) European Banking Authority (EBA): adjustment of procedural modalities
2012/10/30
ECON
1 amendments...
Amendment 201 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 Article 19 – paragraph 3a "3a. Where the Authority requests the
source: PE-498.137
|
| 5 |
2012/2027(INI) Innovative financial instruments in the context of the next Multiannual Financial Framework
2012/04/06
REGI
5 amendments...
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Urges a legal definition of FI to be
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Believes that adequate monitoring, reporting and auditing are of the utmost importance in order to ensure that EU resources are being used for the purpose intended; calls on the Commission to strengthen the reporting requirements for managing authorities during the programming period
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6.
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6 a. Encourages the Commission to use the experience of the instruments such as JEREMIE, JESSICA, JASMINE which are crucial for Europe's regions, towns and cities while defining the new era of financial instruments for the 2014-2020 programming period;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 b (new) 6 b. Believes that the role of various national and regional banking institutions having the necessary experience and know-how in reference to the local and regional specificities in the development and implementation of financial instruments needs to be acknowledged;
source: PE-491.016
|
Jan OLBRYCHT on
Activities
Term 7 14.07.2009 / ...
Term 6 20.07.2004 - 13.07.2009
All references link to europarl.euHistory
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
| active | changed |
Old
New
True |