Procedure : 2014/2946(RSP)
Document stages in plenary
Document selected : B8-0279/2014

Texts tabled :

B8-0279/2014

Debates :

Votes :

PV 27/11/2014 - 10.5
Explanations of votes

Texts adopted :

P8_TA(2014)0068

DRAFT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION
PDF 220kWORD 54k
See also joint motion for a resolution RC-B8-0278/2014
24.11.2014
PE539.002v01-00
 
B8-0279/2014

further to Question for Oral Answer B8‑0042/2014

pursuant to Rule 128(5) of the Rules of Procedure


on delays in the start-up of cohesion policy 2014-2020 (2014/2946(RSP))


Rosa D’Amato, Rolandas Paksas on behalf of the EFDD Group

European Parliament resolution on delays in the start-up of cohesion policy 2014-2020 (2014/2946(RSP))  
B8‑0279/2014

The European Parliament,

–       having regard to the Articles 174, 175 and 176 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–       having regard to Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014 -2020,

–       having regard to points 2 and 3 of the Conclusions of the European Council of 7 and 8 February 2013,

–       having regard to Article 26 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013,

–       having regard to Article 19 of the Multiannual Financial Framework,

–       having regard to the communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions - Sixth report on economic, social and territorial cohesion: investment for jobs and growth,

–       having regard to the question to the Commission on delays in the start-up of cohesion policy for 2014-2020 (O-000082/2014),

–       having regard to Rules 128(5) and 123(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.     whereas the crisis has dramatically affected public investment, reducing it by 20 % in real terms between 2008 and 2013 and by 60 % in the most affected Member States, thus reinforcing the role of cohesion policy in boosting growth and jobs and reducing disparities between the level of development of different regions;

B.     whereas, according to the latest information available, only a few Operational Programmes have been adopted and only 100 will be adopted by the end of this year, in spite of the fact that the cohesion policy was supposed to start in 2014;

C.     whereas the Common Strategic Framework (CSF), one of whose main elements is the goal of raising the performance of the Funds with more visible results, has been drawn up with the aim of increasing coherence between policy commitments made in the context of Europe 2020 and investment on the ground;

D.     whereas the General Affairs Council of 18 and 19 November 2014, in its conclusions, recalls the importance of appropriate regulatory, institutional and strategic frameworks in order to ensure the effectiveness of investments supported by ESI Funds, and underlines that the adopted programmes are designed and will be implemented in accordance with the subsidiarity, shared management and partnership principles and are underpinned by a specific intervention logic;

E.     whereas, for programmes not ready for adoption by 31 December 2014, the 2014 commitments can only be preserved by rebudgeting uncommitted amounts from 2014, in accordance with Article 19 of the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) Regulation;

F.     whereas the above implies a revision of the MFF on the basis of a Commission proposal, with the Council’s agreement and Parliament’s consent, and whereas, as a direct consequence, there will be significant delays in the concrete start-up of implementation of projects;

G.     whereas on 19 November 2014 Corina Creţu, Commissioner for Regional Policy, said that she expects ‘cohesion policy to make a significant contribution to the 300 billion investment package announced by President Juncker’, while failing to explain at her hearing in October how she intended to tackle the huge delay in payments in the field of cohesion policy;

H.     whereas on 20 November 2014 the president of the Committee of the Regions, Michel Lebrun, said that ‘the current delays are challenging regional and local authorities’ capacity to plan and implement the 2014-2020 European Structural Investment Funds’ and that ‘this situation require full stable cooperation between the European Commission, national governments, regions and cities, otherwise our investment could hit the ground too late’;

I.      whereas regarding cohesion policy the unpaid bills for 2011-2012 were EUR 11 billion, for 2012-2013 EUR 16 billion, and for 2013 -2014 as high as EUR 23.4 billion;

1.      Expresses its deepest concern at this institutional and financial stalemate, considering that the delays in the implementation of cohesion policy will ultimately place a further burden on Europe’s citizens, who are already dramatically hit by the crisis;

2.      Welcomes the General Affairs Council’s position of 20 November 2014 calling on the Commission and the Member States to accelerate the adoption of Partnership Agreements and Operational Programmes;

3.      Notes with concern that the stated ‘need to explore all the possibilities to preserve the availability of financial resources within the EU budget’ raises the issue of clarity regarding the availability of the EUR 350 billion for sustainable and inclusive growth under regional policy;

4.      Urges the Commission to clarify its current position regarding the treatment of commitments for OPs cofinanced by the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development, the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and the Cohesion Fund which will not be adopted by the end of 2014;

5.      Points out that the issue of rebudgeting uncommitted amounts from 2014 to 2015 through an MFF revision has not been brought to Parliament’s attention until now;

6.      Notes with concern that the alleged contribution of cohesion policy to the EUR 300 billion investment package announced by President Juncker could pave the way for a redistribution of the resources already allocated to sustainable and inclusive growth under regional policy;

7.      Stresses that the necessity of the speed-up of programming in order to ensure that the adopted Operational Programmes are implemented should not cause any prejudice to their quality;

8.      Urges the Commission to clarify how the situation with regard to unpaid bills from the 2007-2013 programming period affects the adoption of OPs and the start of the new implementation period;

9.      Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Commission, the Council, the Committee of the Regions, the European Economic and Social Committee and the other relevant institutions.

Legal notice