What changed between the draft committee report and the plenary report

Removed:9. Deplores the destruction of homes and infrastructure in Ukraine; stresses the active role that cross-border cooperation programmes and the New European Bauhaus should play in sustainable post-war reconstruction;

Added:15. Recognises the importance of promoting local and regional culture and heritage conservation and educational and economic exchanges between border regions in order to strengthen mutual understanding of neighbours’ customs and create major incentives for multilingual education; underlines the importance of inclusive education with regard to democratic values and the need to support greater quality in this field;

Removed:10. Deplores the use of energy sources as a means of exerting political pressure; calls for more funding to bolster energy efficiency and reduce dependence on Russia;

Added:16. Calls for support for more sustainable infrastructure projects that contribute to improving the connectivity of cross-border regions, boosting mobility within and between these regions and enhancing quality of life and opportunities for the regions’ residents, along with projects addressing the need for infrastructure;

Removed:11. Welcomes the procedures for including Ukraine in the URBACT European Territorial Cooperation programme and the accession of Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova as observer members in the European Observation Network for Territorial Development and Cohesion (ESPON);

Added:17. Recognises the immense efforts made by national governments, regional and local authorities and civil society in the EU Member States situated around Ukraine, as well as the efforts of the Republic of Moldova, to host displaced Ukrainians and address all the challenges arising from the Russia’s war of aggression, including the matter of grain from Ukraine and the lack of transport infrastructure; calls, in this regard, for appropriate support to be given, including through cross-border cooperation programmes, to meet emerging needs;

Added:18. Underlines that although it is not at open war with Russia, the Republic of Moldova also has conflict zones supported by Russia and has welcomed a large number of Ukrainian refugees, and that Moldova’s economic and social situation was greatly affected by the cessation of its commercial relations with Russia; stresses, therefore, that solid investments and an open market are highly necessary and that common projects are more than welcome in all economic and social fields;

Added:19. Is outraged by the human losses and the destruction of homes and infrastructure in Ukraine; stresses the active role that cross-border cooperation programmes and the New European Bauhaus should play in sustainable post-war reconstruction and underlines the urgent need to support local and regional authorities in Ukraine while continuing to help neighbouring regions and encouraging increased cooperation;

Added:20. Welcomes the initiative for the inclusion of Ukraine in the URBACT European Territorial Cooperation programme and the accession of Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova as observer members of the European Observation Network for Territorial Development and Cohesion (ESPON);

Added:21. Deplores Russia’s use of its energy sources as a means of exerting political and economic pressure; calls for swift inquiries into economic cooperation with Russia in the energy sectors of some Member States, along with further action to bolster renewables and enhance energy efficiency in order to reduce dependence on Russia in those Member States that have drastically decreased their cooperation with the aggressor and were affected by the sanctions, including neighbouring countries;

Added:22. Deplores the increase in Russia’s influence in neighbouring countries, particularly through the use of manipulation and disinformation on both traditional media and online social media, and underlines the importance of enhancing cooperation with those countries, particularly in the education and cultural sectors, in order to keep their citizens informed and educated about democratic values;

Cooperation relating to sea basins

Black Sea basin

Change 10

Removed:12. Stresses the importance of increased financial support being granted, given the security challenges in the Black Sea;

Added:23. Stresses the importance of granting increased financial support to the programme, given the security challenges in the Black Sea resulting from Russian attacks and the blockade on sea and Danube ports, which aim to prevent grain shipments that are essential to Ukraine’s economy; highlights the security risk that these attacks pose to the Member States that have borders with Ukraine;

Change 11

Changed:13.24. Highlights the potential of Black Sea energy sources, which are capable of contributing to a sustainable energy future in the EuropeanEU Union;too; stresses that, despite their potential, renewable energy resources remain largely untapped;

25. Considers that the Interreg NEXT Black Sea basin programme should facilitate sustainable economic development and the efficient management of shared resources;

Change 12

Removed:15. Calls for Black Sea ports and related infrastructure to be upgraded, expanded and connected to existing transport hubs, and in particular for their connection to TEN-T corridors;

Added:26. Emphasises the importance of developing sustainable tourism in Black Sea coastal regions and advocates for all the actors involved to take a responsible approach to environmental protection;

Removed:16. Calls for a cohesive strategy to be adopted for the Black Sea area and for synergies with the Danube Programme 2021-2027;

Added:27. Calls for a strong focus on the Black Sea, enhancing regional cooperation to address security issues, including those related to regional conflicts and energy security, and encouraging projects to upgrade ports and related infrastructure and increase their connections to existing transport hubs; calls in particular, therefore, for their connection to TEN-T corridors;

Added:28. Insists that a cohesive strategy should be adopted for the Black Sea area and that synergies should be developed with the Danube Programme 2021-2027;

Mediterranean basin

Change 13

Changed:17.29. WelcomesUnderlines the importance of strong economic and social partnerships with third countries from the Mediterranean basin; welcomes the fact that the number of countries participating in 2021-2027 Interreg MEDEuro-MED programmes is expectedon tothe increase;rise;

Change 14

Changed:18.30. ProposesAsks for a more coordinated and efficient use of existing fundsfunds, inwithin orderthe framework of current social, climate and environmental rules, to increase the competitiveness of the Mediterranean basin,basin while respectingfostering environmentalthe rules;potential of onshore and offshore renewable energy;

Change 15

Changed:19.31. Considers that cross-border programmes must play an active role in managing migration flows andaddressing fosteringcommon inclusivenesssecurity onchallenges bothand sidesaim offor theregional Mediterranean;stability;

Change 16

Removed:20. Recognises the crucial role of research and innovation in natural disaster risk prevention, sustainable water management and CO2 reduction;

Added:32. Calls for migration flows to be managed and irregular migration and human trafficking to be combated, including by funding projects aiming to receive, care for and provide training for migrants to help them face the challenges of a competitive economic environment and better understand and respect European values, while fostering inclusiveness on both sides of the Mediterranean;

Removed:21. Stresses that, despite their potential, renewable energy resources remain largely untapped;

Added:33. Recognises the crucial role of research and innovation in natural disaster risk prevention, sustainable water management and CO2 reduction and underlines the need to prioritise projects that have quantifiable objectives in terms of economic, social and environmental impact;

Added:34. Stresses that, despite their potential, renewable energy resources remain largely untapped and that this potential should be stimulated, including by involving SMEs and mid-cap companies;

Added:35. Welcomes the WestMed sea basin strategy in the Western Mediterranean and Interreg programmes such as MARITTIMO as good examples of direct and diversified cooperation, including at regional level, with shared objectives;

Added:36. Welcomes the progress of the Adriatic-Ionian macro-regional strategy (EUSAIR), which has mobilised the member countries and their regions, third countries and their local authorities; considers EUSAIR a successful example in which the Union proved to be a driving force and a vector of openness; maintains that these same principles and a similar common approach must be applied to the other areas of the Mediterranean;

Added:37. Invites the European Council to ask the Commission to submit a detailed macro-regional strategy for the Mediterranean, taking into account its New Agenda for the Mediterranean, in particular section 5 thereof (‘Green transition: climate change resilience, energy and environment’), and to adopt it; deplores the continuous degradation of the environment in the entire Mediterranean sea basin, the loss of biodiversity and the increase in air and marine pollution, particularly with plastic and domestic waste, and calls for these to be avoided, limited and managed by promoting the circular economy;

Challenges in the field of cross-border cooperation

Change 17

Removed:22. Notes that the existence of different legal and institutional frameworks creates additional obstacles to project implementation;

Added:38. Notes that the existence of different legal and institutional frameworks creates additional obstacles to project implementation and therefore makes the implementation of projects a challenge; recalls that administrative procedures can be complex and time-consuming, which may discourage local and regional authorities from participating in territorial cooperation; calls on the Commission to help simplify these procedures by making them more accessible and transparent;

Removed:23. Notes that language barriers increase the administrative burden;

Added:39. Notes that language barriers and cultural differences make communication more difficult and may lead to administrative burdens, which should be overcome through appropriate measures;

Change 18

Changed:24.40. Stresses that incompatibilitiesdifferences exist between states when it comes to the competences of authorities, as well as frequent changes in regional authorities, which can cause delays; believes that dialogue between local authorities should be encouraged and the participation of civil society in territorial cooperation projects should be fostered, involving non-governmental organisations, social enterprises and other stakeholders;

Change 19

Removed:25. Notes that adapting the programme to the individual needs and specifics of each participating state may call for further efforts to be made;

Added:41. Stresses the necessity of developing a long-term exchange and entrepreneurial collaboration programmes between institutions and businesses in cross-border regions to promote sustainable economic development and of enhancing administrative coordination between participating states by further developing, reorganising or, where appropriate, setting up sustainable functional structures for cross-border cooperation and networks;

Removed:26. Notes that the COVID-19 pandemic has had an adverse impact on border regions, and has affected the implementation of current programmes and projects;

Added:42. Underlines the importance of establishing a short- and medium-term intercultural exchange system to promote the learning of common languages, foster a deeper understanding of regional cultures and facilitate collaboration between cross-border communities, highlighting that this system should also include entrepreneurial and administrative aspects to stimulate economic and administrative development;

Removed:Cross-Border Cooperation (CBC) opportunities

Added:43. States the need to adapt programmes to the individual needs and specifics of each participating country/region; calls for further efforts to be made in this regard;

Removed:27. Stresses that cross-border cooperation with neighbouring countries underscores the need to invest in the resilience of states and societies;

Added:44. Notes that the COVID-19 pandemic has had an adverse impact on border regions and has affected the implementation of current programmes and projects;

Removed:28. Considers that this contributes significantly to strengthening local democracy and the administrative capacities of partner countries;

Added:45. Points out that the lack of adequate transport infrastructure and networks, particularly when it comes to maritime and island cross-border cooperation, hampers trade and mobility and complicates cooperation;

Removed:29. Highlights the fact that the programmes offer opportunities for dialogue with a range of stakeholders: civil society, local authorities and the private sector;

Added:46. Points to the specific challenges of maritime borders and the need to recognise them as specific borders with their own needs, particularly in view of language and cultural differences, administrative and legal burdens, socio-economic disparities and environmental issues;

Removed:30. Notes that CBC contributes to reducing regional disparities and promoting territorial cohesion, as well as to mobility and connectivity;

Added:Cross-border cooperation opportunities

Removed:31. Highlights both the intangible benefits, such as institutional capacity building, and the tangible benefits linked to infrastructure development;

Added:47. Stresses that in view of multiple crises and conflicts, cross-border cooperation with neighbouring countries requires investment in the resilience of countries and societies and that partnership priorities should contribute to substantially improving living conditions on both sides of the border, including by ensuring inclusive sustainable development, social justice, employment opportunities and economic prosperity;

Added:48. Considers that cross-border cooperation may contribute significantly to strengthening local and regional democracy and the administrative capacities of partner countries; highlights the importance of the European Groupings of Territorial Cooperation (EGTCs) in facilitating and promoting territorial cooperation, in particular on the management of cross-border transport services or hospitals, the implementation or management of cross-border development projects and the exchange of knowledge and best practices;

Added:49. Highlights the importance for EU cross-border programmes to include culture as an important indicator of regional development, in particular in border areas where people living on both sides of the border share the same cultural and linguistic background, in order to ensure lively regions and increase the regions’ attractiveness, increase cultural exchange and promote diversity and solidarity beyond EU borders;

Added:50. Highlights the fact that the programmes offer opportunities for an in-depth dialogue with a range of stakeholders including civil society representatives, local and regional authorities, academia, citizens, NGOs and the private sector; stresses in particular the importance of cross-border programmes for the EU candidate countries, as they provide local and national authorities with the opportunity to familiarise themselves with EU legislation;

Added:51. Notes that cross-border cooperation may contribute further to reducing regional disparities, promoting economic and social development, gender mainstreaming, employment, trade and territorial cohesion, and improving the mobility of people and the connectivity of the regions;