5 Amendments of Petri SARVAMAA related to 2015/2155(DEC)
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Calls for a report by the administration on the extent to which - besides economic panels - environmental and social associations, NGOs and interest groups organise events in Parliament; wonders if there arecalls for guidelines that exclude the disproportionate presence of such organisations in Parliament;
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Criticizes the presentation of statistical data on explanations of vote, speeches in plenary, parliamentary questions, amendments, motions for resolutions, written questions to the President of the European Council, the Council, the Commission or the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy on the Parliament website, which appear designed to prove which Members of the Parliament are supposedly "active" on platforms such as MEPRanking; calls on Parliament to stop providing the raw numbers in a statistical form and to take into account more suitable criteria to identify a Member as "active";
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Criticizes the total cost of the LUX Prize in 2014, which reached an all-time high of EUR 906 902 (2013: EUR 448 000 (2012: EUR 434 421); deeply regrets the fact that the results of a survey on awareness and impact of the LUX-Prize, requested in the 2013 discharge report, is not yet available; calls for the results of this study to be available to the public by mid-May 2016 and an official presentation of the results to be made to its Committee on Budgetary Control;
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52 a (new)
Paragraph 52 a (new)
52a. Calls for a careful consideration, based on the study of the impact of the LUX Prize, if the continuation of the LUX Prize is worth the expenditure;
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 67 a (new)
Paragraph 67 a (new)
67a. Requests a review to evaluate whether an appropriate staff of internal interpreters is also guaranteed during the core business days of Parliament;