11 Amendments of Nils TORVALDS related to 2012/2092(BUD)
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Encourages a priority driven approach to budget 2013, withile striving to match any budget line increase accompanied by as with corresponding budget line cuts;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Recalls in this context the commitment by Council to adopt an amending budget to make up for funding shortages due to its horizontal cutting procedure during the conciliation procedure for the 2012 annual EU budget; reminds that already planning for amending budgets as the annual budget procedure is being concluded does not constitute sound and responsible budgeting and hopes that this will not happen in the case of the 2013 or future EU annual budgets;.
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes the EU shouldmust prioritise programmes and funding that will deliver growth in the European Union;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Is concerned by the cuts proposed by the Commission to the budgets of the EIOPA and ESMA especially given the crucial role they will play to promoting financial market stability and enabling our financial system to deliver growth; is particularly concerned by the further cuts to all ESAs introduced by the Council which, if implemented, would make it nearly impossible for the ESAs to fulfil their duties;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Believes that when the ESAs are given additional tasks in the future there should be a cost assessment made at a suitable stage during the legislative process, such as duringbefore trilogue negotiations, in order for MEPs and Member States to understand the cost consequences of the proposals they are making;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Supports the reduction of some budget lines on refunds drastically, in some cases even to zero, as this instrument is politically controversial and has not been taken up for some products at the same level as in the budget year 2012; notes that some refund lines have been earmarked as negative priorities; weighs up carefully to what extent these lines should be reduced, in order to be able to use this instrument if needed under the current regulation;
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 66
Paragraph 66
66. Decides to increase the 2013 budget appropriations for the three financial supervision agencies, as more efforts are need; believes that those appropriations should reflect the needs to fulfil the required tasks as more regulations, decisions and directives are being adopted to overcome the current financial and economic crisis which is strongly linked to the stability of the financial sector;
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 77
Paragraph 77
77. Welcomes the information and analyses contained in the 2011 Parliament's budgetary and financial management report and in the DGs annual activity reports, regarding budget lines that were under- implemented in 2011, and calls for further objective analysis of this type concerning the 2012 budget in order to more readily identify potential future savings possibilities to be offset by investments where needed and useful for the proper and smooth functioning of the Parliament;
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraphs 77 a, b, c, d, e, f, g (new)
Paragraphs 77 a, b, c, d, e, f, g (new)
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 79
Paragraph 79
79. Welcomes the joint working group's proposal to closefind savings by streamlining internal structures and suggests to only open the Members' Register on Fritwo days during constituency (turquoise) weeks;