36 Amendments of Dominique BILDE related to 2015/2329(INI)
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Europe for Citizens programme is a unique and highly symbolic programme, as it isshould be a listening exercise on civil society’s debate and, with critical thinking about the European project; whereas the programme is being carried out in a context in which, according to the findings of Eurobarometer survey 415 published in 2014, 59% of Member State citizens tend not to trust the EU and its institutions and 47% of them do not understand how the EU works1; 1http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archi ves/ebs/ebs_415_fact_fr_en.pdf
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the Europe for Citizens programme aims to strengthen a sense of European citizenship, enhance mutual tolerance and promote a better understanding of the EUought to provide an opportunity for the EU’s institutions and political leaders to take into consideration the opinions of all citizens of Member States, including critical views of European integration, so as to revitalise democratic practice and make the EU more inclusive for the millions of citizens who hold minority views that either are not represented or are underrepresented;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the current rise ofonstant denigration, by elected representatives and the media, of what is commonly termed ‘Euroscepticism’ –, which culminated recently in the vote in favour of Brexit – reinforces the need to encourage civic participation and to launch an in-depth debate on European values, while highlighting the opportunities brought about by belonging to the EUis nothing other than the exercise of free will and of freedom of expression in a democratic setting, is one reason for the vote in favour of Brexit;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas, in this connection, pluralism, which is enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), is one of the core components of democracy and is defined as a system recognising diversity of thinking, conduct, political and religious opinions, and political parties;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. asserting therefore that the European Union cannot draw closer to the citizens of Member States while it continues to fail to respect the diversity of their opinions, in particular by contemptuously rejecting time after time the outcome of referendums despite the fact that, by their very nature, they are the most democratic mechanism that exists;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas in line with Article 11 TEU, the EU institutions are bound to give citizens and representative associations the opportunity to publicly exchange their views in all areas of Union action; whereas this provision also entails the EU institutions’ obligation to have an open, transparent and regular dialogue with civil society and the Commission’s duty to carry out broad consultations with stakeholders; whereas the Commission has already failed as regards the latter obligation, since there have been few consultations in some areas such as, for example, immigration policy;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas, furthermore, Article 10(3) TEU grants every citizen the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union and stipulates that decisions should be taken as openly and as closely as possible to the citizen; stressing, however, that that commitment has by no means been fully honoured by the Commission, in particular in connection with negotiations on free-trade agreements;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas Article 20 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) establishes the fundamental status of Union citizenship and, which remains subordinate to national citizenship because, etymologically and legally, citizenship is inextricably bound up with nationality; whereas though Article 20 details the rights attached to cit, and whereasizenship it should also be reasserted that citizenship involves obligations; stressing, lastly, that in order to empower citizens to fully enjoybe aware of theose rights, and obligations a better understanding of the EU is an importantessential precondition;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the current programme is founded on Article 352 TFEU, which only gave Parliament the right to express its position under the consent procedure and was vigorously contested by Parliament at the time the proposal was submitted by the Commission; stressing that that legal framework is already jeopardising the legitimacy of the Europe for Citizens programme, since it excludes from the decision-taking process the only EU institution elected by universal suffrage;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the ex-post evaluation conducted by the Commiss, according to the study carried out by Parliament’s Policy Department B, national confirmed the relevance oftact points report that applicants regard the programme’s objectives and the fact that, as it is distinct from os still being couched in too much institutional jargon, making ther programmes in terms of its scope, objectives, activities and target groups, it enabled initiatives that could not have been funded elsewhere more difficult to understand;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereasnoting that, following the budgetary cuts resulting from the negotiations on the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2014-2020, the financial envelope for the Europe for Citizens programme was reduced by around EUR 29.5 million, and whereas the limited financial envelope of EUR 185.47 million for the programme only represents 0.0171 % of the MFF;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas as a consequence of the reduction stressing the financial envelope,at the number of projects that were able to be financed in 2014 fell by almost 25 % compared to the previous programme; whereas to a large extent that stems from the imbalance in funding disbursements for the programme’s strands, since only 20% of the budget is allocated to the ‘European remembrance’ strand, as opposed to 60% to the ‘Democratic engagement and civic participation’ strand, and a decision has been taken to give priority to projects on migration-related topics;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas further synergies with othe fact that ther programmes and better communication with other DGs are needed in order to reduce overlap and reinforce the impact of the programme is run jointly by several DGs, including the Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs, may sow confusion as to its real objectives and undermine its effectiveness;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines thatNotes the overall funding available (EUR 185.47 million) tofor the only programme entirely dedicEurope for Citizens programme and reiterateds to European citizenship, i.e. the Europe for Citizens programme,hat its success will not depend solely on the budget allocated to it, but above all on its negligible in comparison with other education and culture programmes, such as Creative Europe (EUR 1.46 billability to define goals that correspond to what citizens really want, with listening more to their opinion)s and Erasmus + (EUR 14.7 billion)demands being particularly necessary;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recognises that the main obstacle to the successful implementation of the programme is the insufficient financial allocation and deeply regrets that it was cut by 13.7 % under the MFF 2014-2020, which imbalance between the funds earmarked for Strand 1 (20 %) and those earmarked for Strand 2 (60 %), as well as objectives thast dramatically reduced the number of financeable projects and means that the high demand cannot be met, causing frustration among candidates with valuable projectso not always meet the real expectations of Member State citizens, represent the main obstacle to the successful implementation of the programme;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that, owing to budgetary constraints, at mid-term, the programme has had a very poor rate of success as the total number of funded projects is too small to achieve the programme’s ambitious goals and that only around 6 % of the European Remembrance and Civil Society projects were able to be financed in 2015, which is very low; in comparison to the Creative Europe programme results for the same year (19.64 % for Culture and 45.6 % for MEDIA); indicates that the funding for these two strands of the Europe for Citizens programme should be substandicates that a debate should be launched, following a public consultation, on the programme’s goals so that they truly match the needs of Member State citizens, and not the EU’s politically increased expectations;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Recalls furthermore that in view of its limited budget, programme grants ought to focus on projects run by associations or institutional authorities in the Member States and not be dispensed to projects run by non-Member State third countries;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. WelcomNotes the Europe for Citizens newsletter and the database on funded projects, launched by the Commission;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Highlights the fact that the Europe for Citizens’ National Contact Points (NCPs) have an important role in raising awareness and providing support and guidance to potential applicants (in particular first-time applicants in target countries); recalls that National Contact Points are the most suitable level at which to meet the expectations of potential candidates or organisations and that their capacity to support programme beneficiaries whose application has been successful should be developed;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. WelcomesAcknowledges that the multidisciplinary approach of the programme, and its clear and simple application form and reporting requirements and its focus on specifhave been appreciated by the National Contact Points responsible for implementation; reiterates however that Parliament ought to have a role to play in defining the priorities, which activitiesre currently defined solely by the Commission;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the fact that the priorities defined for both strands of the programme, ‘European Remembrance’ and ‘Democratic engagement and civic participation’, which were previously modified annually, have henceforth become multiannual and will apply throughout the remaining period of the programme (2016-2020)Notes that for the programme’s priorities multiannual programming is more efficient; expresses some doubts however as to the relevance of some priorities, such as the one concerning Euro-scepticism as this discriminates against all citizens daring to have a different view of Europe;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Acknowledges the fact that the impact of the programme remains proportionally high, as is shown by the fact that in 2015 an estimated 1 100 000 participants were involved in the 408 projects selected; considers also that the high number of applications – 2 087 in 2014 and 2 791 in 2015 – and the quality of projects indicate a high level of interest in the programme;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that, given the low rate of success of the European Remembrance and Civil Society projects in the Europe for Citizens programme (6 %, as against 19.64 % for Culture and 45.6 % for MEDIA in the Creative Europe programme), a 60 % increase in the current budgetbetter management of the current budget, in particular through sharing the funds out better between the two strands, would be necessary in order to achieve a target rate of 20 % of funded projects; calls, therefore, on the Commission, the Council and the Member States to consider a total financial envelope of approximately EUR 300 million for the Europe for Citizens programme under the next MFFo review the programme’s financial structure along these lines;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recommends that another source of funding be found for the Europe for Citizens Initiative (ECI), which is currently financed under the Europe for Citizens budget, be given greater prominence as this is a tool with great potential for democratising the EU institutions, in that it enables one million EU citizens to play a direct part in EU policy-making by asking the European Commission to present a legislative proposal;
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Notes that the lump sum or flat rate system should take into consideration the price differences across the EU, depending on the costs of living in the Member States; recommends rethinking this scheme in order to ensure the sustainability of the funded projects and to better support cooperation among local administrations or organisations at a wider distance, especially smaller organisations with limited financial capacity and participants with special needs, especially those with disabilities necessitating special adaptations to ensure accessibility;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. UnderlineRecommends that operating grants guarantee independence to beneficiaries (i.e. Think Tanks) and offer the possibility of long-term planning to realise vision- oriented activities and to develop expertise; recommends the use of specific criteria, indicators and annual reporting to monitor progress towards their goals and to make sure that these funding schemes do notbe replaced by targeted project grants; considers that there is a serious risk of operating subsidies leading to the beneficiary’s dependency on the Commission;
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Commissionwilling Member States to gather together all useful information regarding the Europe for Citizens programme (programme guide, priorities, calls for proposals, ongoing and past projects, outcome and lessons learned, newsletter), along with all the programmes, actions, grants and structural funds that come under the umbrella of European citizenship (such as the European Citizens’ Initiative and the European Voluntary Service), in a unique, user-friendly communication portal (one- stop-shop online platform); recommends that this platform should be used as a public register of the beneficiaries’ contact details and as a tool to access the projects’ descriptions and to find partners in other countries;
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission to implemenNotes that an engaging communication strategy for European citizenship by using social networks, constantly updating the content and reaching new audiences in the participating countries, especially those in which the level of participation is lowercould be useful, while pointing out that communication alone will not be enough to bring citizens closer to the EU and that instruments are needed to assess and meet real public expectations; points out that the funds earmarked for communication purposes should not be spent on communicating EU political priorities;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. UrgeRecommends theat participating countries which have not yet done so to designate a national contact point; recommends reinforcing the coordination and synergy among these countries, the Member States and the Commission;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Recommends that the funds allocated to communication should not be used to cover institutional communication of the priorities of the Union, as is currently set out in Article 12 of the present programme, but should be used to publicise the programme itself in the participating countries, especially those in which the level of participation is lowerredirected towards campaigns to promote or raise awareness of major objectives, such as measures to combat Alzheimer's disease or other health priorities in Europe, research activity and the benefits of sport;
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Recommends, in the next generation programme, formalising the multiannual approach in the definition of the priorities and enhancing synergies among the strands and the components of the programme; stresses that changing the structure of the programme might lead to confusion and reduce its impactthat it is therefore advisable for all upstream actors, including the public, to be more closely involved in policy formulation;
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Welcomes the strong focus on citizens and societal aspects of the EU, allowing EU institutions to directly engage with civil society on the ground; highlights within the priorities of the programme the importance of projects focused on current challenges for Europe, on issues such as migration, social inclusion and intercultural dialogueStresses that, if the programme is to bring the EU closer to its citizens, it should begin by taking into account their views, as regards programme priorities for example, including in particular priority 2. 3. entitled ‘Combating stigmatisation of "immigrants" and building counter narratives to foster intercultural dialogue and mutual understanding’; points out that the majority of citizens in the Member States, for example 56% of French voters, not to mention 98.3% of Hungarian voters in the referendum on the migrant quotas imposed by Brussels, are against accepting more migrants;
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Stresses the need to develop – within the ‘European Remembrance’ strand – a European identity that should be oriented towards the future and not only the past, with a view to achievingRecalls that ‘without a past, there can be no future’ and that no cultural identity can be created from nothing; points out that it is therefore only by enhancing their own heritage and traditions, highlighting their shared Greek and Latin philosophical origins and Christian roots, that Member State citizens will be able to regain awareness of their common secular integration; tural values;
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Stresses the need to enrich the programme with proposals regarding citizens’ participation in the democratic process and in EU decision-making, for instance through the implementation of e- democracy; points out, however, that such tools cannot be effective if the EU persists in disparaging other tools of direct democracy such as referendums and accordingly expresses disquiet at the numerous utterances by the Commission President, who has regularly found fault with national referendums, not least those which have been held in Greece; maintains that if European leaders adopt attitudes of this kind, European peoples are likely to become increasingly distrustful of the EU;
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Recommends more internationalisation of, that third countries not be included in the programme and proposes to promote cooperation between organisations in the EU and/or subsidy payments, given that funding is limited and the time ins neighbouring countriesot yet ripe;
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Recommends that the next generation of the Europe for Citizens programme should be adopted with a legal base enabling Parliament to be involved in the adoption of the programme as a co- legislator under the ordinary legislative procedure, on equal footing with the Council; points out also that the European Parliament is still, despite everything, the only European institution directly elected by citizens; encourages the Commission to think of possible solutions to achieve this objective;