8 Amendments of Dominique BILDE related to 2016/2151(DEC)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines the value and popularity of the Erasmus+ programmehigh profile which the Erasmus+ programme enjoys among citizens of the Member States; regrets the suspension of payments throughout 2015 under the “‘Youth”’ strand in Greece and particularly its impact on young people; welcomesemphasises that this country, and its young people in particular, have already borne the brunt of the austerity policies imposed by the European Union, which have had disastrous consequences, in particular as regards youth employment, given that in January 2016, according to Eurostat, 51.9% of young Greeks were still jobless; welcomes, for that reason, the lifting in Greece of the suspension of payments under the ‘Youth’ strand of the Erasmus+ programme in April 2016;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Urges the Commission to conduct a more comprehensive review of the Erasmus+ programme, to ensure that it provides real opportunities to learn the language of the host country, and to remove all obstacles so that everyone, including students with a disability (defrayal of accommodation and transport costs), overseas students who live more than 12 000 km from mainland Europe and apprentices, can take part in the programme;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes the increase in funding applications in 2015 under the Europe for Citizens and Creative Europe programmes, in particular its Culture sub-programme; stresses that the low project success rate in both programmes is symptomatic of their modest budgets and causes frustration and disappointment among applicants; insists that the increase in applications must be met with more funding for both programmes inadequate management of their budgets; takes the view that a balanced reallocation of the funds available is required, and proposes, for example, that the EUR 1.6 million earmarked for the social integration of refugees under the cross-sectoral strand of the Creative Europe programme be made available for projects carried out by European SMEs in the cultural and creative sector;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes, as regards the ‘Citizens’ Europe’ programme, a severe imbalance between the budgets allocated to the two strands, with only 20% of the total budget set aside for strand 1 (European remembrance) and 60% for strand 2 (Democratic engagement and civic participation); calls on the Commission to remedy this imbalance in order to respond to the frustration felt by many applicants under strand 1;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that EACEA plays an important role in delivering the three programmes; welcomnotes the greater use of online project applications by the Agency; expresses concern, however, that users continue to perceive systems as too complex and urges EACEA to involve national desks in implementing the strategy and improving the systems, since they best understand the situation on the ground and the specific concerns of the citizens of each Member State;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Takes due note of the reservations lodged by EACEA with regard to payments under the 2007-2013 Lifelong Learning, Culture and Youth programmes; shartakes the Agency’s view that the move from the reimbursement of eligible costs towards lump-sum and flat-rate payments under the 2014-2020 programmes shcould reduce error rates, while ensuring that financial controls are proportionate and do not discourage applications; emphasises, however, that it is essential to guarantee that flat- rate payments do not disadvantage recipients in remote areas and properly reflect the real costs incurred;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Expresses concern Takes the view that the ongoing pressure on capacity at the four European schools in Brussels, three of which were officially overcrowded in both 2014-2015 and 2015-2016; welcom, could be indicative of over-staffing in the EU institutions; notes the Belgian government’s decision to make a fifth European school available in Brussels as of the 2019-2020 school year;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Urges the Commission to pay close attention to the overall functioning of and the problems facing the 10 other type-I European schools and also to support the type-II and type-III schools by facilitating admission for all children to type-II schools;