39 Amendments of Luke Ming FLANAGAN related to 2018/2219(DEC)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 5
Citation 5
— having regard to the statement of assurance4 as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2017, pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,; having regard also to the strong possibility that the statement of assurance for 2017 is tainted by the fact that a) the error-rate correction hasn't been published, and b) application of the Residual Error Rate (RER) rather than Payment error-rate in many instances is inappropriate, as this cannot reflect the true error-rate for 2017; _________________ 4 OJ C 357, 4.10.2018, p. 9.
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Acknowledges that ex-ante conditionalities have represented an often unnecessary additional administrative burden and that, as recognised by the Commission, have been one of the possible reasons for the registered delays in implementation of the ESIF 2014-2020; acknowledges, as well, that although there have been no cases of suspension of payments to programmes by the Commission for non-fulfilment of ex- ante coditionalities by the end of 2016, managing authorities concerned refrained from submitting payment claims, thus imposing a kind of self-suspension and delaying implementation with the result that the absorption at the end of the fourth year of the current period (2017) was significantly lower than the absorption rate on the corresponding date (end 2010) of the previous period 2007-2013 (17% and 41% respectively), thus further putting into question the added value of ex-ante conditionalities as an instrument introduced with the aim to facilitate cohesion policy implementation;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes, however,Agrees with the Court’s opinion that, overall, the 2014-2020 performance framework is not significantly more results-oriented than similar arrangements in previous periods, remaining essentially focussed on spending and project outputs, with the large majority of indicators that constitute the basis for allocating the performance reserve representing output indicators (57,1 %), financial indicators (33,4 %) and key implementation steps (9,2 %), with - regrettably - only marginal use of result indicators (0,3 %);
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Is of the opinion, together with the Court, that financial instruments should only be used only if commercial loans are unobtainable because the project is too small or too risky, or the borrower cannot offer the necessary collateral;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. DNotes with concern and draws the attention of the Commission and the Court to the fact that the Loan Guarantee Facility and the InnovFin SME Guarantee Facility creates potentially intermediaries’ loan portfolios worth EUR 24,42 billion, of which the discharge authority knows very little, as the system is highly complex and opaque;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Believes that election observation activities - properly, fairly and objectively executed - play a key role in public diplomacy by offering impartial assessment and constructive recommendations which can be followed up by national stakeholders, including civil society organisations;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Invites the European External Action Service to follow as much as possible the effective implementation in third countries of the EOM's recommendations, while fully respecting the sovereignty of each country and involving Parliament, and also by allocating a sufficient level of human resources from Union’s delegations with adequate technical expertise to this important political task, necessary in some areas identified by the EOM;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Welcomes the Court’s special report, and endorsnotes its remarks and recommendations; points out a fundamental truth - a Banking Union is effective only if there is full and complete Monetary Union, which is so far not the case in the eurozone;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Is of the opinion that the SRB should forms part of a strong banking union with a strong regulation and supervision of banks and an important step towards a structural and coherent institutional framework endowed with adequate resources and democratic legitimacy in order to stabilize the financial sector and prevent a future crisis, but that this would be the case only if there was full Monetary Union in the eurozone, and all that this entails - in the continued absence of a European Deposit Insurance Scheme (EDIS), this is clearly not the case; nevertheless sees the need for adjustments that will enhance the effectiveness of the work of SRB and its systemic contribution;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55
Paragraph 55
55. Is deeply concerned by the fact that the ECB did not grant the Court access to all documents or information requested which the Court deemed necessary to carry out its task, and calls on the ECB to remedy this policy;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
Paragraph 56
56. Is of the opinion that the ECB’s full cooperation is absolutely necessary, should be forthcoming, and would have enhanced transparency and accountability;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60 a (new)
Paragraph 60 a (new)
60a. Recalls also that many of those banks now under ECB supervision received massive public bailout funds from EU citizens through their various Member State governments, and thus have an additional duty to treat those citizens in a fair manner;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60 b (new)
Paragraph 60 b (new)
60b. Points out that instead, in some Member States, those bailed-out banks have abused their new-found strength and taken advantage of their dominant position, most notably in Ireland as recognised by ECB President Mario Draghi in a recent appearance before the Irish Parliament Oireachtas Finance Committee ("An effective monopoly in the banking market here is the reason mortgage costs are double the level elsewhere in the eurozone, European Central Bank chief Mario Draghi has told the Oireachtas Finance Committee."1) 1 https://www.independent.ie/business/irish/ ecbs-draghi-blames-irish-bank-monopoly- for-high-mortgage-costs-37509130.html
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60 c (new)
Paragraph 60 c (new)
60c. Points out further that as part of its brief, the ECB, in conjunction with the Commission, should investigate and end this monopoly position in Ireland, and its abuse;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60 d (new)
Paragraph 60 d (new)
60d. Points out finally, as further example of how banks continue to abuse their position, that in 2018 there was a major Tracker Mortgage scandal in Ireland in which nearly 40 000 mortgage- holders (and rising) were overcharged by their banks, many of whom lost their homes as a result, yet with no-one within any of the many banks involved held responsible; asks that for its 2018 discharge, the Court should investigate this matter, and that the ECB should take responsibility for ensuring that the necessary actions are taken;1 1 https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingn ews/ireland/numbers-hit-by-tracker- mortgage-scandal-rise-to-38400- 873437.html
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61
Paragraph 61
61. Notes that the ECB was given responsibility for the management of the assessments of banks’ recovery planning and for early intervention for significant banks in the euro area and that the effective crisis management therefore depends primarily on the operationally efficient management by the ECB; asks that in light of the above, the ECB should assume its responsibility in all such cases;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63
Paragraph 63
63. WelcomNotes the Court’s special report on the macroeconomic imbalance procedure, its recommendations and the Commission’s readiness to implement the majority of them;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 65
Paragraph 65
65. Points out that the MIP was designed as a response to the economic and financial crisis in Europe aseven though macroeconomic imbalances were not one of the root causes of the crisis - the crisis instead arose because of the greedy and reckless behaviour of so many in the banking and financial sector. Therefore the conceptual design of the MIP is falsely based and so needs to be redeveloped constantly in order to overcome imbalances and ensure social andto ensure social fairness, alongside economic stability;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 66
Paragraph 66
66. Notes that, if, on the basis of the outcomes of the IDR, the Commission finds that "macroeconomic imbalances" exist, it informs the European Parliament, the Council and the Eurogroup. The Council may then, on recommendation from the Commission, address a recommendation to the Member State concerned (in accordance with procedure set out in Article 121(2) TFEU), which same Member State may then, depending on its size and influence in the Union, simply ignore those recommendations. These preventive MIP-recommendations form part of the country-specific recommendations (CSRs);
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 69
Paragraph 69
69. CInescapably concludes, together with the Court, that the Council recommendations are subject to political weighting; that this seems to be the rule, rather than the exception;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 70
Paragraph 70
70. Is convinced that the political appreciation of economic data is a necessary exercise as long as it is carried out in a transparent way, stating the economic facts, on the one hand, and the political reasons for the recommendation, on the other, but with social impacts also requiring consideration, above and beyond all else;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 71
Paragraph 71
71. Calls on the Commission to devise a system, which encourages Member States to implement the MIP-CSRs efficiently and effectively, so long as those MIP-CSRs have also included within their scope an appreciation and allowance for the social impact of those policies, and do not include an enforced privatisation of public services and assets;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 92
Paragraph 92
92. Calls on Member States, with regard to EAFRD support for renewable energy, to provide the Commission with pertinent independent information on programme achievements of renewable energy projects in their enhanced annual implementation reports of 2019; this information should allow the Commission to know how much of EAFRD expenditure has been paid out for renewable energy projects, the energy capacity installed or the energy produced from such projects; calls on the Commission to define the various types of indicators more accurately when preparing the post-2020 programming period;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 129 a (new)
Paragraph 129 a (new)
129a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that CAP payments are used for the purpose for which they were designed, i.e. to ensure a sustainable livelihood for all food producers, but especially for small- scale producers, whilst also ensuring a reasonably-priced high-quality and reliable food-supply for consumers. This can be achieved by a), establishing a weighted payment system, with payments reducing as farm size increased, and b), setting an upward limit on payments under CAP;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 131
Paragraph 131
131. Regrets that the new SCOs are only used for a marginal part of rural development spending and that they are not enhancing the potential of this source of funding, although; simplification shouldis the be ast way to encourage beneficiaries to engage in projects, and this should be done;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 135
Paragraph 135
135. Recalls that simplification is not an end in itself, but must be beneficial to both administrations and projects bearers;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 139
Paragraph 139
139. WelcomNotes the Commission’s efforts in improving the broadband coverage across the Union but regrets that in certain Member States, such as in Ireland, privatisation of these services has meant that many rural areas that are deemed commercially non-viable are broadband blackspots;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 151
Paragraph 151
151. WelcomNotes the Court’s special report, endorsfurther notes its recommendations and sets out its observations and recommendations below;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 151 a (new)
Paragraph 151 a (new)
151a. Points out that it was the actions (including arms supply) of the USA (aided and abetted by certain Member States of the EU) in sovereign countries such as Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, that led to much of the mass migration from those areas, and the accompanying radicalisation of many;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 157 a (new)
Paragraph 157 a (new)
157a. Calls on the Commission to ensure, and the Court to confirm, that no work done by these Centres of Excellence will ever be towards the area of chemical warfare or chemically-based crowd control (e.g. new gases);
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 166
Paragraph 166
166. WelcomNotes the Court’s special report on strengthening the capacity of the internal security forces in Niger and Mali and sets out its observations and recommendations below;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 200
Paragraph 200
200. Is most concerned at the complete divergence of opinions between the Court and the Commission regarding whether the Commission has been implementing the preventive arm provisions properly in order to achieve the required MTOs, but notes that this is indicative of the confusion and lack of certainty around this entire exercise, which strongly suggests that it needs either to be scrapped, or reviewed and totally overhauled. This complete lack of common understanding between the two institutions on the crux of the question whether the Commission has been properly applying the SGP preventive arm is an important indication of the existence of substantial differences, on the one hand regarding the adequacy of the actual texts of the legal acts currently governing the implementation of the SGP, and on the other concerning the criteria and considerations, on the basis of which to asses whether they are being applied in practice;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 201
Paragraph 201
201. Is of the opinionNotes that the findings of the Court, namely that the Commission, through its actions has not been ensuring that the Regulation’s main objective is met, might be considered as justified on the basis of a strictly literal interpretation of its provisions; nevertheless considers that the Commission has had sufficient grounds to exercise flexibility in applying the respective provisions of the Regulation in light of economic conditions and the of requirements of relaunching growth and increasing employment;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 202
Paragraph 202
202. Further considers that the expanding complexity of the provisions of the SGP that has been taking place in the course of the past decade of implementation calls not just for an all- round comprehensive reexamination of the respective legal acts and their interpretation in light of experiences accumulated as well as of the actual evolution of the European and the global economy, characterized by subdued growth, deepening inequalities and increasing uncertainties, but for the entire scrapping of the SGP;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 205 a (new)
Paragraph 205 a (new)
205a. Believes that in the context of COP 21, if the European Union is really serious about taking real steps to decelerate climate change, then it needs to invest whatever it takes to establish an EU-wide working rail system;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 233 a (new)
Paragraph 233 a (new)
233a. Regrets that for 2019, 'The EU Erasmus+ Programme can co-fund projects related to Key Skills and Competencies (KSC) for Defence, including those supporting EDA’s Overarching Strategic Research Agenda (OSRA) and Key Strategic Activities (KSA) in Defence.1'; observes that for 2017, and for all other years to date, according to its own website ' Erasmus+ is the European Union programme for education, training, youth and sport2', with no reference contained therein to this well-founded programme becoming involved in military/'defence' research; believes that this decision should be revisited and reversed; 1 https://eda.europa.eu/what-we-do/our- current-priorities/eu-funding- gateway/access-to-eu-erasmus-funding 2 https://www.erasmusplus.org.uk/about- erasmus?md=yxz
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 245
Paragraph 245
245. Welcomes the ambitious commitments of the European Union to achieve cutting of its emissions compared to 1990 by at least 20% levels by 2020 and by 40% by 2030, and to spend at least 20% of its budget on climate related action for the 2014-2020 budgeting period; while these commitments are ambitious, it should also be noted that they are absolutely necessary, and those targets are minimums, to be exceeded if and where possible;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 246
Paragraph 246
246. Welcomes the Union ambition of being a global leader in renewables, but notes that those renewables should and must be sustainable; considers it of high importance for the Commission to continuously demonstrate sufficient leadership and commitment to climate change issues to consolidate its international credibility and impact of its instruments for shaping conditions for the Union's climate policy and green diplomacy in future years;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 274 – indent 1
Paragraph 274 – indent 1
- carry out an evaluation of the 2012- 2015 animal welfare strategy - particularly in relation to live animal transportation - to identify to what extent its objectives have been achieved and if the guidance it has issued is being applied;