239 Amendments of Salvador GARRIGA POLLEDO
Amendment 3 #
2014/2020(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas Parliament has continuously called for the EU budget to be financed wholly by genuinefinancing of the EU budget to return to a genuine system of own resources, as stipulated in the Treaty; whereas it has regularly highlighted the shortcomings and limits of the existing system of own resources, the lack of transparency and high complexity of which make it totally incomprehensible to European citizens, who ultimately bear the consequences;
Amendment 7 #
2014/2020(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas national contributions to the EU budget, which based on GNI amount nowadays to around 8574 % of the total EU revenue, cannot be considered as a genuine own resource as they simply constitute transfers from national treasuries; whereas this situation has reinforced, over decades, the logic of ‘fair return’ that has also clearly prevailed in the conclusions of the European Council of 7-8 February 2013 on the MFF 2014-2020 and has largely prevented a structural reform of the EU budget;
Amendment 14 #
2014/2020(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the High-Level Group on Own Resources aims at producing a first assessment of the current system’s shortcomings by the end of 2014, with a final outcome in 2016 to be assessed at an inter-institutional conference inwith the presenceactive participation of national parliaments; whereas the High-Level Group shallould examine all aspects of the reform of the own resources system with a view of providing the Commission with the necessary means to propose a successful reform for the period covered by the next Multiannual Financial Framework;
Amendment 22 #
2014/2020(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Places high expectations on the work of the High-Level Group on Own Resources, which it believes offers a unique opportunity to overcome the current blockage of the reform of the system of own resources; strongly regrets that the High-Level Group has not yet started its work; calls for its inaugural meeting to be convened without delay, in complianceorder to comply with the objectives and the calendar set out in the joint declaration establishing the High Level Group on Own Resources annexed to the MFF (2014-2020) regulation;
Amendment 55 #
2014/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that Parliament was the first EU institution to present its vision on the MFF 2014-2020 and the need to reform the financing of the EU budget, with the report of its specialised SURE Committee, in June 2011; considers that this report provided effective guidance for the Commission in drafting its own proposals on the MFF and own resources and; appreciates the regular political dialogue that was establishedbetween several EU Commissioners and Parliament at all stages of the preparation of this report and considers that this practice should be further developed into a more structured dialogue between the two iInstitutions at all stageshead of the preparsentation of this reporte MFF legislative proposals; points to the obvious advantages for Parliament of an early preparation for any negotiations on the MFF;
Amendment 69 #
2014/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Points out that the conclusions of the European Council are to be seen as negotiating instructions for the Council and that they in no case constitute red lines which cannot be negotiated with Parliament; calls for a standard formula recalling the provisions of Article 15(1) TFEU to be included in the conclusions of the European Council, recalling that the European Council does not exercise legislative functions; is convinced that, notwithstanding any political decision taken by the European Council, the negotiations on the MFF and the related EU multiannual programmes should only be conducted between Parliament and Council, as the Treaty provides;
Amendment 89 #
2013/2010(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Recalls, in this regard, that the EU 2020 strategy should be at the heart of the next MFF (2014-2020) and invites the Commission to clearly prioritise it already in 2014 and to place emphasis on spending for entrepreneurship and self- employment, SMEs, research, development and innovation, renewable energy, sustainable development, and skills; highlights, in this regard, the importance of sufficient financial resources for the programs Horizon and COSME, which are essential to the EU 2020 strategy;
Amendment 94 #
2013/2010(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Recalls that the biggest economic potential in the EU lies in small and medium enterprises (SMEs) which create most of the new jobs; therefore the promotion of entrepreneurial mindsets and business start-ups through concrete actions, such as the Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs, is of utmost importance and should be provided with adequate resources;
Amendment 97 #
2013/2010(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)
Paragraph 21 b (new)
21b. At times of crisis and European scepticism, today's youth should especially benefit from education programmes fostering the knowledge about the European Union and the European Institutions, including courses on media pluralism; stresses further the valuable role that can be played by the newly established Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom
Amendment 1 #
2012/2160(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the European Union has set up the appropriate legislative and budgetary instruments to provide additional support to workers who are suffering from the consequences of major structural changes in world trade patterns and to assist their reintegration into the labour market,
Amendment 2 #
2012/2160(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the Spanish authorities submitted the application for EGF financial contribution on 28 December 2011, supplemented by additional information up to 28 May 2012, and that its assessment was made available by the Commission on 9 August 2012; observeswelcomes the fact that the evaluation process of the application could have been more expeditiousand submission of additional information by Spain were speedy and accurate;
Amendment 10 #
2012/2160(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Requests the institutions involved to make the necessary efforts to improve procedural and budgetary arrangements to accelerate the mobilisation of the EGF; appreciates the improved procedure put in place by the Commission, following Parliament's request for accelerating the release of grants, aimed at presenting to the budgetary authority the Commission's assessment on the eligibility of an EGF application together with the proposal to mobilise the EGF; hopes that further improvements in the procedure will be integrated in the new Regulation on the EGF (2014-2020) and that greater efficiency, transparency, visibility and follow-up of the EGF will be achieved;
Amendment 12 #
2012/2160(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls the institutions’ commitment to ensuring a smooth and rapid procedure for the adoption of the decisions on the mobilisation of the EGF, providing one- off, time-limited individual support geared to helping workers who have been made redundant as a result of globalisation and the financial and economic crisis; emphasises the role that the EGF can play in the reintegration of workers made redundant into the labour market;
Amendment 13 #
2012/2160(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. NotWelcomes the fact that following repeated requests from Parliament, the 2012 budget shows payment appropriations of EUR 50 000 000 on the EGF budget line 04 05 01, of which EUR 9 000 000 has been paid out to date in 2012; ; recalls that the EGF was created as a separate specific instrument with its own objectives and deadlines and therefore deserves a dedicated allocation, which will avoid transfers from other budget lines, as happened in the past, which could be detrimental to the achievement of the policy objectives of the EGF;
Amendment 14 #
2012/2160(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Regrets the decision of the Council to block the extension of the "crisis derogation", allowing to provide financial assistance to workers made redundant as a result of the current financial and economic crisis in addition to those losing their job because of changes in global trade patterns, and allowing the increase in the rate of Union co-financing to 65% of the programme costs, for applications submitted after the 31 December 2011 deadline, and calls on the Council to reintroduce this measure without delay;
Amendment 70 #
2012/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas there is great concern about the difficult economic and financial situation in which several Member States find themselves, aggravated by the doubts around the EMU and the continuous strains on the sovereign bond markets reflected in high interest borrowing rates for some countries and considerable financial and economic instability;
Amendment 82 #
2012/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
Ha. Whereas the crisis has very clearly shown four main shortcomings in the current design of the euro area: (i) lack of stabilisation mechanisms to deal with asymmetric shocks within the Union; (ii) national responsibilities for banking supervision and crisis management in the absence of a European backstop; (iii) fragmentation and frictions in the working of European sovereign debt markets; and (iv) weaknesses in the governance of the European fiscal discipline framework;
Amendment 216 #
2012/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital AH a (new)
Recital AH a (new)
AHa. whereas Member States suffer from an apparent mismatch between banks carrying out operations on a European market basis, and contingent liabilities shouldered by their sovereigns; whereas during the current crisis it has become self-evident that the bank-sovereign link is stronger and more damaging within a monetary union, where the internal exchange rate is fixed and there exists no mechanism at Union level to alleviate the costs of bank restructuring.
Amendment 219 #
2012/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital AI
Recital AI
AI. whereas breaking up the negative feedback loops between sovereigns, banks and the real economy is crucial for a smooth functioning of EMU; whereas the euro area should establish common tools and pools to restructure and resolve troubled banks, without pushing sovereigns out of the markets and digging economies into depression;
Amendment 221 #
2012/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital AI a (new)
Recital AI a (new)
AIa. whereas the crisis has created a dispersion of lending rates and has also de facto fragmented the single market for financial services;
Amendment 222 #
2012/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital AI b (new)
Recital AI b (new)
AIb. whereas advancing towards a euro area banking union would contribute to allay these concerns and it would reduce the probability of troubled banks resulting in disorderly failure due to a weak sovereign, diminish the risk of sovereign collapse, facilitate a consistent approach to cross border coordination, and the financial stability would be significantly enhanced;
Amendment 249 #
2012/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital AN a (new)
Recital AN a (new)
ANa. whereas the role of lender of last resort is still conferred to national central banks, despite monetary policy being decided by the Eurosystem; whereas the implementation of emergency liquidity assistance (ELA) requires complex ad hoc arrangements prone to execution risks and conflicts with monetary policy objectives;
Amendment 251 #
2012/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital AN b (new)
Recital AN b (new)
ANb. whereas the development of a banking union should correct this anachronism by formally conferring the role of lender of last resort to the ECB, without endangering its price stability objective; whereas the ECB should set rules on the granting of ELA, which would allow it to improve transparency on its use and to prevent moral hazard more efficiently;
Amendment 352 #
2012/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital BH
Recital BH
BH. whereas a single deposit guarantee scheme should cover all banks within the countries included in the system in order to guarantee a level playing field and avoid deposit flight from uncovered to covered financial institutions, be partly financed by banks ex ante by levies or contributions till it has sufficient resources to provide a credible guarantee, and have access to ESM funding if necessary;
Amendment 409 #
2012/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital -BS a (new)
Recital -BS a (new)
-BSa. whereas five years on from the burst of turmoil in financial markets, the euro area lingers in crisis, lagging far behind other economic areas on the track to recovery, and to a large extent this is due to flaws in the current EMU framework;
Amendment 410 #
2012/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital -BS b (new)
Recital -BS b (new)
-BSb. whereas in this regard, the report Towards a Genuine Economic and Monetary Union presented by the Four Presidents to the European Council marks an important step forward, as it acknowledges that "the smooth functioning of the EMU requires not only the swift and vigorous implementation of the measures already agreed under the reinforced economic governance framework (notably the Stability and Growth Pact and the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance), but also a qualitative move towards a fiscal union";
Amendment 411 #
2012/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital -BS c (new)
Recital -BS c (new)
-BSc. whereas in line with the report "Towards a genuine Economic and Monetary Union" a fully-fledged fiscal union should include a risk-sharing arrangement through a common budget or backstop, enhanced fiscal oversight through a joint decision-making and oversight by a European Budget Authority, and debt pooling mechanisms that would result in the creation of a single sovereign debt market;
Amendment 436 #
2012/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital BV a (new)
Recital BV a (new)
BVa. whereas in order to ensure adequate implementation of fiscal policies and regulations, a European Budget Authority could be mandated to oversee budget execution by national governments;
Amendment 462 #
2012/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital BZ a (new)
Recital BZ a (new)
BZa. whereas pooling debt would address many of the factors that have exacerbated the current crisis. It would reduce the risks of sovereigns being cut off from the markets, limit the strain from rising funding costs, and create a liquid and efficient market of safe assets for the financial sector;
Amendment 471 #
2012/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital CA a (new)
Recital CA a (new)
CAa. whereas if Member States are to move further towards pooling resources and sharing risks, fiscal policy-making should also be pooled to a certain extent, as Member States would be jointly assuming the consequences of an asymmetric shock that affects any of them, the design of the fiscal paths should also be decided jointly and debt issuance should be authorised in advance;
Amendment 473 #
2012/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital CA b (new)
Recital CA b (new)
CAb. whereas delegating debt issuance to a European Budget Authority, mechanisms to deal with moral hazard would be strengthened, it would be easier to enforce penalties against non- compliant Member States as their access to funds obtained from debt markets could be restrained or halted;
Amendment 536 #
2012/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital CH a (new)
Recital CH a (new)
CHa. whereas to benefit of the full growth potential of the Union economy is necessary to complete the internal market specially in areas such as services, energy, telecommunications, standardisation, simplification of public procurement rules, network industries, e-commerce, and copyright regime;
Amendment 541 #
2012/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital CI
Recital CI
CI. whereas it is important that the recovery of the economy goes along with a labour market policy that reduces structural unemployment, especially for youth, old persons and women,; whereas in that sense the integration of labour markets of the Member States should be fostered to enhance cross-border labour mobility;
Amendment 35 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Gives mandate to its delegation for the Budget 2013 conciliation not to accept any level of payments both for the Amending budget XX/2012 and the Budget 2013 that does not fully cover the payment needs for 2012 and 2013, as those are estimated by the Commission;
Amendment 55 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Stresses the substantial added value of the Lifelong Learning and Erasmus Mundus programmes, which, against modest financial envelopes, provide great returns in terms of effective implementation and positive image of the Union vis-à-vis its citizens; in line with its established position in the last budgetary procedures, decides to increase appropriations both in CA and in PA for these programme above DB, considering their high absorption capacity;
Amendment 10 #
2012/2000(BUD)
3. Recalls that the European Union’s budget is one of the most important instruments of solidarity between Member States and between generations, and that it provides a clear added value, given its extraordinary impact on the real economy and daily lives of European citizensbased on a transnational outlook, on the possibility to achieve synergies and economies of scale, and on best practices sharing; recalls that if the Union’s policies were to be financed solely by Member States, their costs would skyrocket and that, seen in this light, the European budget intrinsically represents a clear common saving for the wellbeing of all; takes the view that austerity measures undertaken at national level should not automatically lead to an equivalent decrease at EU level, since one euro spent at this level can generate savings in the 27 Member States;
Amendment 33 #
2012/2000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Underlines that investments in high European added value infrastructures in the fields of transports, energy and telecommunications have a strong potential for growth, both directly and indirectly, by creating jobs and activity during the building phase and strengthening the competitiveness of the European economy as a whole;
Amendment 50 #
2012/2000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Stresses that the EU budget represents an investment solely directed towards policies and actions demonstrating EU added value; draws attention to the fact that the EU budget – which cannot run into deficit – has a leverage effect on growth and employment much higher than that of national spending, as does its capacity to gear up investment, deliver stability in Europe and help the EU out of the current economic and financial crisis; underlines the fact, moreover, that new financial instrumentshighlights the increasing relevance of innovative financial instruments to compensate budgetary constraints at national level, in that they further enhance the leverage effect of EU spending’s contribution to growth by attracting private investment, thus optimising public spending;
Amendment 1 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph - 1 (new)
Paragraph - 1 (new)
-1. Underlines that the aim of the Common Strategic Framework is to cover all relevant EU research and innovation funding currently provided through FP7, CIP and EU initiatives such as EIT on the basis of coherent goals and shared strategic objectives;
Amendment 3 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that the Structural and Cohesion Funds canshould complement EU research and innovation funds but cannot replace them, and, because the principal aims of the respective funds differ, they should continue to be separate during the future multi-annual financial framework (MFF) while creating greater synergies between them;
Amendment 7 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the Commission's proposals on extending the use of innovative financial instruments to strengthen the leverage of the EU budget while fully respecting the rights of the budgetary and discharge authorities; asks the Commission to improve access for primary target groups such as SMEs; demands that any SME-specific bankaction should function under the umbrella of the EIB; expresses its reservations about so-called ‘soft loans’ blurring the distinction between grants and loans;
Amendment 13 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that a risk-averse culture of EU research funding would prevent financing of high-risk research ideas with the greatest potential for breakthroughs, and therefore advocates a trust-based approach with higher tolerance for risk and failure – involving, for example, more frequent use of prizes the use of prizes without substituting properly structured funding – in preference to a purely results- based approach, which is at odds with the very nature of innovative scientific research;
Amendment 15 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is convinced that horizontal simplification activities throughout all research and innovation programmes should be one of the highest priorities for the new programme period together with measures to ensure flexibility, and draws attention to the important decisions on simplification to be taken in the ongoing procedure of revising the Financial Regulation, on issues including simplifying the rules on pre-financing and on eligibility of costs and increasing the scope for awarding research prizes; emphasises the need for further simplification of application procedures and control mechanisms, for the benefit of applicants to European research and innovation programmes;
Amendment 18 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Asks the Commission to build ‘stairways to excellence’ for all potential research and innovation players in those Member States with a low rate of participation in FP 7, including by encouraging more effective use of the Structural and Cohesion Funds in this respect; underlines the importance of trans-national cooperation through collaborative projects and stresses the need to develop dedicated actions to foster excellence across Europe;
Amendment 19 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Reiterates its position that, with regard to the MFF post-2013, the financial resources dedicated to large-scale projects such as ITER and Galileo should be fixed for the whole programming period and ring-fenced so, in order to ensure their planning continuity and organisation stability; believes that any cost overrun must be financed with fresh money through employing budgetary flexibility, as opposed to the redeployment of funds at the expense of other programmes such assmaller successful programmes like in the fields of research and innovation;
Amendment 23 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Strongly supports a further substantial increase in the EU's annual budgets for research and innovation, as these have been proven to deliver excellent European added value and to aid recovery from the economic crisis; emphasises that the Europe 2020 strategy for growth and jobs, adopted by the Council, clearly states the need for additional funds for research and innovation.
Amendment 30 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. stresses the importance to further promote the complementarity between EU and national R&D funding; in this regard, calls for greater coordination at EU and the national level, through enhanced joint programming efforts, agreed common standards, and faster, more flexible and simpler instruments to allow co-funding;
Amendment 31 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Amendment 1 #
2011/2043(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. While fully respecting the rights of the budgetary and discharge authorities, welcomes the RSFF and other innovative financial instruments which strengthen the leverage of the EU budget; emphasises the need for working delivery mechanisms for these; asks the Commission to improve access for primary target groups such as SMEs;
Amendment 5 #
2011/2043(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3b (new)
Paragraph 3b (new)
3b. Is convinced that simplification should be one of the highest priorities of the midterm review of FP7;
Amendment 6 #
2011/2043(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Asks the Commission to improve access for primary target groups such as SMEs; Stresses the need for further efforts in the field of research infrastructure, benefitting also SMEs and industry; Highlights the need of simplifying administrative procedures to promote the participation and to increase the number of applications of smaller organisations and SMEs.
Amendment 10 #
2011/2043(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5a (new)
Paragraph 5a (new)
5a. Stresses that the design and implementation of the current FP7 and future Framework Programmes must be based on the principles of simplicity, stability, legal certainty, consistency, excellence and trust.
Amendment 14 #
2011/2043(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Recommends simplified interpretation and further clarification on the definition of eligible costs; Calls on more precise, consistent and transparent rules of procedure for audits;
Amendment 15 #
2011/2043(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Asks the Commission rapidly to resolve prior situations arising from inspections in progress, acting with discernment and respect for the principles of sound financial management;
Amendment 15 #
2011/0428(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Those Union funding programmes cannot address all environmental and climate action specific needs. For environment and climate action, specific approaches are required to deal with uneven integration of their objectives into Member States practice, uneven and inadequate implementation of the legislation in the Member States, and insufficient dissemination and promotion of policy goals. It is appropriate to continue the LIFE Programme regulated by Regulation (EC) No 614/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 May 2007 concerning the Financial Instrument for the Environment (LIFE+) and adopt a new Regulation. Therefore, this Regulation should establish a dedicated funding Programme for the Environment and Climate Action (the ‘LIFE Programme’). With the aim of achieving substantial impact of Union funding, close synergies and complementarity should be developed between the "LIFE Programme" and Union programmes, in particular Horizon 2020 and the Structural Funds.
Amendment 17 #
2011/0428(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) In order to improve the implementation of environmental and climate policy and enhance the integration of environmental and climate objectives in other policies, the LIFE Programme should promote projects that support integrated approaches to the implementation of environmental and climate legislation and policy. For the sub-programme for Environment, those projects should focus primarily on the implementation of the Union Biodiversity Strategy to 2020, with particular regard to the effective management and consolidation of the Natura2000 network set up by Council Directive 92/43/EEC through the implementation of Prioritised Action Frameworks foreseen in Article 8 of the same Directive, of Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy, and of the Waste and Air legislation. Those projects, while focusing on the themes identified, will be multi-purpose delivery mechanism (e.g. aiming at environmental benefits and capacity building) allowing to reach results in other policy areas, in particular Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of marine environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive). Those types of projects could be envisaged in other environmental areas. For the sub-programme for Climate Action, those projects should in particular concern climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies and action plans. Those types of projects should support only a series of specific activities and measures, while other activities that complement those included in the project should be sourced from other Union funding programmes, as well as from national, regional and private sector funds. Funding through the LIFE Programme should exploit synergies and ensure consistency between different Union funding sources by providing a strategic environmental and climate focus being also important to ensure an effective simplification of procedures.
Amendment 22 #
2011/0428(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission and the Member States shall ensure that support from the LIFE Programme is consistent with the policies and priorities of the Union and complementary to other instruments of the Union being of utmost importance the implementation of simplification measures.
Amendment 23 #
2011/0428(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3
Article 8 – paragraph 3
3. In accordance with their respective responsibilities, the Commission and the Member States shall ensure coordination between the LIFE Programme and the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development, and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and the Horizon 2020, in order to create synergies, particularly in the context of Integrated Projects referred to in Article 18 point (d), and to support the use of solutions, methods and approaches developed under the LIFE Programme. At Union level, coordination shall take place within the Common Strategic Framework referred to in Article 10 of Regulation (EU) No…. (CSF Regulation).
Amendment 26 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The Union is committed to achieving the Europe 2020 strategy, which has set the objectives of smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, highlighting the role of research and innovation as key drivers of social and economic prosperity and of environmental sustainability and setting itself the goal to increase spending on Research and Development to reach 3 % of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2020 while developing an innovation intensity indicator. In this context, the Innovation Union flagship initiative sets out a strategic and integrated approach to research and innovation, setting the framework and objectives to which future Union research and innovation funding should contribute. Research and innovation are also key factors for other Europe 2020 flagship initiatives, notably on resource efficient Europe, an industrial policy for the globalisation era, and a digital agenda for Europe. Moreover, for achieving the Europe 2020 objectives relating to research and innovation, Cohesion policy has a key role to play through building capacity and providing a stairway to excellence thereby the importance of fostering stronger synergies and complementarity with the structural funds.
Amendment 28 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) At its meeting of 4 February 2011, the European Council supported the concept of the Common Strategic Framework for Union Research and Innovation funding to improve the efficiency of research and innovation funding at national and Union levels and called on the Union to rapidly address remaining obstacles to attracting talent and investment in order to complete the ERA by 2014 and achieve a genuine single market for knowledge, research and innovation. This requires increasing significantly the budget for the next 7- year period to reinforce the innovation capacity of the EU while attracting significant private sector funds for its activities.
Amendment 28 #
2011/0400(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Article 7 of the Euratom Treaty entrusts the Commission with the responsibility of carrying out the Euratom Programme. For the purposes of implementing the Euratom Programme, except its direct actions, the Commission should be assisted by a consultative committee of Member States to ensure appropriate coordination with national policies in the areas covered by this research and training programme and to foster strong synergies and complementarities between European, national and regional funds.
Amendment 15 #
2011/0384(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1a) The EIT budget allocation for the next 7-year period should be increased significantly. While increasing its budget the EIT will also attract significant private sector funds for its activities, hence, reinforcing the innovation capacity of the EU.
Amendment 19 #
2011/0384(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The scope of the EIT contribution to the Knowledge and Innovation Communities (hereinafter referred to as KICs) should be defined and the origins of KICs' financial resources clarified. EIT should build greater synergy and as much complementarity as possible with the structural funds.
Amendment 20 #
2011/0384(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13a) Excellence should be the main driver for EIT as a whole while promoting the widening of participation in order to stimulate excellence across Europe, including the concept of "stairway to excellence", to encourage the participation of strong units of embryonic excellence.
Amendment 21 #
2011/0384(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) The criteria and procedures for the financing, monitoring and evaluation of the activities of the KICs should be adopted by the EIT prior to launching the KIC selection process being of utmost importance the implementation of simplification measures.
Amendment 23 #
2011/0384(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 7
Article 1 – point 7
Regulation (EC) No 294/2008
Article 7a
Article 7a
The EIT, shall on the basis of key performance indicators and in cooperation with the Commission, organise continuous monitoring and periodic external evaluations of the outputs, results and impact of each KIC. In order to improve the delivery of the EIT outputs, the activities performed by the KICs shall have a measurable impact on the creation of sustainable innovative start ups and spin-offs, notably by way of supporting the networking and entrepreneurial activities of the receivers of EIT degrees and trainings.
Amendment 703 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex – Part I – point b – row 10
Annex – Part I – point b – row 10
Amendment 878 #
2011/0294(COD)
add the following multimodal platforms to the comprehensive network: – Pontevedra – Zalia – Torrelavega – Júndiz – Monzón – El Vallés – El Prat – El Gorguel – Ciudad Real – Albacete – San Roque – Mérida – Ponferrada/El Bierzo – Castellón – Alicante – Benavente – Zamora – Miranda de Ebro – Burgos – Palencia – Área Central – Aranda de Duero – Soria – Arévalo – Ávila – Segovia
Amendment 879 #
2011/0294(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Volume 16/33
Annex I – Volume 16/33
add the following rail freight transport sections to the core network: – Almería – Málaga – Algeciras (along the coast) – Granada – Motril – Castejón – Logroño – Miranda – León – Gijón / Avilés – Palencia – Santander – Madrid – Cáceres – Mérida – Mérida – Badajoz – Portuguese border – Mora – Ciudad Real – Mérida
Amendment 881 #
2011/0294(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Volume 16/33
Annex I – Volume 16/33
Amendment 891 #
2011/0294(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Volume 17/33
Annex I – Volume 17/33
add the following rail passenger transport sections to the core network: – Madrid – Toledo – Madrid – Alcázar – Albacete – Murcia – Almería – Málaga – Algeciras (along the coast) – Avilés – Oviedo – Bilbao – Santander – Oviedo – El Ferrol – A Coruña – Castejón – Logroño – Miranda – Mora – Alcázar – Linares – Moreda/Jaén/Córdoba – Ourense – Vigo (via Cercedo) – Ourense – Monforte – Lugo – A Coruña – Palencia – Santander – Segovia – Ávila – Sevilla – Cádiz – Sevilla – Huelva – Portuguese border – Valencia – Alicante (along the coast) – Motilla – Albacete – La Encina – Santiago – Vigo – Portuguese border – Granada – Motril – Antequera – Málaga – Madrid – Ávila – Salamanca – León – Monforte – Torralba – Soria – Castejón – Plasencia – León – Gijón
Amendment 243 #
2011/0203(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 86 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c
Article 86 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c
Amendment 457 #
2011/0203(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 124 – paragraph 2
Article 124 – paragraph 2
2. Institutions shall meet the requirement imposed by paragraph 1 with Common Equity Tier 1 capital, or other loss absorbing items such as provisions in excess over expected losses, which shall be additional to any Common Equity Tier 1 capital maintained to meet the own funds requirement imposed by Article 87 of Regulation [inserted by OP(EU) No. .../2012 of ... [on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms], the requirement to maintain a Capital Conservation Buffer under Article 123 and any requirement imposed under Article 100.
Amendment 266 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The competent authorities shallmay waive in full or in part the application of Article 401 to a parent institution and to all or some of its subsidiaries in the European Union and supervise them as a single liquidity sub- group so long as they fulfil all of the following conditions:
Amendment 424 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) the amount to be deducted shall be reduced by the amount of software classified as intangible assets under the relevant accounting standards.
Amendment 426 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 35 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. The amount of Deferred tax assets that derive from a countercyclical provisioning accounting system will not require deduction in accordance with this article.
Amendment 540 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 80 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part
Article 80 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part
(a) the amount of Tier 1 capital of the subsidiary minus the lower of the following:
Amendment 556 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 82 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part
Article 82 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part
(a) the own Funds of the subsidiary minus the lower of the following:
Amendment 917 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 400 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 400 – paragraph 1 – point 2
(2) ‘'Retail deposit’' means a liability to a natural person or to a small and medium sized enterprise where the aggregate liability to such clients or group of connected clients is less than 1 million EUR.as defined by the IRB approach in the capital framework
Amendment 968 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 404 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 404 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) assets that are eligible for Central Banks' pledging, subject to the haircut applied by the Central Bank.
Amendment 1073 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 405 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 405 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
The institution shall only report as liquid assets those holdings of liquid assets that meet the following conditions:test on a regular basis the conditions that follow, providing disclosure to Supervisory Authorities with outcomes of controls performed, in order to allow Supervisory Authorities to assess if specific haircuts should be applied;
Amendment 1074 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 405 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 405 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 1078 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 405 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 405 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 1083 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 405 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 405 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) they are legally and practically readily available at any time during the next 30 days to be liquidated via outright sale or repurchase agreements in order to meet obligations coming due. Liquid assets referred to in point (c) of Article 404 which are held in third countries where there are transfer restrictions or which are denominated in non-convertible currencies shall be considered available only to the extent that they correspond to outflows in the third country or currency in question; unless the Institution can demonstrate to the Competent Authorities that it has appropriately hedged the ensuing currency risk.
Amendment 1084 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 405 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 405 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the liquid assets are controlled by a liquidity management function; or are subject to appropriate internal arrangements that ensure that they are readily available to the treasury function in case of a crisis.
Amendment 1085 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 405 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 405 – paragraph 1 – point e
Amendment 1091 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 405 – paragraph 1 – point f – introductory part
Article 405 – paragraph 1 – point f – introductory part
(f) price risks associated with the assets may be hedged but the liquid assets are subject to appropriate internal arrangements that ensure that they will not be used in other ongoing operations, including: (i) hedging or oare readily available to ther trading strategies; (ii) providing credit enhancements in structured transactions; (iii) to cover operational costeasury function in case of a crisis.
Amendment 1095 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 405 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 405 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) the denomination of the liquid assets is consistent with the distribution by currency of liquidity outflows after the deduction of capped inflows.
Amendment 1103 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 408 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 408 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the percentages of the current amounts outstanding of other liabilities that come due, can be called for payout or entail an imexplicit expectation of the provider of the funding that the institution would repay the liability during the next 30 daysmonth rolling as set out in Article 410;
Amendment 1105 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 408 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 408 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the percentage of the maximum amount that can be drawn during the next 30 days from undrawn committed credit and liquidity facilities that qualify as medium or medium to low risk under Annex I, as set out in Article 412;
Amendment 1114 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 409 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 409 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Institutions shall multiply the amount of retail deposits that are covered by a Deposit Guarantee Scheme according to Directive 94/19/EG or an equivalent deposit guarantee scheme in a third country by at least 5% where the deposit is either
Amendment 1116 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 409 – paragraph 4
Article 409 – paragraph 4
4. Notwithstanding what is specified under Article 409 (1) and (2), Institutions shall multiply retail deposits that they have taken in third countries by a higher percentage than provided for in paragraphs 1 and 2 if such percentage is provided by comparable third country reporting requirements.
Amendment 1121 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 410 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 410 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) 0% up to the value of the liquid assets according to Article 406;the applicable haircut as specified in Article 406 for liquid assets
Amendment 1128 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 410 – paragraph 3
Article 410 – paragraph 3
3. Institutions shall multiply liabilities resulting from secured lending and capital market driven transactions as defined in Article 188 by 25% if the assets would not qualify as liquid assets according to Article 404 and the lender is the central bank or another public sector entity of the Member State in which the credit institution was authorised.
Amendment 1136 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 410 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph – point b a (new)
Article 410 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph – point b a (new)
(ba) by the depositor in the context of an established operational relationship other than that mentioned under point (a);
Amendment 1139 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 410 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Article 410 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 1150 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 410 – paragraph 5
Article 410 – paragraph 5
5. Institutions shall multiply liabilities resulting from deposits by clients that are not financial customers by 750% to the extent they do not fall under paragraph 4.
Amendment 1154 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 410 – paragraph 6
Article 410 – paragraph 6
6. Institutions shall take payables and receivables expected over the 30 daynext month rolling horizon from the contracts listed in Annex II into account on a net basis across counterparties and shall multiply them by 100% in case of a net amount payable. Net basis shall mean also net of collateral to be received that qualifies as liquid assets under Article 404.
Amendment 1156 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 410 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 410 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
All notes, bonds and other debt securities issued by the bank are included in this category regardless of the holder, unless the bond is exclusively in the retail market and held in retail accounts, in which case instruments can be treated in the appropriate retail deposit category.
Amendment 1161 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 410 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 410 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) there are reasons to expect a lower outflow over the next 30 daysmonth rolling even under combined idiosyncratic and market- wide stress scenario;
Amendment 1163 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 410 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Article 410 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Amendment 1190 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 413 – paragraph 1
Article 413 – paragraph 1
1. Institutions shall report their capped liquidity inflows. Capped liquidity inflows shall be the liquidity inflows limited to 75% of liquidity outflows. Institutions may exempt liquidity inflows from deposits placed with other institutions and qualifying for the treatments set out in Article 108(6) or Article 108(7) from this limit.
Amendment 1200 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 413 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 413 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The liquidity inflows shall be measured over the next 30 daysmonth rolling. They shall comprise only contractual inflows from exposures that are not past due and for which the bank has no reason to expect non- performance within the 30-day timenext month rolling horizon. The inflow shall be taken into account in full with the exception of the following:
Amendment 1206 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 413 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 413 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) monies due from customers that are not financial customers shall be reduced by 50% of their value or by the contractual commitments to those customers to extend funding, whichever is higher. This does not apply to monies due from secured lending and capital market driven transactions as defined in Article 188 that are collateralised by liquid assets according to Article 404;
Amendment 1211 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 413 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 413 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(b a) monies due from secured lending and capital market driven transactions as defined in Article 188 if they are collateralised by assets which do not qualify as liquid assets according to Article 404 but which meet the requirements of Article 404(3)(b), shall be reduced by [50%];
Amendment 1219 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 413 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 413 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Notwithstanding paragraph 2, monies from assets which do not qualify as liquid assets according to Article 404 but which meet the requirements of Article 404(3)(b) shall be taken as inflow for [50%] of the value of such assets.
Amendment 1221 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 413 – paragraph 3
Article 413 – paragraph 3
3. Payables and receivables expected over the 30 day horizonnext month rolling from the contracts listed in Annex II shall be reflected on a net basis across counterparties and shall be multiplied by 100% of a net amount receivable. Net basis shall mean also net of collateral to be received that qualifies as liquid assets under Article 404.
Amendment 1223 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 413 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 413 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Competent authorities may grant the permission to apply, by derogation from paragraph 2 point c), a higher inflow on a case by case basis for credit, deposits and liquidity facilities when all of the following conditions are fulfilled:
Amendment 1229 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 413 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 413 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Amendment 1231 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 413 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 413 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Amendment 1387 #
2011/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 444
Article 444
Amendment 7 #
2011/0183(CNS)
Draft decision
Recital 8 b (new)
Recital 8 b (new)
Amendment 13 #
2011/0183(CNS)
Draft decision
Recital 8 e (new)
Recital 8 e (new)
Amendment 31 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5a (new)
Paragraph 5a (new)
5a. Considers that the Union has been particularly affected by the successive financial crises of the past four years partly because financial operators, international partners as well as the public opinion have put in question the level of solidarity within the EU; believes that the EU budget should be at the heart of such solidarity; is convinced, therefore, that the decision on the next MFF can either have a significant positive impact on the efforts made by national governments to overcome the crisis or lead to a further recession of the EU;
Amendment 46 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that delivering on the Europe 2020 strategy’s seven flagship initiatives will require a huge amount of future- oriented investment, estimated at no less than EUR 1 800 billion up to 2020 ; stresses that one of the main objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy, namely, to promote jobsgrowth and high-quality employment for all Europeans, will only be achieved if the necessary investment in education, in favour of a knowledge society, and in research and innovation, SMEs, and green and new technologies is made now and not delayed any longer; favours combining the reduction of public deficits and debt with the promotion of such investments;
Amendment 66 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Strongly rejects, therefore, any attempt by the Council to reduce further the level of EU expenditure as proposed by the Commission; firmly opposes, in particular, any plead for linear, across-the- board cuts that would jeopardise the implementation and effectiveness of all EU policies, irrespective of their European added value, political weight or performance; instead, challenges the Council, in case it proposes cuts, to clearly and publicly identify which of its political priorities or projects should be dropped altogether;
Amendment 77 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20a (new)
Paragraph 20a (new)
20a. Stresses that a strong and diversified industrial base is key to achieving the objective of creating a competitive, sustainable and inclusive European economy; recalls that SMEs are key drivers of economic growth, competitiveness, innovation and employment and recognises their important role in ensuring recovery and boosting of a sustainable EU economy; welcomes, therefore, the emphasis put by the Europe 2020 strategy on innovation and industrial policy; strongly rejects any attempt to further decrease the allocation for programmes, such as COSME, that are at the heart of European competitiveness and employment;
Amendment 90 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Emphasises that interoperability and synergies between EU cohesion policy and other EU programmes, such as. Horizon 2020, COSME or CEF, must be further promoted; is convinced that such synergies will maximise the uptake of available EU funds in all Member States and, therefore, lead to growth across the Union’s territory;
Amendment 131 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Stresses the need to ensure coherence between sector-specific rules and the overall framework of the Financial Regulation and to strike a balance between simplification and sound financial management; welcomestakes note of the simplification scoreboard issued by the Commission, and confirms its determination to support the simplification agenda; is convinced of the need to further reduce the administrative burdens on beneficiaries, and calls for the implementation of ‘bureaucracy checks’ before the adoption of binding EU rules;
Amendment 159 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Takes the view that for the next MFF, a 7- year period set until 2020, should be considered as a transitional solution asgiven that it makes a clear link with the Europe 2020 strategy; believes, however, that a 5- or a 5+5 year period would better align the MFF’s duration with that of the institutions’ terms of office, thereby enhancing democratic accountability and responsibility;
Amendment 161 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 a (new)
Paragraph 40 a (new)
40a. Stresses, however, that its decision to accept a 7-year period for the next MFF will be conditional on both a sufficient level of resources and a maximum level of flexibility in the next framework; is of the opinion that the lower the ceilings and the lesser the flexibility, the shorter the MFF duration should be;
Amendment 3 #
2010/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas in response to the increase in unemployment resulting from the economic and financial crisis and to the lessons learned from the experience gained in 2007 and 2008, the European Union amended the rules governing the use of the EGF in June 2009; whereas that amendment consisted in temporarilycerned all applications to be submitted before 31 December 2011 and consisted in broadening the scope of the EGF, relaxing and clarifying the intervention criteria, temporarily raising the co- financing rate and extending the period during which Member States may use the financial contributions provided,
Amendment 8 #
2010/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the raising of the co-financing rate from 50% to 65% during the 2009 revision would appear to be one of the factors behind the increase in the number of applications concerning Competitiveness Objective regions; whereas, however, that change has not had a similar multiplier effect in Convergence Objective regions,
Amendment 11 #
2010/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the limited use made of the EGF for the EU's poorest regions stems from varying national strategies linked to the co-financing rates available under the ESF and the EGF andstems also from the difficulties involved in establishing the precise status of potential beneficiaries before a decision is taken at European level,
Amendment 12 #
2010/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas, according to the Commission's interim report on the functioning of the IAA12, the need for the two arms of the budgetary authority to take a specific decision to mobilise the EGF is one of the factors behind the slowness of the procedure, whereas, however, the Council and the European Parliament are obliged to take a decision for the mobilisation of the EGF within a deadline of six weeks (linked to the deadline for transfers imposed by Article 24 of the Financial Regulation), while the Commission is bound by no deadline for the assessment of each EGF application,
Amendment 16 #
2010/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
Amendment 24 #
2010/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Takes the view that the EGF's added value as an EU social policy instrument lies in the fact that it provides specific and targeted financial support for personalised programmes for the reskilling and re- integration into employment of workers affected by collective redundancies in sectors or regions undergoing severe economic and social disruption; stresses that EGF was established as a flexible, one-off support instrument that was meant to respond more quickly and effectively to extraordinary and urgent circumstances when mass-redundancies occur in a Member State;
Amendment 26 #
2010/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Takes the view that the long-term increase in the number of applications for EGF funding and the difficulties experienced in implementing the EGF mobilisation and deployment procedure call for improvements to be made to the fund's procedural and budgetary arrangements at the earliest opportunity; calls, accordingly, on the Commission to bring the submission of its mid-term evaluation forward to 30 June 2011 and to submit at the same time a proposal for the revision of the EGF Regulation, in order to remedy the fund's most obvious shortcomings before the end of the current multiannual financial framework;
Amendment 32 #
2010/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to evaluate the contributions granted with reference to, among other things: the assessment of skills upgrading of workers; the beneficiaries' re- integration into employment; the difference between the number of potential beneficiaries and the number of workers that have received support and possibly other reasons for explaining the large amounts of EGF assistance that were not implemented and, subsequently, paid back by the beneficiary Member States; the disparities between Member States in terms of the funding provided per worker and the reasons for those disparities; compliance with the non- discrimination criterion with reference to the contractual position of the workers made redundant; the procedures for consulting the social partners that were or were not used when preparing applications and the checks carried out on their implementation; the amount and execution rate of possible ESF financing that has been allocated to the same region as the EGF assistance; and the procedures for verifying the implementation of contributions and any repayments Member States are requested to make; calls on the Commission to reflect the findings of that evaluation in its proposal for the revision of the regulation;
Amendment 39 #
2010/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that the time required to mobilise the EGF could be halved and that, to this end, applications for mobilisation of the EGF should be drawn up by Member States as soon as a collective redundancy has been announced, and not after it has taken place, so as to reduce the 10-week period Member States have in which to forward their applications once the intervention criteria have been fulfilled; considers that Member States should forward their applications in their own language and one of the European institutions' working languages, so that the Commission department responsible for scrutinising applications may do so without delay, and; believes that the Commission should be bound by a six-month delay for assessing each EGF application and that all means should be made available to ensure a better communication with the Member State concerned in this process; considers that the Commission should assign additional staff to processing applications submitted by Member States and should scrupulously observe the time limit of 15 days between the adoption of a mobilisation decision and the payment of the financial contribution to the Member State;
Amendment 42 #
2010/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Requests that the Commission indicate clearly the financing from other community sources (e.g. from the ERDF or the ESF) in the same geographical area where EGF assistance is also provided, in order to ensure more transparency on the complementarity between the different funds;
Amendment 44 #
2010/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Undertakes, for its part, to simplify its decision-making process by stipulating that, in the absence of objections by the Committee on Budgets orand the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, Commission proposals will be voted on at the first part-session following the month in which they are submitted, where appropriate grouped into batches, as explicitly provided for should examine and vote as soon as possible on the Commission proposals, in order to proceed to a plenary vote without any delay; calls on the Commission, therefore, to take due account of the EP calendar, both with regard to the Budget Committee meetings as well as the part-sessions, when submitting its proposals, in order to speed up the decision-making procedure; stresses that any revision of the EGF should not undermine the regulation establishing the EGFole of the European Parliament, as Budgetary Authority, in the mobilisation of this fund;
Amendment 48 #
2010/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Notes the significant disparities in the EGF funding per worker between different Member States; urges the Commission to examine this phenomenon and to recommend possible solutions on how a more equivalent support to all beneficiaries could be achieved; calls, at the same time, on the Commission to improve the knowledge on this Fund among all Member States, so that they can make use of this possibility should the need arise;
Amendment 49 #
2010/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Notes the inclusion, for the first time, in the Commission's Draft Budget 2011 of payment appropriations for the EGF and considers this an important element in the overall reflection on the management and visibility of this fund; considers, however, that these payment appropriations might not be sufficient to cover the amounts necessary for EGF applications in 2011; reiterates, therefore, its demand not to finance EGF applications exclusively through transfers from ESF lines and calls on the Commission to identify and use without further delay different budget lines for this purpose;
Amendment 53 #
2010/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Takes the view that, over and above these improvements to the procedure, the period of validity of the derogation inserted in 2009 with a view to assisting workers who lose their jobs as a result of the economic and financial crisis should be extended until the end of the current multiannual financial framework and that the co-financing rate should be r, therefore, be maintaisned from 50% to 65%, given that the underlying causes on which their approval was based are very far from having been removed, and that ESF Convergence Objective regions should be eligible for 75% co- financing under the EGF, in order to diminish the current bias in favour of the ESF;
Amendment 57 #
2010/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Wishes the EGF to be made a pStresses that the future of the EGF will be determainent fund in the next multiannual financial framework,d in the framework of negotiations for the next MFF; considers that for this purpose several options could be examined, such as the creation of an independent fund with its own commitment and payment appropriations, instead of on which depends so that it does not depend solely on the non- utilisation or under-utilisation of appropriations from previous financial years, or the integration of EGF into the future ESF; believes that any future reform of the EGF should maintain its flexibility, which currently represents a comparative advantage to the EU Structural Funds;
Amendment 68 #
2010/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Considers that, despite a recent increase in the applications for EGF assistance, the EGF remains largely unknown in many Member States; urges the Commission, therefore, to launch an information campaign and promote success stories and best practices from the operation of EGF assistance on the ground; believes that further action needs to be taken to increase the visibility of the EGF across the Union;
Amendment 69 #
2010/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission to improve its reporting on the use of the EGF by substantially fleshing out its annual reports and regularly forwarding to Parliament information on Member States' implementation of financial contributions; calls, furthermore, for the Commission's annual report on implementation of the EGF to become a six-monthly report, should the Commission be delegated decision-making powers under the next multiannual financial framework;
Amendment 29 #
2010/2005(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Notes that the budget item for Members' travel costs is actually higher than the one for salaries; underlines the need for responsible use of allowances, notably travel allowances, and points out that without changing the current rules and by using, where possible, other means of transport than business class air travel from and to Parliament's places of work, Parliament's carbon footprint can be reduced and costs saved at the same time. Therefore decides to reduce the budget item related to Members' travel by EUR 3 million;
Amendment 10 #
2010/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that the EU was able to react collectively to the financial and economic crisis by adopting an ambitious European Economic Recovery Plan (EERP), but notes that the overall economic situation in the EU is still deteriorating and is far from satisfactory in comparison to the world’s other leading economiesnot satisfactory;
Amendment 13 #
2010/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses that youth is tremendously important both now and for the future of the EU, and that it should be given particular attention in the course of defining our mid-and long-term priorities; points out that youth, in all its related aspects, represents a key resource for EU and should be seen as a cross-policy theme; investing in youth is investing in the future; this investment should be done as early as possible and in a coordinated manner across policy areas;
Amendment 19 #
2010/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Stresses that youth policy must be defined broadly, encompassing the ability of individuals to change positions and status several times throughout their lives, switching without restriction among settings such as apprenticeships, academic or professional environments and vocational training; one of the objectives should be the transition from the education system to the labour market;
Amendment 21 #
2010/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
paragraph 11a new
paragraph 11a new
11a. Special attention should be devoted to new skills, such as e-skills and entrepreneurship aspects;
Amendment 31 #
2010/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a new
Paragraph 13 a new
13 a. Recalls the importance of innovation and the digital agenda for economic development and job creation in Europe;
Amendment 57 #
2010/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Takes the view that the lifelong learning programme, by focusing on education and vocational training, supports the efforts to be made with regard to youth; stresses that this programme should cover the activities planned at the beginning of the programming period and integrate possible new developments, allowing, inter alia, for a clear link to be established between education and the labour market, both of which are crucial for economic development and recovery; stresses the request, already approved by the Parliament, to move forward with a specific mobility programme to promote youth first jobs called "Erasmus First Job";
Amendment 59 #
2010/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a new
Paragraph 26 a new
26 a. Underlines the priorities of Research, Innovation and Digital Agenda, that are crucial elements for a sustainable development in Europe; recalls the importance of programmes contributing to this objective, such as the European Institute of Innovation and Technology;
Amendment 115 #
2010/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50
50. Recalls that, although the Commission’s growth forecast for 2010 was limited to 0.9%, it did not include a number of administrative areas that are in fact financed outside this heading, such as technical and administrative support lines (ex-BA lines), executive agencies (outside research agencies) and administrative expenditure on decentralised agencies and direct and indirect research; asks the Commission to state its view as to the criteria to be applied in order to define total administrative expenditure, and to continue to provide a clear description of those areas outside heading 5; requests that all administrative expenditure must be included in heading 5;
Amendment 3 #
2010/2003(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines the difficult situation with respect to the Heading 5 expenditure ceiling for 2011 and is aware of the fact that the Institutions may encounter problems in reconciling the financing of all needs and the wish to maintain budgetary discipline and self-restraint in order to comply with the multiannual financial framework; notes that a number of administrative areas are financed outside heading 5; requests that all administrative expenditure be included in that heading;
Amendment 9 #
2010/2003(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Emphasises that legislative excellence is Parliament's priority, and highlights the need to provide the Members, committees and political groups with the necessary means to achieve it;
Amendment 13 #
2010/2003(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Considers that the current 20% of heading 5 basis is now more restrictive compared to the previous situation, as it will have to cover expenditure not foreseen in the self-imposed declaration of 1988; recalls that, since 2006, Parliament has included expenditure such as the Members' Statute (generating savings for Member States), the Assistants' Statute, expenditure relating to its new role following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty and also an expanded buildings policy to accommodate its overall needs, including enlargements; considers that, on the basis of the original MFF references negotiated in 2006 and in force since 2007, its expenditure should remain within the traditional 20% limit, as an indicative reference;
Amendment 15 #
2010/2003(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)
Paragraph 9 c (new)
9c. Points out that action needs to be taken with a view to securing budgetary sustainability in future years; reaffirms the importance of drawing up a zero- based budget policy that will ensure further rigour and transparency;
Amendment 16 #
2010/2003(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 d (new)
Paragraph 9 d (new)
9d. Emphasises the need to know the fixed costs of Parliament as already approved in Parliament's resolutions of 26 February 2010 on the estimates of revenue and expenditure for Amending Budget 1/2010 and of 22 October 2009 on the draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2010, in order to ensure rigorous and transparent budget planning; calls for the Bureau to submit annual estimates of these fixed costs for the years corresponding to the MFF; requests that a cost-benefit analysis be carried out for the variable expenditure;
Amendment 21 #
2010/2003(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Recalls that wider cost implications should always be assessed in relation to new measures introduced such as, for example, when deciding on staff and assistants schemes in both 2010 and 2011; underlines especially that if additional assistants were to be recruited in Brussels, this would have an impact on the situation regarding office space, which is already stretched; considers that the March presentation of the medium-term buildings strategy for its three places of work is crucial; insists on the need for long-term planning of its buildings policy, with a view to ensuring budget sustainability;
Amendment 26 #
2010/2003(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Considers that follow-up and analysis are important on a number of fronts with clear budgetary links such as, inter alia, the restructuring of Directorates-General, the pursuit of a more effective and professional staff policyefficient management of human resources, non- discrimination action, EMAS, public procurement and action taken following budget discharge recommendations; emphasises the need for continuous follow- up and analysis of Parliament's budget implementation in general;
Amendment 84 #
2010/2002(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 b new
Paragraph 35 b new
35b. Expresses its concern that the political importance of the Common Fisheries Policy(CFP) is not adequately reflected in the draft budget for 2011; points out that the funds proposed for the development of an Integrated Maritime policy are not sufficient to cover the most important aspects of the launch of this new policy; stresses that a new European Union maritime policy could develop to the detriment of the existing priority areas of the CFP in so far as their budgetary funding is concerned; stresses, that in future such a policy will require adequate financing under more than one budget line;
Amendment 154 #
2010/2002(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60
Paragraph 60
60. WelcomNotes the 13% decrease in the EPSO budget, which is linked to the lower level of expenditure on competitions resulting from the new system proposed in the EPSO Development Programme, provided that this decrease does not come at the expense of the quality, transparency, fairness and, impartiality of EU selection proceduresand multilingual character of all EU selection procedures; Reminds EPSO that under Regulation 45/2001 candidates have an inalienable right to access their personal data, including questions and answers, and calls on EPSO to guarantee such right; expects solid guarantees from the Commission in this respect;
Amendment 2 #
2010/2001(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1a (new)
Paragraph -1a (new)
-1a. Rejects the severe cuts in the fisheries chapter in the Council's common position on the 2011 budget; deplores the Member States' willingness to reduce drastically the Community's already inadequate contribution to this sector;
Amendment 6 #
2010/2001(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the, nonetheless, the Commission's fisheries and maritime policy proposals in the 2011 general budget despite the fact that the 2007-2013 multiannual financial framework does not take adequate account of the political importance of the common fisheries policy (CFP), in particular as regards the political expectations from greater European Union involvement in fisheries control, in fisheries research and in cushioning the social effects of what is a necessary reduction in capacity;
Amendment 9 #
2010/2001(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the Commission's proposed increase in commitment and payment appropriations for the European Fisheries Fund (EFF); is, however, opposed to the severe cuts supported by the Council;
Amendment 16 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) TheAlthough coal only makes a small contribution of subsidised coal to the overall energy mix no longer justifies the maintenance of such subsidies with a view of securing the supply of energy on a Union levelof the Union, provision should be made for the granting of aid to access indigenous coal reserves on the grounds of energy security.
Amendment 24 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The Union's policies of encouraging renewable and lower carbon fossil fuels for power generation do not justify the indefinite support for uncompetitive coal mines. The categories of aid permitted by Regulation (EC) No 1407/2002 should therefore not be continued indefinitely. Nonetheless, it should be recognised that replacing subsidised coal with unsubsidised coal will not greatly benefit the environment.
Amendment 33 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) This Regulation marks the transition of the coal sector from sector-specific rules to the general State aid rules applicable to all sectors, save in respect of aid to cover exceptional costs, aid for access to reserves and aid for research and development projects.
Amendment 34 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
(6a) The Community guidelines on State aid for environmental protection1 reaffirm clearly the European Commission’s positive attitude towards State aid for CO2 capture, transport and storage. This regulation upholds this view, stating that aid for coal mining to provide raw materials for said projects is compatible with the internal market. _____ 1 OJ C 37, 3.2.2001, p. 3.
Amendment 37 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) In order to minimise the distortion of competition in the internal market resulting from aid, such, closure aid should be degressive and strictly limited to production units that are irrevocably planned for closure.
Amendment 43 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) As the European Union is committed to developing CO2 capture and storage technology under the Seventh Framework Programme of the European Community for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013)1 maintaining access to reserves until this technology has been proven and made available is only reasonable. _____ 1 OJ L 412, 30.12.2006, p. 1.
Amendment 50 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) Given that in some regions of the European Union the opening of coal mines has had a huge impact on the landscape in areas that are part of the Natura 2000 network, remediation must be included into this regulation as an obligation.
Amendment 53 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 a (new)
Recital 10 a (new)
(10a) The Commission needs to ensure that the Member States make effective and selective use of the aid for regeneration of mining basins so as to encourage their economic diversification and overcome their dependence on economic activities linked to coal, especially in the regions most affected by the closures. Future regional policy after 2013 should provide the framework for setting objectives and establishing the necessary control mechanisms to help improve competitiveness in these regions.
Amendment 54 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point a a (new)
Article 1 – point a a (new)
aa) ‘plan for accessing coal reserves’ means a plan drawn up by a Member State, providing for the production of the minimum quantity of indigenous coal necessary to guarantee access to coal reserves;
Amendment 55 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. In the context ofAs far as definite closure of uncompetitive mines, coverage of exceptional costs, access to reserves and support for research and development projects are concerned, aid to the coal industry may be considered compatible with the proper functioning of the internal market if it complies with the provisions of this Regulation.
Amendment 57 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
a) the operation of the production units concerned must form part of a closure plan the deadline of which does not extend beyond 31 OctoDecember 201422;
Amendment 65 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f
f) the overall amount of closure aid granted by a Member State for any particular undertaking must follow a downward trend, where the reduction between successive periods of fifteen months must not be less than 33 percent of the aid provided in the initial fifteen month period of the closure plan;
Amendment 76 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Aid may not be granted for costs arising from the remediation of mining areas if, under the legislation in force at the time mining began, setting up a bond to cover remediation costs was compulsory.
Amendment 77 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 a (new)
Article 4 a (new)
Amendment 78 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
da) the status of remediation work at closed or abandoned production units and, where applicable, the estimated period of time required for complete remediation of the mines.
Amendment 79 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Member States which intend to grant aid for accessing reserves as referred to in Article 2a shall advise the Commission of the plan for accessing reserves at the production units concerned. The plan shall contain at least the following: a) identification of the production units; b) the real or estimated production costs for each production unit per coal year; c) estimated coal production, per coal year, of production units forming the subject of a plan for accessing reserves; d) the estimated amount of aid for accessing reserves per coal year.
Amendment 80 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall notify the Commission of any amendments to the closure plan toand the Commissionplan for accessing reserves.
Amendment 81 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 6
Article 7 – paragraph 6
6. When notifying aid as referred to in Articles 4 and 5 and when informing the Commission on aid actually paid, Member States shall supply all the information necessary for the Commission to verify that the provisions of this Regulation are complied with.
Amendment 83 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Amendment 8 #
2010/0150(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 - point 3
Article 1 - point 3
Regulation (EC) No 663/2009
Article 22 - paragraph 1 a (new))
Article 22 - paragraph 1 a (new))
1a. A sustainable multi-annual follow-up and solution for heading 1a in the context of the budget review shall be found and a necessary revision of the Multi-annual Financial Framework (MFF) by using all the provisions of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006, notably its Points 21-23 shall take place.
Amendment 6 #
2009/2002(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Is committed to do its utmost to secure adequate financing for all activities and policies under heading 1 a which delivers solutions to European citizens namely providing greater energy security, increasing support for research and innovation, particularly clean energy technologies, promoting small and medium sized enterprises and fostering growth and job creation;
Amendment 19 #
2009/2002(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Stresses the importance of further funding being made available via the EU budget to manage legal immigration and integration of third country nationals while, in parallel, tackling illegal immigration and strengthening border protection, including the strengthening of the European Return Fund and the European Refugee Fund to facilitate solidarity between the Member States;
Amendment 18 #
2008/2334(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Regrets that the decision on theCommission proposal to invest in trans-European energy interconnections and broadband infrastructure projects waremains in vain baecause of a lack of budgetary agreement within the Council. agreement within the Council, contrary to the will of the European Council, as expressed in December 2008; considers that the EU budget should be used to contribute in facing the economic crisis by means of the appropriate instruments provided for in the IIA of 17 May 2006 and invites Council to discuss with Parliament alternative proposals;
Amendment 1 #
2008/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Notes with interest the Presidency Conclusions of the European Council of 19 and 20 June 2008 and their budgetary implications; considers that these budgetary requirements can only be addressed by having recourse to the means provided for by the IIA of 17 May 2006; underlines once again that new appropriations should be provided for new tasks;
Amendment 7 #
2008/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the advances brought about by the Lisbon Treaty in the area of the democratic scrutiny and transparency of the Union’s finances; draws attention to the need to introduceenhance and adapt interinstitutional conciliation mechanisms and internal concilioperation procedures in order to enable Parliament to exercise its new powers to the full;
Amendment 14 #
2008/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Welcomes the fact that the Lisbon Treaty provides for a minimum financial programming overperiod of five years, so that, if the necessary changes are introduced, the MFF can be made to coincide with Parliament's parliamentary term and the Commission's term of office, as democratic logic requires; underlines that particular arrangements to cope with the needs of specific policies for longer-term financial periods could be required;
Amendment 18 #
2008/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Takes the view, moreover, that at debates in plenary and hearings before the parliamentary committees the nominee for the post of President of the Commission and Commissioners-designate should already be in a position to provide details of the likely financial implications of the political objectives they new Commission intends to pursue during their terms of office;
Amendment 21 #
2008/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Emphasises that the switch to five-year financial programming, as referred to above, necessitates the extension of the current MFF to 2016 inclusivefor two years, so that the next five-year MFF can come into force in early 201761; considers that this extension could be envisaged when the next mid- term review is carried out in 2010;
Amendment 26 #
2008/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Emphasises, in that connection, the importance of strengthening flexibility mechanisms operating between each heading and through specific flexibility fundinstruments which can be mobilised outside the margins;
Amendment 27 #
2008/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Draws attention to the need, in good time prior to the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, for the institutions to reach agreement on the arrangements for making the transition from the current interinstitutional agreement to an MFF contained in a legislative act, as provided for in the Lisbon Treaty; recalls that a period of eight weeks is required for scrutiny by national parliaments of draft legislative acts;
Amendment 30 #
2008/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Draws attention to the fact that the new procedure incorporates only a single reading of the draft budget by each institution; emphasises that the new procedure and the single reading will no longer make it possible in de facto terms for the institutions to adjust their standpoints at second reading, as they were able to hitherto; is convinced, therefore, that this procedure will require Parliament to fincorporate a 'quality blueprint' (e tune its political priorities at an earlier stage and adapt accordingly its operational approach and organisational arrangements which enable it to achieve all the objectives set) into its working methods;
Amendment 33 #
2008/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Takes the view that in future its resolution on the Commission's draft budget (adopted in July at the latest)before the first conciliation meeting will take on increased importance, since it will enable Parliament formally to set out its budgetary priorities for the coming financial year, unencumbered by tactical considerations linked to the Council's position on the draft budget; takes the view that that resolution will thus give the other institutions a clear picture of Parliament's priorities before the interinstitutional negotiations start; adds that this will also be the appropriate juncture for Parliament to take political decisions concerning the pilot projects and preparatory actions;
Amendment 38 #
2008/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Emphasises that, without prejudice to the political nature of the procedure for the appointment of its members by the political groups, Parliament'’s delegation to the Conciliation Committee must necessarily be headed by the chairman of the Committee on Budgets and incorporate, if required and without prejudice to the political nature of the procedure for the appointment of its members by the political groups, in addition to the members of that committee, members of the specialist parliamentary committees whose work has significant budgetary implicin case a specific issue within their policy area is subject to the negotiations;
Amendment 41 #
2008/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. Points out, moreover, that the Lisbon Treaty extends to all Union institutions the obligation to enforce budgetary discipline; points out that Parliament's Rules of Procedure already lay down a specific procedure designed to ensure that that principle is observed; takes the view that this procedure will have to be made more workable and effective; calls on its committee responsible to review the Rules of Procedure in the light of these considerations;
Amendment 43 #
2008/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
Paragraph 49
49. Regards it as vital that the institutions should reach a political agreement on these matters before the end of 2008in due time so that, once the Lisbon Treaty has entered into force, the requisite changes to the Financial Regulation can quickly be made using the new procedure and, if needed, provide for provisional agreements to allow the smooth continuation of the budgetary procedure;
Amendment 45 #
2008/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50
50. Calls on the Commission to put forward without delayin due time a proposal which enables Parliament and the Council to reach agreement on the application of the identification criteria referred to in paragraph 47 to the substance of the current interinstitutional agreement;
Amendment 7 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Reiterates that initiatives for growth in jobs and support for SMEs and for research and innovation are of the utmost importance in the current economic situation and have to be top priorities reflected in the Union's budget for 2009; against this background, considers that the support for cohesion amongst regions has to be regarded as a key factor for stimulating economic growth throughout the Union; considers it essential that the political determination to make progress on tackling climate change and providing citizens with a safer Europe become clearly visible in the EU budget; stresses that, in 2009 and in the years to come, the Union has to be in a position to fulfil its role as a global player especially given recent challenges such as rising food prices;
Amendment 10 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. On overall figures, sets the final level of commitment appropriations at EUR xxx xxx million; sets the overall level of payments at EUR 116 096 million, equivalent to 0,89% of EU GNI ; notes that this leaves a significant margin of EUR 7 762 million beneath the payments ceiling of the multi-annual financial framework (MFF) for 2009; underlines the joint commitment of both arms of the budgetary authority to a prompt provision of additional payment appropriations, particularly in the event of structural policies being more quickly implemented during the budgetary year;
Amendment 11 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Undertakes to analyse the related budgetary implications of the Commission's proposal for a European recovery plan; reiterates the commitment of Parliament and of the Council, as stated at the conciliation meeting, to respond with the appropriate financial means to the current economic crisis;
Amendment 13 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Underlines the vital importance of effective budget implementation and of reducing unpaid commitments in light of this very modest overall level of payments; calls on the Commission and on Member States to do their utmost to implement, in particular, lines in heading 1b of the MFF, because this sub-heading not only finances numerous important policies and activities aimed at tackling climate change but also supports growth for jobs initiatives contributing to economic growth; stresses that improvement and simplification measures are needed in order to accelerate the implementation of structural and cohesion funds and invites the Commission, within the existing legal framework, to proceed rapidly with its compliance assessments of the Member States' management and control systems in order to facilitate the start of major projects; notes with great concern that the Commission has, on the basis of evidence, seen fit to cut EUR 220 million of funding for Bulgaria; asks the Commission to support both Bulgaria and Romania in their reforms and to report every three months to the Parliament on problems or irregularities in implementing EU funds;
Amendment 15 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Insists that the Commission take the appropriate measures both at political and administrative level to undertake a concrete follow-up to the joint declaration No 3 on implementation of cohesion policy, as adopted at the conciliation meeting on 21 November 2008; undertakes to evaluate before the end of March 2009 whether sufficient progress has been made;
Amendment 18 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Emphasises that Budget 2009 reinforces the safety and security of EU citizens by bolstering related actions and policies which concern mainly competitiveness, small and medium enterprises (SMEs), transport and energy security as well as securing external borders;
Amendment 19 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Has taken note of the Commission's Letter of Executability regarding the amendments to the draft budget adopted by Parliament at first reading; considers it unacceptable that the Commission presented this document at such a late stage in the procedure, thus rendering it far less useful than it could have been; insists that several important political issues require appropriate visibility in the Union's budget; decides to create new budgetary lines on climate change, on the Small Business Act (SBA),on the financial instrument for the adaptation of the fishing fleet to the economic consequences of fuel prices and on aid for rehabilitation and reconstruction of Georgia; has decided to take some of the Commission's comments into account in the second reading of the budget; will, however, abide by its first reading decisions especially in those cases in which sufficient time and effort has already been spent at an earlier stage on assessing how Parliament's amendments can best be implemented, as was the case with pilot projects and preparatory actions;
Amendment 21 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Deplores the fact that, for the second consecutive year, the Council has rejected Parliament's proposal for an amendment concerning the creation of a new line 05 02 08 12 - School fruit scheme; welcomes, however, the political agreement of the Council on the legal base for such a programme; had expecteds the programme to start as soon as the legal base is adopted and in time for the 2009/2010 school year 2009/2010 and, as demanded by the European Parliament and agreed by the Council in its political agreement; regrets, therefore, that the Council did not accept the Commission's proposal to create already a token entry ("p.m.") in the budget, which would have allowed for a flexible start of the programme as appropriate during the budget year 2009;
Amendment 27 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Notes that appropriations for assistance to Kosovo will only just suffice to keep pace with reforms and investment; recalls its various commitments to EU assistance in Kosovo that is; at the same time stresses the need for a functioning public administration and a take-over of public duties by the Kosovo government as well as for properly managedment and implementedation of these commitments; insists on a proper follow-up of the conclusions of the final report from the ITF (Investigation Task Force, which closed down its operation at the end of August 2008), as well as on the creation of a successor organisation for combating fraud and financial irregularities;
Amendment 28 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Notes with satisfaction that the Union has committed itself to tackling soaring food prices in developing countries and that an agreement has finally been reached on the financing of a food facility and that complementarity with the European Development Fund and visibility of EU assistance have been ensured; regrets, nevertheless, that once more, due to the constrained margins in heading 4, a part of the appropriations for financing this food facility could only be found through redeployment within the heading;
Amendment 29 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Takes note of the increasing amount of EU funds being channelled through international organisations; repeats its call for the Commission to make every effort to obtain as much information as possible on external and internal audits of institutions and programmes receiving EU funds;
Amendment 35 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29a. Draws the Commission's attention to the former Amicus preparatory action, which has now been integrated into the "Youth in Action Programme"; requests the Commission to ensure a close follow- up of its implementation and to report to Parliament's relevant committees by 30 June 2009";
Amendment 2 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – indent 2
Paragraph 4 – indent 2
– Continuing cohesion policy in order to reduce inequalities between the Union's regions, which is not just solidarity since it results in a more competitive Europe in a globalised world;
Amendment 4 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Recalls the European Parliament's priorities as expressed in its abovementioned resolution of 24 April 2008 on the Commission’s Annual Policy Strategy for 2009;
Amendment 7 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Points out that, as a result of the very small margins under the other ceilings of the multiannual financial framework (MFF) 2007 - 2013, in particular in headings 1a, 3b and 4, the Union's capacity to react to policy changes in budgetary terms is extremely limited; underlines, at the same time, the possibility for recourse to the provisions of the IIA to overcome financial shortfalls;
Amendment 8 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers it its responsibility as budgetary authority to ensure that the funding allocated to the EU budget is spent with a view to optimising the limited resources; intends to strive for a more ambitious, balanced and coherent budget in cooperation with, and in line withtaking into account the requests of, the specialised committees;
Amendment 9 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Cannot always see a clear correlation between the Commission's political priorities, as described in its Annual Policy Strategy (APS) and the PDB, and increases in the corresponding budget lines and policy areas; is still not satisfied with the attempts of the Commission to include Parliament's priorities in the PDB; is not convinced, for example, that the climate change priority really is reflected throughout the budget as proposed by the Commission;
Amendment 12 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Expresses its strong concern that a time has come in which the margins that are available are more and more frequently due to "creative budgeting" such as backloading existing multiannual programmes, excluding budgetary requirements that are already well known and foreseeable and other similar manoeuvres; considers such practices to be in breach of the principle of sound budgeting and requests once more a PDB that is an honest reflection of the budgetary needs to come in the following year; invites the Commission and the Council to cooperate with a view to taking the necessary decisions to reach a satisfactory level of appropriations for the 2009 budget;
Amendment 16 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Requests the Commission to continue its screening exercise started in 2007 and to set out clearly further information regarding human resources policy, andpplication of redeployment strategy for 2009and the degree of externalisation of tasks for 2009; asks for a follow-up report by 30 April 2009 including the conclusions the Commission will draw with regard to their internal organisation; takes note of the Commission's 2008 follow-up report on "Planning and optimising Commission human resources to serve EU priorities" whereby the Commission confirms its commitment not to request any new posts up to 2013, beyond the last tranche of enlargement-related posts in 2009;
Amendment 18 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Is worried about the increasing number of external investigations of OLAF opened in the external aid sector; invites, therefore, the Commission to adopt the necessary measures to ensure proper protection of EU funds; asks the Member States to improve the quality of their cooperation with the Commission in the fight against EU fraud, including the assistance given to OLAF when conducting investigations on their territories; calls for the strengthening of the information exchange, from the Member States to the Commission, on irregularities and frauds, notably in the field of structural funds; asks the Member States to ensure a proper follow-up of the anti-fraud investigations, including the recovery procedure; invites the Commission to focus efforts also on the prevention aspects of the anti-fraud and anti-corruption policies;
Amendment 21 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Welcomes the Commission's intention to undertake key actions in the field of job creation and support for innovation, SMEs and research;
Amendment 27 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Considers the planned Small Business Act an important strategy to support Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises; notes that also a financial framework and legislative acts are required to support SMEs in the most appropriate way; urges the Commission and the Member States to make enhanced use for this purpose also of the resources available through the Structural Funds in this context;
Amendment 35 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. WelcomesPoints to the fact that the PDB maintains the substantial increase of the appropriations voted in 2008 for the Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders (FRONTEX), but notes with some concern the rebalancing of the subsidy by shifting EUR 5,7 million from operational to administrative expenditure; calls for an increase in appropriations for 2009 for FRONTEX in order to enable it to sustain the commitment to permanent and uninterrupted missions, notably at the southern borders of the Union (Hera, Nautilus and Poseidon);
Amendment 36 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33a. Stresses that a European pact on migration policy should include issues related to tackling illegal immigration, managing legal immigration and strengthening border protection, taking fully into account the principle of solidarity; in that framework intends to introduce pilot projects and preparatory actions;
Amendment 41 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Recognises the need for coordination of the different communication policies implemented by the institutions within the Interinstitutional group on information and communication; recalls that communication has long been an important priority for Parliament; considers that Parliament's key role in this process is vital and guarantees continuity and efficiency of the policy, in particular in view of the coming European elections; points out in this context that information provided to citizens concerning their rights stemming from the application of EU law should be enhanced;
Amendment 44 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. Notes, therefore, with concern that the Commission has already stated, at this early stage of the budgetary procedure, that appropriations for Kosovo, the Middle East, Food aid and Macro-financial assistance will clearly not be sufficient to fulfil existing EU commitments in the world, let alone expected supplementary needs: the PDB proposes, for example, EUR 161 million in commitments and EUR 100 million in payments for assistance to Palestine and the Peace process, although final amounts for the 2008 Budget were EUR 300 million and EUR 200 million, respectively; regarding Kosovo, appropriations for the EULEX mission drop by 15,7% under the CFSP; believes that, with regard to the decision to vastly increase the original number of experts working in the EUPOL mission to Afghanistan, financial shortfalls can already be foreseen at this stage;
Amendment 53 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 57
Paragraph 57
57. Points outRegrets that, as a general principle, the Commission's PDB does not include any commitments for pilot projects and preparatory actions, so that these will need to be financed from the margins of the relevant MFF headings; expresses its astonishment that there are a few exceptions to this general rule insofar as a small number of pilot projects and preparatory actions, in which the Commission seems to be interested, are already budgeted in the PDB with commitment appropriations;
Amendment 59 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68
Paragraph 68
68. Deplores the fact that the Commission has still not presented to the budgetary authority the details of how it proposes to finance the two new agencies currently under discussion, one of which is already included in the PDB for 2009 with a pm entry; has come to the conclusion that, in the situation of current margins, for the financing of new bodies, which fulfil in part administrative tasks, all possibilities granted by the IIA of 17 May 2006 should be explored; recalls that prior agreement of the budgetary authority on the financing of any new agency is required in line with point 47 of the IIA;
Amendment 60 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 73 – indent 3 a (new)
Paragraph 73 – indent 3 a (new)
– commitment by the Commission to submit, where the EU Solidarity Fund and the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund are concerned, amending budgets that have the mobilisation of these funds as their sole purpose in order to avoid any delay in the delivery of financial aid;
Amendment 61 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 73 – indent 3 b (new)
Paragraph 73 – indent 3 b (new)
– adequate response to food aid requirements;
Amendment 62 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 73 – indent 3 c (new)
Paragraph 73 – indent 3 c (new)
- state of play regarding the implementation of Point 44 of the IIA;
Amendment 63 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 73 – indent 4
Paragraph 73 – indent 4
– firstprovisional intentions of the budgetary authority with regard to pilot projects and preparatory actions;
Amendment 64 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 73 – indent 5
Paragraph 73 – indent 5
– clarity of budget presentation, especially concerning administrative expenditure and human resources and outsourcing of tasks;
Amendment 65 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 73 – indent 6
Paragraph 73 – indent 6
– adequate budgetary provision to allow for a linkage ofenable a response to the EU priorities "competitiveness for growth and employment" and ,"combating climate change and promoting a sustainable Europe" and "making a reality of the Common Immigration Policy";
Amendment 5 #
2008/2022(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Underlines the fact that the new Lisbon Treaty also provides a challenge for political groups; acknowledges, that in line with the reinforcement of the core activities of Parliamentary Administration, political groups will also need strengthening in terms of staff while observing budgetary prudence;
Amendment 11 #
2008/2021(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Reiterates its belief that the introduction of a Knowledge Management System, bringing together multiple sources of information, texts and references into a single point access- system for both Mmembers and staff, would constitute a valuable management tool and a real qualitative improvement that should not be delayed; notes with interest the recent discussion of this issue in the Bureau and insists on the appropriate follow-up during the budgetary procedure;
Amendment 13 #
2008/2021(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Welcomes the pilot project on individual interpretation for Mmembers and looks forward to its rapid launch; notes that it is directed, in a first stage, towards rapporteurs and/or shadow rapporteurs "in legislative or budgetary procedures"; invites the Secretary-General to follow up on this project during its 6 months and, subsequently, toin due time before first reading, present an objective cost- benefit analysis;
Amendment 14 #
2008/2021(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a new
Paragraph 15 a new
15a. Awaits the outcome of the evaluation of the pilot project for the analytical service to be provided to Members in the library of Parliament and its implications for 2009;
Amendment 25 #
2008/2021(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Attaches high importance to increased transparency and clarification concerning the work contracts of the assistants of Members of the European Parliament; awaits proposals from the Secretary- General in this regard in line with the request expressed in the resolution of 25 October 2007 on draft general budget for 2008 (Sections I, II, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII and IX) (P6-TA(2007)0474, paragraphs 23 and 24);
Amendment 26 #
2008/2021(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Welcomes the preparation of a revised long- term strategy proposal for its buildings policy, including the expected development of maintenance costs, which should be analysed during the 2009 procedure; considers particularly important the financial implications stemming from rental arrangements, on the one hand, and acquisitions, on the other hand; wishes to see the arguments put forward and debated during the year;
Amendment 31 #
2008/2021(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Insists that environmental concerns should be a key element of its policy; believes that further improvements in terms of energy efficiency are necessary, including the consideration of green energy sources, albeit that the institution's ability to function effectively must be safeguarded;
Amendment 4 #
2007/0197(COD)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Considers that the reference amount indicated in the legislative proposal is not compatible with the ceiling of subheading 1a of the current multiannual financial framework 2007 - 2013 without jeopardising the financing of other priorities; notes that the Commission has communicated its intention to finance the new Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators exclusively by redeployment within subheading 1a; reiterates, however, that the budgetary authority has not yet received any information as to the details of this redeployment exercise so that it remains unclear which programmes or priorities are affected and what consequences arise from this throughout the financial period; further wishes to have indications on the consequences for the margin under subheading 1a;
Amendment 5 #
2007/0197(COD)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Amendment 7 #
2007/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 –paragraph 1 – point a
Article 18 –paragraph 1 – point a
(a) a subsidy from the Community, entered inunder the appropriate heading of the general budget of the European Communities (Commission Section), as decided by the budgetary authority, in accordance with point 47 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006;