BETA

Activities of Jan MULDER related to 2012/2092(BUD)

Plenary speeches (1)

General budget of the European Union for the financial year 2013 - all sections (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2012/2092(BUD)

Amendments (13)

Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that the EU budget is to be seen instead as a complementary instrument of support for the Member States' economies, capable of concentrating initiatives and investments in areas strategic for growth and jobs and of bringing an actual added value in sectors overcoming national boundaries; highlights that such a role is legitimised by the same Member States, who, together with Parliament, are responsible for the decisions from which most of the EU law stems;
2012/10/08
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that 2013 is the last year of the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), which makes it of the utmost importance to reach a balance between commitments undertaken so far and payments deriving from them that need to be honoured, the institutional credibility of the EU being at stake as well as possible legal consequences for the Commission in case of missingbeing unable to reimbursement of legitimate payment claims;
2012/10/08
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Deplores, therefore, the decision of the Council to proceed again this year with the usual approach of horizontal cuts to the DB, aimed at artificially reducing the level of the EU resources for 2013 all in all by EUR 1 155 million (-0,8%) in commitment appropriations (CA) and by EUR 5 228 million (- 3,8%) in payment appropriations (PA) as compared to the DB, leading thereby to a very modest increase compared to the 2012 budget both in commitments (+1,27% vs. 2% of the DB) and in payments (+2,79% vs. 6,8% of the DB);
2012/10/08
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Recalls in this context the commitment by Council to adopt an amending budget to make up for funding shortages due to its horizontal cutting procedure during the conciliation procedure for the 2012 annual EU budget; reminds that already planning for amending budgets as the annual budget procedure is being concluded does not constitute sound and responsible budgeting and hopes that this will not happen in the case of the 2013 or future EU annual budgets;.
2012/10/08
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. On the basis of the data presented by Commission in the inter-institutional meeting on payments of 26 September 2012, doubts that the increase in payments by 6,8% proposed in the DB will be sufficient to cover reimbursements of payment claims awaited by Member States under the various headings – and in particular for Headings 1a and 1b – in the absence of an amending budget covering payment needs for 2012; will therefore rejecargue against any attempt to reduce the level of payment appropriations as compared to the DB proposal;
2012/10/08
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Is of the opinion that the answer to the crisis must be more Europe and not less Europe, in order to restart investments and help rebuild confidence in the economy; having already criticised the proposed freezing in commitment appropriations at the level of the expected inflation rate in the DB, cannot accept Council's decision to reduce them further down to 1,27% compared to budget 2012; recalls that commitments reflect EU political priorities and should be set having in mind a long term perspective where the economic downturn might be over; therefore takes the view that, as a general principle, commitments should be restored at the DB level; intends, however, to increase commitment appropriations above the DB on a selected number of budget lines directly related to the delivery of the Europe 2020 priorities and in line with traditional Parliament's priorities;
2012/10/08
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Deplores the substantial cuts in payments (-EUR 1,6 billion or -3,3 % as compared to DB) by the Council affecting the Regional Competitiveness and Employment objective (-12,9%), the European Territorial Cooperation objective (-18,7%) and the Cohesion Fund (-4,7%); thereby substantially increasing RAL, notes instead that the Convergence objective is left practically untouched;
2012/10/08
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
34. Supports the reduction of some budget lines on refunds drastically, in some cases even to zero, as this instrument is politically controversial and has not been taken up for some products at the same level as in the budget year 2012; notes that some refund lines have been earmarked as negative priorities; weighs up carefully to what extent these lines should be reduced, in order to be able to use this instrument if needed under the current regulation;
2012/10/08
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 65
65. Considers, therefore, that any further cuts as proposed by the Council would endanger the proper functioning of the agencies and would not allow them to fulfil the tasks they have been assigned by the legislative authority; rejects Council's horizontal approach in cutting appropriations for agencies, whose needs have to be assessed on a case-by-case basis; also calls on the Commission to identify, for the next MFF period, possible areas of duplication of work or reduced added value in relation to the agencies, with a view to streamlining their functioning;
2012/10/08
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 66
66. Decides to increase the 2013 budget appropriations for the three financial supervision agencies, as more efforts are need; believes that those appropriations should reflect the needs to fulfil the required tasks as more regulations, decisions and directives are being adopted to overcome the current financial and economic crisis which is strongly linked to the stability of the financial sector;
2012/10/08
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 77
77. Welcomes the information and analyses contained in the 2011 Parliament's budgetary and financial management report and in the DGs annual activity reports, regarding budget lines that were under- implemented in 2011, and calls for further objective analysis of this type concerning the 2012 budget in order to more readily identify potential future savings possibilities to be offset by investments where needed and useful for the proper and smooth functioning of the Parliament;
2012/10/08
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraphs 77 a, b, c, d, e, f, g (new)
Working arrangements of the Parliament 77a. Believes that, like every directly elected parliament, the Parliament should have the right to decide on its own seat and working place arrangements; 77b. Declares therefore that the Parliament's seat and places of work for Members and officials should be decided upon by the Parliament itself; 77c. Urges the two arms of the budgetary authority (the Council and the Parliament), in order to make financial savings and promote a more sustainable climate- and environment friendly solution, to raise the issue of a single seat and Parliament's working places for Members and officials in the upcoming negotiations on the next MFF for 2014- 2020; 77d. Urges the Member States to revise the issue of the Parliament's seat and working places in the next revision of the Treaty by amending protocol 6; 77e. Calls in the meantime on the Council and the Parliament to start elaborating a road-map towards a single seat and a more efficient use of the Parliament's working places, taking into account specific up to date figures detailing the cost of each place of work and working conditions for staff, as well as economic, societal and environmental factors - to be presented in a report by 30 June 2013; 77f. Believes that, as the most viable place for Parliament's seat would be Brussels, co-located alongside Council, Commission and the EEAS, such a road- map should also include a reasonable solution for Strasbourg and Luxemburg so as to avoid, to the extent possible, any loss of jobs and income for citizens and local and regional authorities in those places of work; such a solution could preferably entail locating other institutions permanently to Strasbourg and Luxemburg that could make full use of the Parliament's buildings; 77g. Suggests that the agreement between the authorities in Luxembourg and the Parliament, on the number of staff to be present in Luxembourg, should be revised taking into account a revision of the Parliament's needs;
2012/10/08
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 79
79. Welcomes the joint working group's proposal to closefind savings by streamlining internal structures and suggests to only open the Members' Register on Fritwo days during constituency (turquoise) weeks;
2012/10/08
Committee: BUDG