904 Amendments of Jan MULDER
Amendment 1 #
2014/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the late communication of the MFF figures and the ceilings available for each policy area did not help individual rapporteurs with the development of a strategic approach to negotiations with the Council; urges the Commission to provide simultaneously to the Council and the Parliament all updated MFF figures in the future.
Amendment 6 #
2014/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Regrets the fact that, in the area of home affairs, the Council – supported by the Commission – seemed more interested in using the funds to supplement Member States’ national budgets than to promote European added value and European solidarity; regrets not having obtained delegated acts for programming decisions in accordance with article 290 TFEU as these decisions clearly meet the conditions for delegated acts laid down in the Treaty;
Amendment 8 #
2014/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas, faced with the impossibility of changing the overall MFF figures decided by the European Council, Parliament successfully negotiated the inclusion of several key new provisions that will help to make the new financial framework and the new EU annual budget more operational, consistent, transparent and responsive to the needs of EU citizens and to allow the MFF ceilings to be fully used; whereas these provision concern, in particular, the new arrangements relating to the MFF revision, flexibility, own resources, and the unity and transparency of the EU budget;
Amendment 9 #
2014/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Further notes, with respect to the home affairs funds, that the ordinary legislative procedure does not provide for the Commission and the Council to negotiate an agreed position between themselves, without involving Parliament, and then to present that position to the Parliament as a fait accompli; points out that if the Commission is unwilling to defend its initial proposal, it should present an amended proposal; insists that the Commission shall take up its role of honest broker in future inter-institutional negotiations;
Amendment 12 #
2014/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Taking into consideration that the cuts were imposed to the Parliament without any reasoned justification, considers that the Parliament has to put emphasis, when it comes to consider the Mid-term review, on the particular areas where the cuts were the most significant;
Amendment 13 #
2014/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas the outstanding payment claims received after 31 October 2013 and carried-over to 2014 amount to 23 billion EUR for structural and cohesion policy only, which will add significant pressure on an already very low ceiling of payment appropriations;
Amendment 13 #
2014/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Is of the opinion that, in the framework of the Mid-term review, the Parliament should use all its negotiation capacity through co-decision, without being imposed decisions and figures from the European Council;
Amendment 15 #
2014/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the Council failed to make any progress on a much needed reform of the current system for financing the EU budget, despite the ambitious proposals put forward by the Commission aimed not only at overcoming the stalemate caused by the lack of a genuine own resources system but also at making the system of financing of the EU budget simpler, fairer and transparent to the EU citizen;
Amendment 27 #
2014/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is deeply concerned at the fact that any budgetary debate in the Council has been for many years poisoned by the logic of ‘fair returns’; stresseconsiders that this situation is largely due to the current system of EU financing, whereby some 85 % of revenues stem from national contributions instead of genuine own resources; considers that such a system places disproportionate empdebate already existed before the introduction of an GNI based resources but that this resource hasis on net balances between the Member Stly reinforced the poisoned debates and has led to the progressive introduction of complex and opaque rebates and other correction mechanisms for the financing of the EU budget;
Amendment 35 #
2014/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Believes that this logic also prevailed in the way the MFF agreement was struck by the European Council on 8 February 2013; considers it regrettable that this was reflected in the fact that the national allocations, especially from agriculture and cohesion policy, were determined at that moment; deplores, in particular, the list of special allocations and ‘gifts’ granted in the course of negotiations between Heads of State and Government, which number culminates in the conclusions of the European Council of 8 February 2013 and which are not based on objective and verifiable criteria, but rather reflect the bargaining power of Member States, trying to secure their national interests and maximise their net returns; denounces the lack of transparencopacity in striking this agreement; highlights that the addition of 27 national individual victories is anything but a success for Europe;
Amendment 41 #
2014/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Strongly rejects this purely accounting vision of the EU budget, which disregards the European added value, contradicts the principle of EU solidarity and underestimates the current and potential role of the EU budget in strengthening economic governance; stresses that the EU budget is predominantly an investment budget with a strong leverage effect and a catalyst for growth and jobs across the Union; considers it regrettabledenounces, therefore, that some Member States seem to regard national contributions to the EU budget purely as a cost to be minimised;
Amendment 42 #
2014/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. NoteStrongly regrets that the European Council took a top-down approach to deciding the overall size of the MFF 2014- 2020, which in turn demonstrates a worrying discrepancy between EU political commitments which the European Council has been making and its reluctance to adequately finance them; believes, on the contrary, that this decision should be based on a bottom-up process, resulting from a thorough assessment of EU financial needs and political objectives as set out in EU multiannual programmes and policies defined by the legislator;
Amendment 51 #
2014/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Is convinced, moreover, that tangible progress can only be achieved following an in-depth reform of the financing of the EU budget that should return to a system of genuine, clear, simple and fair own resources; stresses that this should lead to the introduction of one or several new own resources that will considerably reduce the share ofwith the ultimate objective to put an end to the GNI-based contributions to the EU budget and, accordingly, to the burden onthat the GNI contribution represents for national treasuries; reiterates its strong commitment to any process leading to the reform of the current unfair, non- transparent and complex system of own resources;
Amendment 58 #
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 established between the two institutions at all stages of the preparation of this report; points to the obvious advantages for Parliament of an early preparation for any negotiations on the MFF;
Amendment 62 #
2014/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls that, pursuant to Article 312 TFEU, the Council unanimously adopts the MFF Regulation after obtaining the consent of Parliament, while the three EU institutions ‘shall take any measure necessary to facilitate its adoption’; notes, therefore, that the Treaty does not set out any concrete procedure for the involvement of Parliament in the MFF negotiations and that these modalities were subsequently determined in practice through a number of ad hoc arrangements agreed at political level at Parliament’s initiative; notes that the European Parliament was defining its own role as well and encourages the Parliament to draw on the lessons learnt from this experience; stresses the need for clear and transparent mandates for Parliament's negotiating team;
Amendment 64 #
2014/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. DeplorRecalls that, according to the Treaty, the European Council has no legislative powers and, therefore, denounces the fact that, despite Parliament’s strong objections, all successive ‘negotiating boxes’ presented by different Council presidencies and, ultimately, the European Council MFF agreement of 8 February 2013 contained a significant number of legislative elements that should have been decided under the ordinary legislative procedure; stresses that the legally required unanimity in the Council on the MFF Regulation could only be achieved by pre- empting certain major policy changes in EU sectoral policies, thereby hindering Parliament’s prerogatives under co- decision, in clear contradiction with the Treaties;
Amendment 87 #
2014/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Strongly believes a five year MFF cycle would enhance democratic legitimacy, improve the prioritisation of budgetary means and could be considered a precondition for more political debate; urges the Commission, in line with TFUE 312, to opt for a five year budgetary cycle from 2020 onwards;
Amendment 95 #
2014/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. CReminds its intention to make the compulsory MFF revision a key demand in the investiture of the next Commission; calls, therefore, on the next European Parliament to make the election of the proposed candidate for President of the Commission conditional upon a strong and non-ambiguous commitment to implementing this review/e post-electoral revision clause and engaging in a genuine and deep political dialogue on its content;
Amendment 6 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that the European economy is showing some signs of recovery and considers that along with Member States continuing their growth-friendly fiscal consolidation and structural reforms, the European budget can be a very strong tool to increase strategic investment with European added value and put the European economy back on track, generating sustainable growth and employment while aiming to foster economic and social cohesion throughout the EU;
Amendment 14 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights in particular the importance of the European Structural and Investment Funds, which form the biggest single block of expenditure in the EU budget; underlines the fact that these ESIFs are particularly important in helping Member States and regions to exit the current crisis and achieve the Europe 2020 targets; stresses the need to endow citizens with the tools to find a way out of the crisis; stresses in this regard the special need to also foster investments in areas such as education and mobility, research and innovation, digital agenda, SMEs and entrepreneurship, in order to boost the creation of employment –, in particular youth and 50+ employment;
Amendment 16 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers it also important to invest in other areas such as renewable energy, infrastructures, in particular broadband infrastructure, with a stronger and enhanced use of ‘innovative financial instruments’, particularly in respect of long term investments; underlines the importance of ensuring that sufficient resources are made available for EU external actions; recalls the EU’s international commitments as regards the allocation of 0.7 % of GNP to the Millennium Development Goals Instruments by 2015;
Amendment 22 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Underlines the importance of ensuring that sufficient resources are made available for EU external actions to allow the European Union to respect the principles and pursue the objectives set out in article 21 of the TEU as well as article 323 of the TFEU; recalls the EU and its Members States' international commitment to increase their Official Development Aid (ODA) spending to 0.7% of GNI and to achieve the Millennium Development Goals by 2015;
Amendment 25 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls the recent agreement on the 2014-2020 multiannual financial framework (MFF), which defines the main parameters for the annual budgets until 2020; underlines the fact that each annual budget must be in line with the MFF Regulation and the Interinstitutional Agreement and should not be considered an excuseopportunity to re-negotiate downwards the MFF; points out, however, that this does not exclude the use of all means available to the budgetary authority within the framework of the annual budget procedur the special instruments agreed upon in the MFF 2014-2020 regulation and in the related Interinstitutional Agreement which are available to the budgetary authority within the framework of the annual budget procedure in order to provide the EU budget with the necessary flexibility; highlights its determination to use them as appropriate;
Amendment 30 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls the agreement within the MFF, which is being implemented for the first time in the 2014 budget, to frontload in 2014 and 2015 commitments for specified policy objectives relating to youth employment, research, Erasmus+ in particular for apprenticeships, and SMEs; emphasises that a similar approach needs to be taken for the 2015 budget throughrecalls that for 2015 this means a frontloading of the Youth Employment Initiative (by 871.4 million( in 2011 prices) as well as of Erasmus+ and COSME, by (20 million each (in 2011 prices);
Amendment 33 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Emphasises that, in order to help European citizens to exit the crisis, investments should be brought forward as much as possible in those programmes; invites the Commission, furthermore, to identify furpossible other programmes for which could benefit froma frontloading, could usefully benefit and contribute to this purpose and would also be able to fully absorb help the EU to renew with growthe additional appropriationsnd employment;
Amendment 40 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Underlines the importance of decentralised agencies, which are vital for the implementation of EU policies and programmes; stresses the need to assess all agencies individually and to provide them in the 2015 budget and in the following years with the appropriate financial means and staff so that they are able to properly fulfil the tasks assigned to them by the legislative authority;expects the first outcome of the Interinstitutional Working Group on decentralised agencies to be delivered in due time for Parliament's reading of the budget;
Amendment 46 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls that the overall level of payment appropriations agreed for the 2014 budget is below the level considered necessary and proposed by the Commission in its original draft budget; is deeply concerned that the unprecedented level of outstanding bills at the end of 2013, upamounting to EUR 23.4 billion under Heading 1b alone, cannot be covered within 2014 ceilings; Underlines also the backlog of payments appropriations of EUR 160 million for humanitarian aid carried over from 2013 to 2014, which could result in delay of payments, with all the tragic consequences that this would have in a sector where immediate reaction is essential; stresses therefore that, even if all the new flexibility mechanisms are mobilised in payments in 2014, this will again lead to a large implementation deficit at the end of 2014; underlines the fact that the recurrent shortages of payment appropriations have been the main cause of the unprecedentedly high level of outstanding commitments (RALs) especially in the last years;
Amendment 47 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Recalls that according to the Treaty4 ‘the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission shall ensure that the financial means are made available to allow the Union to fulfil its legal obligations in respect of third parties’; expects the Commission in its draft budget to propose an adequate level of payment appropriations, based on real forecasts rather than political expectations; __________________ 4 Article 323 TFEU.
Amendment 56 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Insists that the use of all special instruments in payments (EU Solidarity Fund, Globalisation Adjustment Fund and Emergency Aid Reserve) must be entered in the budget over and above the MFF payment ceilingRecalls its position of principle that the financing of special instruments shall be entered in the budget over and above the multiannual financial framework ceilings for commitments and for payments;
Amendment 57 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Insists that the use of all special instruments in payments (EU Solidarity Fund, Globalisation Adjustment Fund and Emergency Aid Reserve) must be entered in the budget over and above the MFF payment ceiling; asks to present systematic data on the effectiveness of these special instruments in the draft general budget
Amendment 59 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Given the alarming situation of payment appropriations in humanitarian aid at the very beginning of 2014, calls for the Commission to take all necessary measures and to react as quickly as possible in order to ensure the proper delivery of EU humanitarian Aid in 2014; given the particularity of this funding for which most of commitments have to be paid within the budgetary year, invites the Commission to reflect on the possibility to enter in the draft budget 2015 not only a sufficient level of appropriations but also to enter an amount of payments appropriations equal to the level of commitment appropriations for humanitarian aid and for the emergency aid reserve;
Amendment 60 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 14 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Request the Commission to present an outline to Council and Parliament how it intends to fund the measures that have to be taken in case there is an outbreak of contagious animal diseases on the scale as was the case in the past with among others with BSE, swine fever and Foot and Mouth disease. Request the Commission to outline, in case it expects that no sufficient public funding will be available, the possibility of establishing insurance schemes.
Amendment 25 #
2013/2256(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33a. Urges the Management Boards of those agencies that are fully or partially co-financed by fees to ensure that fee- setting is transparent and that the services by those agencies are carried out as efficiently as possible in order to offer the best possible fee-rate;
Amendment 27 #
2013/2256(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38 a (new)
Paragraph 38 a (new)
38a. Requests that the Court of Auditors provide an evaluation on the performance and the results of the agencies in time for the review in 2016 of the multiannual financial framework with the purpose to assess where agencies can cooperate better or even merge, and to assess whether some agencies could be dissolved or continue in another institutional setting which is more cost-efficient;
Amendment 11 #
2013/2245(DEC)
Performance
Amendment 12 #
2013/2245(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Requests that the Office communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website;
Amendment 15 #
Amendment 16 #
2013/2242(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Requests that the Institute communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website;
Amendment 35 #
2013/2241(DEC)
Performance
Amendment 36 #
2013/2241(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Requests that the Body communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website;
Amendment 13 #
Amendment 14 #
2013/2240(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Requests that the Agency communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website;
Amendment 16 #
2013/2239(DEC)
Performance
Amendment 17 #
2013/2239(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Requests that the Authority communicate the results and impact its work has on the European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website, ;
Amendment 17 #
Amendment 18 #
2013/2238(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Amendment 15 #
Amendment 16 #
2013/2237(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Requests that the Authority communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website;
Amendment 17 #
Amendment 18 #
2013/2236(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Requests that the Institute communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website;
Amendment 14 #
2013/2235(DEC)
Performance
Amendment 15 #
2013/2235(DEC)
7a. Requests that the Office communicate the results and impact its work has on the European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website.
Amendment 15 #
Amendment 16 #
2013/2233(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Requests that the Agency communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website, ;
Amendment 14 #
Amendment 15 #
2013/2232(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Requests that the Agency communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website;
Amendment 13 #
2013/2231(DEC)
Performance
Amendment 14 #
2013/2231(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Requests that the Agency communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website;
Amendment 16 #
2013/2230(DEC)
Performance
Amendment 17 #
2013/2230(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Requests that the Agency communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website.
Amendment 13 #
Amendment 14 #
2013/2229(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Requests that the College communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accesible way, mainly through its website,;
Amendment 14 #
2013/2228(DEC)
Performance
Amendment 15 #
2013/2228(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Amendment 12 #
2013/2222(DEC)
Performance
Amendment 13 #
2013/2222(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Requests that the Agency communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website.
Amendment 21 #
Amendment 22 #
2013/2220(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Requests that the agency communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website;
Amendment 18 #
Amendment 19 #
2013/2219(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Requests that the agency communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website;
Amendment 16 #
2013/2218(DEC)
Performance
Amendment 17 #
2013/2218(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Requests that the Agency communicate the results and impact its work has on the European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website, ;
Amendment 14 #
2013/2217(DEC)
Performance
Amendment 15 #
2013/2217(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Requests that the Foundation communicate the results and impact its work has on the European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website;
Amendment 15 #
2013/2216(DEC)
Performance
Amendment 16 #
2013/2216(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Requests that Eurojust communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website.
Amendment 19 #
2013/2215(DEC)
Performance
Amendment 20 #
2013/2215(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Requests that the Agency communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website;
Amendment 11 #
Amendment 14 #
2013/2214(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Requests that the agency communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website;
Amendment 13 #
2013/2213(DEC)
Performance
Amendment 14 #
2013/2213(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Requests that the Agency communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website;
Amendment 15 #
Amendment 16 #
2013/2212(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Requests that the Agency communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website;
Amendment 15 #
2013/2211(DEC)
Performance
Amendment 16 #
2013/2211(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Requests that the Centre communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website;
Amendment 12 #
2013/2210(DEC)
Performance
Amendment 13 #
2013/2210(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Requests that the Foundation communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website.
Amendment 15 #
2013/2209(DEC)
Performance
Amendment 16 #
2013/2209(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Requests that the Agency communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website;
Amendment 15 #
Amendment 16 #
2013/2208(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Requests that the Centre communicate the results and impact its work has on European citizens in an accessible way, mainly through its website;
Amendment 25 #
2013/2206(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Takes note of the fact that the Commission, notwithstanding the Parliament'sary resolutions relating toabout the 2010 and 2011 discharge procedures, has not yet made neither thpublic exhaustive performance indicators upon which the budget support to the Republic of Haiti was based, noeither the detailed assessments of the Government of the Republic of Haiti’'s performance upon which the decision to give budget support was based public;
Amendment 26 #
2013/2206(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
Paragraph 56
Amendment 27 #
2013/2206(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59
Paragraph 59
59. Observes that since the publication of the CONT report, no improvements have taken place, despite the fact that and the Union participatesion in the International Aid Transparency Initiative, some improvements have taken place;
Amendment 28 #
2013/2206(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 72
Paragraph 72
72. Deplores, as in previous years, the fact that the investment facility is not covered by the Court of Auditors' Statement of Assurance or Parliament's discharge procedure, even though the projects are carried out by the EIB on behalf of and at the risk of the Union, using EDFs' resources; calls therefore for an end to be brought to the Tripartite Agreement during the October 2015 revision and include the investment facility in the normal discharge procedure;
Amendment 29 #
2013/2206(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 73
Paragraph 73
73. Asks the Court of Auditors to issue a Special Report on the performance and alignment with Union development policies and objectives of EIB external lending activities before the mid-term review of the EIB’s external mandate and the mid-term review of the Investment Facility, as well as compare the added value with regards the own resources used by the EIB; asks the Court of Auditors, furthermore, to differentiate their analysis between the guarantees granted by the general budget of the Union and by the Member States, the investment facility endowed by the EDF, and the usage of reflows for these investments, and the EIB's use of the various forms of blending used in the EU Africa infrastructural trust fund, the Caribbean investment fund and the investment facility for the Pacific and the usage of reflows for these investments;acility
Amendment 30 #
2013/2206(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 77, Ingeborg Gräßle
Paragraph 77, Ingeborg Gräßle
77. Believes that the EIB should continue to research a convergence of results reporting among the other co-financing international institutions along with the using of common indicators and definitions;
Amendment 13 #
2013/2200(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Considers that Mr Neves Mates is not in a position to fruitfully cooperate with Parliament as he has not honoured his promise made to Parliament not to accept his appointment as a member of the Court of Auditors in case Parliament gave him a negative verdict; notes that this, moreover, risks harming the working relationship of the Court of Auditors with Parliament and possibly has serious negative consequences for the credibility and hence effectiveness of the Court of Auditors; urges Mr Neves Mates to therefore resign;
Amendment 11 #
2013/2197(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Considers that the Council acted disdainfully towards Parliament by appointing a Member of the Court of Auditors, despite the fact that Parliament gave a negative opinion; urges the Council to pay attention to the opinions expressed by Parliament on the nomination of members of the Court of Auditors and to the declarations of prospective members of the Court of Auditors before they are nominated;
Amendment 36 #
2013/2196(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 c (new)
Paragraph 40 c (new)
40c. Reiterates its request to propose strict rules applicable to all Members for the use of the General Expenditure Allowance and to make it fully transparent; therefore requests that a system is developed by which Members have to report yearly on their use of this allowance, which will be subject to audit procedures;
Amendment 39 #
2013/2196(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 f (new)
Paragraph 40 f (new)
40f. Requests an evaluation of the daily subsistence allowance for Members concerning its amount and use, and requests that the Bureau revise this implementing measure accordingly to ensure that this allowance is used as cost- efficiently as possible;
Amendment 41 #
2013/2196(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Notes that Protocol 6, annexed to the Treaties, on the location of the seats of the institutions, decided by common agreement of the governments of the Member States, imposes on Parliament its three working places; notes the call expressed in its resolution of 17 April 2013 on the 2011 discharge for ‘the Secretary-General and the Bureau to provide Members with up-to- date figures and information on the financial and environmental impact of the multiple seat arrangement’ that followed Parliament’s resolution of 6 February 2013 on the guidelines for the 2014 budget procedure and the report on the location of the seats of the European Institutions adopted on 20 November 2013;
Amendment 43 #
2013/2196(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Recalls that significant historical reasons motivated the seat of the Parliament to be established in its current three places of work and that the question of determination of the seat of an Union institution is the exclusive competence of the Member States; notes in this respect that any decision to change the seats arrangement of Parliament would require a change of the Treaties, a decision which would have to be taken unanimously by the Member States; recalls that with the adoption of the report on the location of the seats of the Europeans institutions, Parliament has taken its first step in invoking Article 48 of the Treaty on European Union;
Amendment 30 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Heading 1
Heading 1
Amendment 36 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Heading 1 - Subheading 1
Heading 1 - Subheading 1
Amendment 43 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that, according to the Communication from the Commission on Protection of the European Union budget86 , eight Member States are responsible for 90 % of the financial corrections in the fields under shared management; urges the Commission therefore to direct its particular attention to those countries; __________________ 86 COM(2013) 682, 26 September 2013.
Amendment 79 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Heading 1 - Subheading 4
Heading 1 - Subheading 4
Amendment 98 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Acknowledges, as the Commission over and over indicates, that around 80% of the funds are being spend under shared management; nevertheless recalls that TFUE article 317 stipulates that the Commission bears the ultimate responsibility for the implementation of the budget;
Amendment 146 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Calls on the Commission, in its annual activity reports, to indicate how its own risk analyses have influenced the use of its own audit capacities, which countries were concerned and whether the shortcomings were remedied; calls for more direct audits of random samples taken from national granting authorities and final beneficiaries; furthermore urges the Commission to look at positive incentives vis-a-vis Member States that have low error rates for example by adjusting audit sample sizes;
Amendment 160 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32a. Calls on the Member States which did not already introduce a voluntary Member State Declaration to do so on the basis of the management declaration as foreseen by Article 59 of the Financial Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012; urges the Commission to establish the template for the management declaration as soon as possible; reiterates in this respect the ongoing work of the interinstitutional working group on Member State Declarations which for its result is very dependent on the new content of the management declarations;
Amendment 166 #
Amendment 169 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
Amendment 179 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)
Paragraph 35 a (new)
35a. Asks the Commission for a concise and comprehensive action plan that could also be endorsed by the new Commission in order to effectively respond to the reservations expressed in this discharge resolution;
Amendment 194 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
Paragraph 54
54. Welcomes the fact that the Commission succeeded in rapidly imposing a significant number of financial corrections in 2012 whilst many financial corrections are in general made many years after initial disbursement of funds; is critical of the fact that the EU budget incurs additional administrative costs and losses of revenue and interest due to excessively protracted procedures, considers effective ex-ante controls a better way of protecting the Union budget than ex post financial corrections;
Amendment 209 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 65 a (new)
Paragraph 65 a (new)
65a. Regrets that the Commission continues to ignore Parliament's long standing request to add the individual Commissioner's signature to the annual activity reports of his/her related Directorate-General for which he/she is responsible; notes that the synthesis report is adopted by the College of Commissioners, but deems this unsatisfactory in the light of democratic accountability principles;
Amendment 37 #
2013/2188(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D – point 9
Recital D – point 9
· the threats to privacy in a digital era; the Internet has been turned into a tool of mass surveillance instead of being an infrastructure that is open, secure and fosters economic growth; regrets the possible detrimental effects this will have on the US and EU's efforts to promote an open and secure Internet through the multistakeholder model at a global level;
Amendment 229 #
2013/2188(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
Amendment 231 #
2013/2188(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
Amendment 249 #
2013/2188(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. Reiterates its resolution of 23 October 2013 and asks the Commission for the suspension of the TFTP AgreementAsks the Commission to present proposals for a new system in which the extraction of data would take place inside the EU;
Amendment 488 #
2013/2188(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 114 – point 3
Paragraph 114 – point 3
Action 3: SuspendReview Safe Harbour until a full review has been conducted andand remedy current loopholes are remedied, making sure that transfers of personal data for commercial purposes from the Union to the US can only take place in compliance with highest EU standards;
Amendment 494 #
2013/2188(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 114 – point 4
Paragraph 114 – point 4
Action 4: Suspend the TFTP agreement until (i) the Umbrella Agreement negotiations have been concluded; (ii) a thorough investigation has been concluded on the basis of an EU analysis, and all concerns raised by Parliament in its resolution of 23 October have been properly addressed;Calls on the EC to present a new proposal where data extraction would take place from EU soil within the framework of the TFTP agreement
Amendment 65 #
2013/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on the Commission to enhance the transparency of expert groups and comitology groups, by holding their meetings in public and publishing the recruitment procedure for members, as well as information regarding membership, proceedings, documents considered, votes, decisions and minutes of meetings, all of which should be published online in a standard format; members of experts groups and comitology have to declare in advance if they have a personal interests in the subjects discussed
Amendment 2 #
2013/2145(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Emphasizes that recovered amounts are considered revenues that should remain in the Union budget and therefore contribute to a stabilisation of the budget; points out that this delivers a strong message and incentive to Member States to improve their management and control systems; regrets that while approximately 80 % of the budget is actually spent by Member States there is no clear commitment from most of the Member States for a declaration justifying that the money is well spent;
Amendment 8 #
2013/2145(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Regrets the fact that the 2014 budget will increase the RAL with an expected amount of EUR 6 billion (compare working document BUDG_DT(2013)510689 on the outstanding commitments for 2013 and calculation methods); calls upon the Commission and the Council to take the still increasing amount of outstanding commitments into account and come forward with measures to reduce the amount of outstanding commitments.
Amendment 8 #
2013/2139(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Requests the institutions involved to make the necessary efforts to improve procedural arrangements to accelerate the mobilisation of the EGF; appreciates the improved procedure put in place by the Commission, following Parliament's request for the accelerated 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 European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014–2020) and that greater efficiency, transparency and visibility of the EGF will be achieved;
Amendment 9 #
2013/2138(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. RegretNotes the decision of the Council to block the extension of the "crisis derogation", which allows for the provision of financial assistance to workers made redundant as a result of current financial and economic crisis in addition to those losing their job because of changes in global trade patterns and allows for an increase in the rate of Union co-financing to 65% of the programme cost, for applications submitted after the 31 December 2011 deadline; calls on the Council to reintroduce this measure without delay;
Amendment 67 #
2013/2131(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60
Paragraph 60
60. Asks the European Court of Auditors to carry out a special report on the performance and alignment with EU policies of EIB external lending activities before the mid-term review of the EIB’s external mandate as well as compare the added value with regards the own resources used by the EIB. Asks the ECA furthermore to differentiate their analysis between the guarantees granted by the EU budget, the investment facility endowed by the EDF, the various forms of blending used in the EU Africa infrastructural trust fund, the Caribbean investment fund and the investment facility for the Pacific and the usage of reflows for these investments;
Amendment 5 #
2013/2095(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 7 #
2013/2095(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Understands the social and economic difficulties that some Member States are experiencing, but reaffirms its strong support and the need for macroeconomic conditionality;
Amendment 2 #
2013/2087(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Deeply regretNotes that the Commission did not analyse the effectiveness of the use of the crisis derogation criterion until now, specially taking into account that these EGF cases were not evaluated in the EGF mid-term review; notes that the Commission is entering the final phase of the ex-post evaluation of the EGF (2007- 2013); regrets, however, that the results are likely to arrive too late to feed into the discussion on the new regulation for the EGF in 2014-2020, especially regarding the effectiveness of the use of the crisis derogation criterion.
Amendment 5 #
2013/2087(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls the importance of networking and exchange of information on the EGF; supports, therefore the funding of the Expert Group of Contact Persons of the EGF as well as other networking activities among the Member States including this years' seminar for practitioners on the implementation of the EGF; underlines the need to further enhance the liaising between all those involved in EGF applications, including namely the social partners, to create as many synergies as possible.
Amendment 11 #
2013/2087(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes the fact that following repeated requests from Parliament, and despite the fact that it is still under the necessary level, that the 2013 budget shows payment appropriations of EUR 50 000 000 on the EGF budget line 04 05 01; recalls that the EGF was created as a separate specific instrument with its own objectives and deadlines and that it therefore deservehas a dedicated allocation, which would avoid unnecessary delays, due to the fact that now its financing is made through transfers from other budget lines, which have proven to be detrimental to the achievement of the social, economic and policy objectives of the EGF of payment appropriations, which helps avoid unnecessary delays.
Amendment 14 #
2013/2087(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 16 #
2013/2087(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 18 #
2013/2087(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 20 #
2013/2087(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 3 #
2013/2018(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that the level of the preliminary draft estimates for the 2014 budget, as suggested by the Secretary-General in his report to the Bureau, amounts to EUR 1 813 144 206; notes with concern the rate of increase of 3,58 %compared with the 2013 budget; notes that this proposed increase has to be seen in the context of its constitutive elements, specifically an increase of 2,20 % stemming from the election of a new Parliament and the application of the Statutes for Members and Members' assistants, and an increase of 1,30 % deriving from other legal obligations; welcomes the Secretary- General's plans to investigate structural reforms in Parliament's budget and expects this work to present options for savings in the 2014 budget by September 2013, without jeopardising legislative excellence or the quality of working conditions;
Amendment 7 #
2013/2018(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that the financial implications of the European elections and the turnover of Members and their assistants during the changeover between the legislative terms are of an exceptional nature; welcomes the fact that the proposed rate of increase in the budget for 2014 is considerably lower than in 2009, the year of the last European elections, when and recognises the efforts already made to accommodate these one-off costs within the budget; believes, however, that greater effort must be made to find further savings, such as delaying capital projects or deferring non-essential spending where possible, in order to absorb theis increase was 5,33 %, even thoughithin a real terms freeze; regrets that these above mentioned legal requirements which are related to elections have increased by almost 52 % between 2009 and 2014dditional costs must be borne in one single budget year and urges the Secretary General to identify a way of ensuring these costs are spread over the lifetime of the parliamentary legislature in future;
Amendment 10 #
2013/2018(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Appreciates the fact that all other expenditure is reduced in total by 0,15 %, according to preliminary draft estimates, compared with the 2013 budget; observes that the reduction is even more significant in real terms, considering that the rates of inflation in Belgium, Luxembourg and France, where most of the Parliament's activities take place, were, respectively, 2,6 %, 2,9 %, and 2,2 % in 2012; welcomes the fact that reductions were made possible by structural savings introduced in the past, the different nature of parliamentary activity in an election year and the freezing of expenditure items, where possible, in all sectors;
Amendment 12 #
2013/2018(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the efforts made by the Bureau to present realistic preliminary draft estimates; appreciates that the rate of increase in the 2014 budget, as proposed by preliminary draft estimates, is particularly low when compared with the corresponding period under the previous MFF (2007-2013) when the rate was lower only in the 2012 and 2013 financial years; notes that the 2014 rate would be the lowest by some margin (1,38 %) if the additional expenditure linked to the election of a new Parliament was to be factored out;
Amendment 25 #
2013/2018(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Welcomes the proposed decreases compared with the 2013 budget in the areas of translation (-56%) and interpreting costs (-23%), without endangering the principle of multilingualism, lease payments (-60%), web TV (-38%) and fitting-out of premises (-31%) and asks for detailed information proving the feasibility of these proposed cuts;
Amendment 35 #
2013/2018(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Considers that the Joint Bureau and Committee on Budgets Working Group on the Parliament budget could, on the basis of work it began in 2012, continue to play a usefuln important role byin identifying possible structural savings and reflecting on and presenting to the Committee on Budgets ideas for further savings, more effectiveness and efficiency; encourages the continuation of its work through the thorough examination of possible efficiencies, synergies and savings which could create space for investment into institutional development for 2014 and beyond;
Amendment 1 #
2013/2017(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph D
Paragraph D
D. whereas the collection of value added tax (VAT) and customs duties directly affects both the economies of the Member States and the Union budget and should be included in Member States management declarations;
Amendment 4 #
2013/2017(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Is worried by the Court of Auditors' finding that more than 60% of errors in spending structural funds in 2011 should have been detected by the Member States' management and control systems; calls in this respect on the Member States to strengthen their management and control systems; urges Member States to issue National Management Declarations signed at the appropriate political level covering all spending under shared management;
Amendment 28 #
2013/2010(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls that, due to the intransigent position of the Council in the negotiations, the overall level of payments set in the 2013 budget is EUR 5 billion lower than the Commission’s estimates for payment needs in the draft budget; is extremely worried about the level of payments in the 2013 budget and believes that this level of appropriations will be insufficient to cover actual payment needs in 2013; warns that continued and excessive deferral of payments on an annual basis will create significant problems for future years;
Amendment 40 #
2013/2010(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Further calls on the Commission and the Council to work constructively, together with Parliament, to avoid any repetition of this situation in future budget cycles by improving forecasting accuracy and agreeing on realistic budget estimates which should include clear and detailed information on the nature of all payment estimates;
Amendment 47 #
2013/2010(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Is concerned about the high level of unused appropriations (RALs) accumulated at the end of the year 2012; proposes to organise once again this year inter- institutional meetings on the difference between commitment and payment appropriations, to establish a dialogue with the Commission in order to fully clarify the composition of RAL and to assess whether the current peak in RAL is primarily due to the economic crisis or whether it indicates wider structural problems; in the event of the latter conclusion, calls on institutions to work together and adopt an appropriate plan of action in order to address the issue of abnormal RAL during the next MFF; insists that the Council refrain from deciding a priori the level of payments, without taking account of actual needs and legal obligations; notes further that accruing RAL actually undermines a transparent EU budget in which the relation between commitments and payments in any specific budgetary year is clearly visible;
Amendment 86 #
2013/2010(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Highlights the strategic effect of the choice of priorities for 2014, as the first year of the coming MFF; emphasises the urgent need for the EU to foster growth and competitiveness, with the objective of creating jobs and opportunities, in particular for young people;
Amendment 30 #
2013/0255(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers the Commission proposal to be a further step towards the establishment of a European criminal justice areaa better coordination of Member States efforts to fight fraud with the EU Budget ;
Amendment 33 #
2013/0255(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Considers that the powers of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office should be limited to crimes affecting the financial interest of the Union, as set out in Article 86(1) TFEU, and its competences should remain in the remit of fight against fraud to the EU budget.
Amendment 95 #
2013/0152(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
Moreover, in its financial operations, the EIB must ensure that all companies and financial institutions involved in the transaction disclose as much as possible information regarding beneficial ownership of any legal structure directly or indirectly related to the company, including trusts, foundations and bank accounts in order to enhance transparency.
Amendment 98 #
2013/0152(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission shall report annually to the European Parliament and to the Council on EIB financing operations carried out under this Decision. For this purpose and to ensure proper coordination with EU external policies, the Commission shall in cooperation with the European External Action Service (EEAS) set up a framework and methodology for annual reporting. The report shall include:
Amendment 101 #
2013/0152(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
(ia) recommendations on how to improve EIB reporting.
Amendment 105 #
2013/0152(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
In particular, the EIB should look at the possibility for EIB beneficiaries, whether corporations or financial intermediaries that are incorporated in different jurisdictions, to disclose country level information about their sales, assets, employees, profits and tax payments in each country in which they operate in their audited annual reports.
Amendment 111 #
2013/0152(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
By 31 December 2017the end of 2016 and in no case later than the envisioned MFF mid-term review, the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and the Council a mid-term report evaluating the implementation of this Decision in the first years accompanied, where appropriate,so it can be taking into consideration during the mid-term review of the MFF. Where appropriate, it could be accompanied by a proposal for its amendment. The report shall draw upon an external evaluation and contribution from the EIB.
Amendment 16 #
2013/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 a (new)
Article 1 a (new)
Article 1 shall bewithout prejudice to the Regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014- 2020 and the Inter-institutional agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on cooperation in budgetary matters and sound financial management, once that Regulation and that Inter- institutional agreement are adopted. If, as a result of the adoption of the that Regulation and that Inter-institutional agreement, it becomes necessary to correct the adjustment rate the Commission shall present a revised proposal to the European Parliament and the Council, in accordance with Article 18(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 of 21 June 2005 on the financing of the common agricultural policy 1 before 1 December 2013. The adjustment rate shall be revised by the budget authority in the framework of the adoption of Budget 2014 on the basis, inter alia, of the Amending letter to the Draft General Budget 2014 by which the Commission provides updated estimates of the need for market related expenditures and direct payments. __________________ 1 OJ L 209, 11.8.2005, p. 1..
Amendment 3 #
2013/0000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the smooth functioning of the European Parliament shall be an equally important guiding principle;
Amendment 4 #
2013/0000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas certain investments may have a sustainable impact on the institutional budget and should therefore be considered despite tight margins for manoeuvre;
Amendment 11 #
2013/0000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Urges the institutions to strengthen their mutual cooperation, where possible and justified, to identify savings through pooling and sharing of resources, for instance, in information technology systems, translation, interpretation and drivingtransportation services and, possibly, other areas;
Amendment 18 #
2013/0000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Encourages the continuation of structural and organisational reforms, without sacrificing legislative excellence and the quality of working conditions, and supports organizational innovation to help improving the Parliament's efficiency and the Members' quality of working conditions in 2014 and the following years, including, but not limited to, more efficient structure of the working rhythm of the Parliament, "demand-driven" translation and interpretation services (without endangering the principle of multi- lingualism), optimal logistical solutions for Members and their assistants, further upgrading of in-house research assistance, and developing paperless Parliament and e- meetings; further notes in this context the letter of Commissioner Lewandowski to the Presidents of the European Institutions dated 7 January 2013 which once again invites institutions to reduce staffing levels in their 2014 estimates and to make all possible efforts aiming at a nominal freeze at the 2013 level of overall non-salary related expenditure;
Amendment 20 #
2013/0000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Encourages the continuation of structural and organisational reforms to deliver greater efficiencies, without sacrificing legislative excellence and the quality of working conditions, and supports organizational innovation to help improving the Parliament's efficiencyectiveness and the Members' quality of working conditions in 2014 and the following years, including, but not limited to, more efficient structure of the working rhythm of the Parliament, "demand-driven" translation and interpretation services (without endangering the principle of multi- lingualism), optimal logistical solutions for Members and their assistants, further upgrading of in-house research assistance, and developing paperless Parliament and e- meetings;
Amendment 24 #
2013/0000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Encourages the continuation of structural and organisational reforms, without sacrificing legislative excellence and the quality of services and working conditions, and supports organizational innovation to help improving the Parliament's efficiency and the Members' quality of working conditions in 2014 and the following years, including, but not limited to, more efficient structure of the working rhythm of the Parliament, "demand-driven" translation and interpretation services (without endangering the principle of multi- lingualism), optimal logistical solutions for Members and their assistants, further upgrading of in-house research assistance, and developing paperless Parliament and e- meetings;
Amendment 27 #
2013/0000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that the Joint Bureau and Committee on Budgets Working Group on the Parliament budget could play a useful role in this reform process, on the basis of its successful work throughout 2012 in identifying ways of economising and reflecting on possible reorganisation; notes that it has already largely achieved the objectives established for it at the end of 2011, for instancein particular, as regards reduction of travel expenses; in the light of the Group’s preliminary findings based, inter alia, on comparative studies of Parliament’s budget with the budgets of the US Congress and a sample of Member States’ parliaments, encourages the continuation of its work and the development of a corresponding action plan; to be presented to both the Committee on Budgets and the Bureau for consideration in the 2014 Parliament budget process; recalls Parliament's resolution of 23 October 20121 in which it expressed the expectation that these studies will "create long-term savings in the Parliament's budget and present ideas for improving efficiency in 2013 and the following years";
Amendment 29 #
2013/0000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes, more generally, the enhanced cooperation between the Committee on Budgets and the Bureau during the annual budget procedure; stands ready to further strengthen the cooperation between the Secretary-General, the Bureau, and the Committee on Budgets throughout the year with a view to ensuring a smooth budgetary process and effective implementation of the budget; expects the Bureau to present prudent needs-based draft estimates that take account of possible subsequent increases arising from legally binding obligations, in particular the one-off costs related to Members' transition arrangements for the 2014 European elections; calls on the Secretary General to provide information on the costs of the transition arrangements for the last 3 European Parliament elections;
Amendment 31 #
2013/0000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes, more generally, the enhanced cooperation between the Committee on Budgets and the Bureau during the annual budget procedure; stands ready to further strengthen the cooperation between the Secretary-General, the Bureau, and the Committee on Budgets throughout the year to ensure a smooth budgetary process and effective implementation of the budget; expects the Bureau to present prudent needs-based draft estimates that take account of possible subsequent increases arising from legally binding obligations and show a detailed record of costs developments to date as they affect the three places of work ;
Amendment 33 #
2013/0000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recalls the Parliament’s budgetary resolutions, including its most recent resolution of 23 October 201234, calling for a transparent decision-making process in the field of buildings policy, including a halt in acquisitions until the end of the current MFF; asks for information about the Secretary General's findings on, and schedule of, the renovation works and office relocation, including information about an intermediate building for the Parliament's 1 Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0359. 2 Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0359. 3 Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0359. 4 Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0359. staff, in the coming years, especially, in relation to the structural problems in the Paul-Henri Spaak (PHS) building and the acquisition of the Trebel building;
Amendment 36 #
2013/0000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recognises the major efforts that have been made in 2012 to communicate transparently the state of play of the KAD building to the Committee on Budgets; notes that adaptations and downsizing of 8 000 m2 have been made, resulting in sav and requests that this communication continues throughout the duration of the project, in particular with respect to the result of the amended Call to Tender; notes that adaptations and downsizings of EUR 80 million for the KAD project8 000 m2 have been proposed; welcomes the savings of more than EUR 10 million in interest payments in the coming years achieved by transfers for early advance payments for both the KAD and the Trebel buildings; encourages a continuation of the fruitful dialogue; trusts that the information requested will be delivered in a timely manner, given the strategic importance of these projects for 1 EP resolution of 23 October 2012 on the Council position on the draft general budget of the EU for the financial year 2013 - all sections. Parliament;
Amendment 40 #
2013/0000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Recalls the plenary decision for the Council to present a roadmap by June 2013 on the multiple seats of the EP and expects both the Committees concerned, the Secretary General and the Bureau to provide members with up-to-date figures and information on the financial and environmental impact of the multiple seat arrangement; suggests the EP's own impact assessment services examine this question also with respect to the impact of the EP's presence or partial presence on the respective communities and regions and present an assessment by June 2013 in order for these findings to be considered for the next MFF;
Amendment 48 #
2013/0000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. ERepeats the position adopted in previous budget cycles that it expects all the institutions to continue to demonstrate efforts in seeking savings and maintaining a high degree of budgetary discipline when drawing up their budget estimates;
Amendment 5 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas Parliament's estimates for 2014 put the overall budget at EUR 1 808 144 206, with costs directly related to the geographic dispersion estimated at EUR 180 000 000between EUR 169 million and EUR 204 million;
Amendment 8 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas since the beginning of the current legislature, both individual committees and the plenary have made several specific requests to the European Parliament's administration to provide comprehensive, detailed and reliable estimates of the additional costs relating to each of the three places of work;
Amendment 9 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas, the numbers provided by the Secretary-General's report to the Bureau of September 2002 are the last overall cost estimates available;
Amendment 10 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
Ac. whereas the 2002 Secretary-General's estimate was confirmed by the joint working group report of the Bureau and the Committee on Budgets on Parliament's budget for 2012, when complementing the EUR 148 million estimate by the EUR 25 million of annual amortisation cost for the Strasbourg buildings that need to be taken into account since the purchase of named buildings;
Amendment 14 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Amendment 18 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas a reply given to the EP Budgetary Control Committee in preparation for the EP discharge for 2011 does not provide estimates on the potential savings, but only a partial estimate of the additional costs of the Strasbourg seat; whereas this EUR 55 million estimate does not include many budget lines that were included in previous and following estimates, namely the cost of data processing, equipment and movable property, travel expenses of political groups as well as any potential savings connected to time lost travelling (totalling EUR 68 million); whereas this estimate provides lower numbers on several budget lines than both previous and following estimates without providing any justification (totalling EUR 25 million);
Amendment 20 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas none of these estimates includes the additional costs of the European Parliament's geographic dispersion on the other European Union institutions, in particular the European Commission and Council, EU member states' representations, journalists and civil society representatives;
Amendment 21 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C c (new)
Recital C c (new)
Cc. whereas ¾ of members believe that the EP should find significant structural savings and these could be found in re- evaluating the EP's geographical dispersion of places of work, illustrated by a breakdown of the costs of Brussels, Luxembourg and Strasbourg set out in a transparent and credible format to standards expected from a major public body;
Amendment 22 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C d (new)
Recital C d (new)
Cd. whereas the historical reasons for the European bodies permanently seated in Strasbourg are well-known in respect e.g. the European Court for Human Rights and the Council of Europe, and while the European Assembly /Parliament for convenience initially used the latter's Chamber, the choice of Brussels as the seat of the European Commission and of NATO reflect the EU's aspirations for a continent progressively united in prosperity and security;
Amendment 23 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C e (new)
Recital C e (new)
Ce. whereas situating the co-legislators of the EU in a single place does not undermine the tradition of polycentrism in the EU but bears significant efficiency and transparency gains for EU citizens;
Amendment 24 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C f (new)
Recital C f (new)
Cf. whereas, in many Member States, parliament's seat is laid down either in the Constitution or by law and whereas the European Parliament is a co-legislator of European law and can call for changes of the European treaties under article 48 of the Lisbon Treaty;
Amendment 25 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C g (new)
Recital C g (new)
Cg. whereas during the European Year of Citizens it is appropriate to show that their voice is not only heard but that their directly elected representatives are taking action on their behalf in order to end the monthly travel between the EP's places of work;
Amendment 26 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C h (new)
Recital C h (new)
Ch. whereas the European institutions must do everything to further European political integration and bridge the perceived distance from citizens by tackling a major structural issue of the institutions and promoting European understanding, transparency, accountability and coherence by having the EU's decision making bodies in one place;
Amendment 27 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C i (new)
Recital C i (new)
Ci. whereas 6% of the EU budget is intended for administrative purposes and that the European Union, with a relatively small operating budget for 500 million inhabitants, must set an example in these times of crisis by streamlining its own budgetary impact as much as possible without prejudice to the proper functioning of the European Parliament, adding that the efficiency gains of having a single seat near the co-legislator cannot be ignored;
Amendment 34 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Ask the Administration for a comparative analysis of the savings that could be made by allocating the working place of the Parliament solely in Brussels while moving the European Council meetings to Strasbourg. This analysis should include structural as well as ancillary costs;
Amendment 35 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Considers that while the seats of the European Institutions are enshrined in the Treaties, so is article 48, which allows for a proposal for treaty change;
Amendment 1 #
2012/2280(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the European Union has set up the appropriatewith its EGF has set up a legislative and budgetary instruments to provide additional support to workers who are suffering from the consequenceshave been made redundant as a result of major structural changes in world trade patterns and to assist their reintegration into the labour market,
Amendment 5 #
2012/2280(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls the importance of improving the employability of all workers by means of adapted training and recognition of skills and competences gained throughout the professional career; expects the training on offer in the coordinated package to be adapted not only to the level and needs of the dismissed workers, but also to the actual business environment;
Amendment 7 #
2012/2280(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Requests the institutions involved to make the necessary efforts to improve procedural and budgetary arrangements in order 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 European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014–2020) and that greater efficiency, and transparency and visibility of the EGF will be achieved;
Amendment 11 #
2012/2280(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 1 #
2012/2279(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the European Union has set up the appropriatewith its EGF has set up a legislative and budgetary instruments to provide additional support to workers who are suffering from the consequenceshave been made redundant as a result of major structural changes in world trade patterns and to assist their reintegration into the labour market,
Amendment 5 #
2012/2279(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls the importance of improving the employability of all workers by means of adapted training and recognition of skills and competences gained throughout the professional career; expects the training on offer in the coordinated package to be adapted not only to the level and needs of the dismissed workers, but also to the actual business environment;
Amendment 8 #
2012/2279(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Requests the institutions involved to make the necessary efforts to improve procedural and budgetary arrangements in order 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 European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014–2020) and that greater efficiency, and transparency and visibility of the EGF will be achieved;
Amendment 13 #
2012/2279(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 1 #
2012/2278(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the European Union has set up the appropriatewith its EGF has set up a legislative and budgetary instruments to provide additional support to workers who are suffering from the consequenceshave been made redundant as a result of major structural changes in world trade patterns and to assist their reintegration into the labour market,
Amendment 4 #
2012/2278(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls the importance of improving the employability of all workers by means of adapted training and recognition of skills and competences gained throughout the professional career; expects the training on offer in the coordinated package to be adapted not only to the level and needs of the dismissed workers, but also to the actual business environment;
Amendment 7 #
2012/2278(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Requests the institutions involved to make the necessary efforts to improve procedural and budgetary arrangements in order 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 European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014–2020) and that greater efficiency, and transparency and visibility of the EGF will be achieved;
Amendment 13 #
2012/2278(BUD)
Amendment 1 #
2012/2277(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the European Union has set up the appropriatewith its EGF has set up a legislative and budgetary instruments to provide additional support to workers who are suffering from the consequenceshave been made redundant as a result of major structural changes in world trade patterns and to assist their reintegration into the labour market,
Amendment 3 #
2012/2277(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomesonders at the fact that, in order to provide workers with immediate assistance, the Austrian authorities decided to start the implementation of the measures on 1 October 2011 - well ahead of the final decision on granting the EGF support for the proposed coordinated package, thereby turning the EGF special and personalised assistance into a quasi foregone conclusion and reimbursement for measures already undertaken;
Amendment 6 #
2012/2277(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls the importance of improving the employability of all workers by means of adapted training and recognition of skills and competences gained throughout the professional career; expects the training on offer in the coordinated package to be adapted not only to the level and needs of the dismissed workers, but also to the actual business environment;
Amendment 8 #
2012/2277(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Requests the institutions involved to make the necessary efforts to improve procedural and budgetary arrangements in order 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 European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014–2020) and that greater efficiency, and transparency and visibility of the EGF will be achieved;
Amendment 14 #
2012/2277(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 1 #
2012/2276(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
Amendment 5 #
2012/2276(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights the key importance of adapted training and recognition of skills and competences gained throughout the professional career; underlines that it is essential that the training on offer in the coordinated package is to be adapted and adequate to the needs and level of the dismissed workers, taking into account their social and economic background current business environment;
Amendment 7 #
2012/2276(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Requests the institutions involved to make the necessary efforts to improve procedural and budgetary arrangements in order 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 European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014–2020) and thatwith these improvements greater efficiency, facilitated mobilization, transparency and visibility of the EGF will be achieved;
Amendment 13 #
2012/2276(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Acknowledges that following requests from Parliament, the 2012 budget shows payment appropriations of EUR 50 000 000 on the EGF budget line 04 05 01; deeply regretnotes, however, that for the second year in a row these payment appropriations have turned out to be clearly insufficient to cover the funding requests for a whole year and the missing payment appropriations have to be marshaled though an amending budget via transfers from other budget lines; believes that both these facts do not denote sound budgeting; recalls that the EGF was created as a specific instrument to give an immediate and adequate answer to special situations of social emergencies raised by the impact ofresponse to mass redundancies due to the direct and indirect effects of globalization; highlights, therefore, that the EGF deserves a dedicated andwithout adequate level of appropriations, and in order to avoid systematic transfers from other budget lines, as has happened in the past, which is detrimental toneither the emergency nature of the EGF itselfnor its integrity can be guaranteed;
Amendment 15 #
2012/2276(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 1 #
2012/2275(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the European Union has set up the appropriatewith its EGF has set up a legislative and budgetary instruments to provide additional support to workers who are suffering from the consequenceshave been made redundant as a result of major structural changes in world trade patterns and to assist their reintegration into the labour market,
Amendment 4 #
2012/2275(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomesonders at the fact that, in order to provide workers with immediate assistance, the Austrian authorities decided to start the implementation of the measures on 1 October 2011 - well ahead of the final decision on granting the EGF support for the proposed coordinated package, thereby turning the EGF special and personalised assistance into a quasi foregone conclusion and reimbursement for measures already undertaken;
Amendment 5 #
2012/2275(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls the importance of improving the employability of all workers by means of adapted training and recognition of skills and competences gained throughout the professional career; expects the training on offer in the coordinated package to be adapted not only to the level and needs of the dismissed workers, but also to the actual business environment;
Amendment 8 #
2012/2275(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Requests the institutions involved to make the necessary efforts to improve procedural and budgetary arrangements in order 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 European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014–2020) and that greater efficiency, and transparency and visibility of the EGF will be achieved;
Amendment 13 #
2012/2275(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 1 #
2012/2265(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the European Union has set up the appropriatewith its EGF has set up a legislative and budgetary instruments to provide additional support to workers who are suffering from the consequenceshave been made redundant as a result of major structural changes in world trade patterns and to assist their reintegration into the labour market,
Amendment 4 #
2012/2265(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls the importance of improving the employability of all workers by means of adapted training and recognition of skills and competences gained throughout the professional career; expects the training on offer in the coordinated package to be adapted not only to the level and needs of the dismissed workers, but also to the actual business environment;
Amendment 7 #
2012/2265(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Requests the institutions involved to make the necessary efforts to improve procedural and budgetary arrangements in order 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 European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014–2020) and that greater efficiency, and transparency and visibility of the EGF will be achieved;
Amendment 9 #
2012/2265(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 61 #
2012/2167(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Regrets that the Commission has refused Parliament'sconstantly ignores Parliament's long standing request to add the responsible Commissioner's signature to the annual activity reports of his/her related departmentDirectorate General; notes however that the Synthesis report is adopted by the College of Commissioners and contains a specific statement emphasising the Commission's final responsibility for the management of its authorising officers on the basis of assurances and reservations made by them in their annual activity reports; is therefore of the opinion that the College, when adopting the Synthesis report, took note of the problems in the respective directorates- general and can be held responsible;
Amendment 65 #
2012/2167(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Calls on the Commission to investigate the possibilities of setting up a correctional system for error prone spending areas, in which the total material value of errors in year n will be partially or entirely depending on the severity of the irregularities, deducted from the yearly reimbursement requests made by accrediting organizations;
Amendment 93 #
2012/2167(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Welcomes the fact that the Commission transmits to Parliament the annual summaries submitted by the Member States with an analysis of their content, and; asks the Commission to provide them in a clear and readable format which enables Members of Parliament to easily read them, calls on the Commission to address to the Member States the necessary recommendations in order to improve the reporting instruments;
Amendment 100 #
2012/2167(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Calls on the Commission to establish in the short term, in cooperation with the Member States, a model for national management declarations which will make them meaningful and comparable; takes thecalls on the Commission to openly provide its opinion on those declarations; takes the See the Commission's Synthesis report, point 3.3, in footnote 9 on page 11 of COM(2012)0281. view that such declarations should, inter alia, certify criteria (such as true and fair 1 accounts, the effectiveness of management and control systems and the legality and regularity of underlying transactions) and specify the scope of assurance reservations and disclaimers; asks the Commission to present proposals for decreasing the burden of controls for those Member States or regions that perform consistently well according to the annual reports of the Court of Auditors and to their own national management declarations; is of the opinion that the Court of Auditors and the Commission should be able to incorporatetake account of the substance of national management declarations in their audit work;
Amendment 147 #
2012/2167(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 78
Paragraph 78
78. Underlines that the Court's findings in its Special Report No 13/2011 were corroborated by the conclusions of the fact- finding mission of Parliament's Budgetary Control Committee to the ports of Rotterdam and Antwerp, which took place on 19 and 20 September 2012; notes that Rotterdam,the Union is major trading block and theat largest European port,s attracts a lot of ships thanks to the simplified Dutch data processing system; stresses that simplification many ships; due to the logistic pressure these ports rely on the procedures and the risk based approach to controls as foreseen in the customs regulation and that also authorized economic operators play a more and more important role; stresses that a risk based approach of customs procedures should not lead to less effective control systems in European ports and that ‘simplifiedall procedures’ should be effectively controlled by the Member States; notes that reduced controls could translate into major economic advantages for a port, points out, however, that seeking such competitive advantages may seriously harm the financial interests of the Union and its Member States; 1 Regime used by an importer in order to obtain a VAT exemption when the imported goods will be transported to another Member State and where the VAT is due in the Member Ststresses that any unjustified reduced control may seriously harm the Union's financial interests and thate of destination. 2 Of which EUR 1 800 million were incurred in the seven selected Member States and EUR 400 million in the 21 Member States of destination of the imported goods in the sample. the Member States.
Amendment 162 #
2012/2167(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 94
Paragraph 94
94. Takes note of the Court's approach which for the first time included cross compliance infringements in the calculation of the error rate as ‘cross- compliance obligations are substantive legal requirements that must be met by all recipients of direct aid and are the basic and in many cases the only conditions to be respected in order to justify the payments of full amount of direct payments’*1 ; asks the Court in this context to explain and justify its changes of methodology and to align its methodology with that of the Commiss, calls on the Commission and the Court of Auditors to agree on a consistent methodology that makes it possible to better compare the year-on-year results of the Commission’s budget implementation;
Amendment 169 #
2012/2167(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 102
Paragraph 102
102. Notes with disappointment that the Court of Auditors found that the effectiveness of the Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS) is adversely affected by inaccurate data in the various databases and also by an incorrect administrative treatment of claims by the paying agencies in thecertain Member States; reminds the Commission that introduction of IACS led to dramatic decrease in errors and calls to remedy the situation without any delays using suspensions and interruptions of funding when necessary;
Amendment 171 #
2012/2167(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 106
Paragraph 106
106. Calls on the Commission to take all necessary actions so that paying agencies remedy weaknesses detected in their administration and control system and insists that the design and quality of the work to be performed by certifying bodies must be improved in order to provide reliable assessment of legality and regularity of operations in the paying agencies; asks the Commission to investigate if it is possible to cooperate with private individuals to verify cross compliance standards and reduce administrative burden;
Amendment 225 #
2012/2167(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 156 a (new)
Paragraph 156 a (new)
156a. Asks the Commission to report before July 2013 on the number of NGOs to which the Union contributes but which do not generate any revenue other than funding from government agencies;
Amendment 237 #
2012/2167(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 158
Paragraph 158
158. Regrets that the great number of Commission services involved in that policy area renders decision-making and the lines of responsibilities opaque; calls on the Commission to designate a single Commissioner as responsible for the ITER projectreview distribution of Commissioners' portfolios in order to better reflect competences distribution of the committees of Parliament and as it is wide spread practice in Member States;
Amendment 238 #
2012/2167(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 159
Paragraph 159
159. Is concerned about the delay in dismantling the Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant (INPP) in Lithuania, due to conflicts between the authorities and the contractors; welcomes that thesupports Commission's and the international donor community have's decision to suspended financial support for the project, in line with the recommendations of Parliament's Committee on Budgetary Control, until the conflict has been solved;
Amendment 252 #
2012/2167(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 173
Paragraph 173
Amendment 17 #
2012/2110(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 1 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Supports the continuation of assistance to the Turkish Cypriot community until a comprehensive settlement of the Cyprus problem, in the framework of Council Regulation (EC) 389/2006 which states that measures to be financed under this Regulation are of an exceptional and transitional nature; considers it important to budgetise support for the Turkish- Cypriot community in the next MFF (2014-2020);
Amendment 6 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas following the 2004 referenda in which the Turkish Cypriot Community has clearly expressed their desire for a future in the European Union, the Council (General Affairs and External Relations), shortly before the accession of Cyprus to the EU, requested the Commission to submit a proposal for an aid programme with particular emphasis on the economic integration of the island and on improving contacts between the two communities and within the EU and that on 7 July 2004, the Commission proposed a package of two regulations: one for a financial support instrument to encourage the economic development of the Turkish Cypriot community and a ‘direct trade’ regulation; it proved, however, difficult for the Council to agree on the adoption of this package and the two regulations had to be decoupled;
Amendment 11 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas despite facing difficult political and legal circumstances and a tight timetable, the Commission developed a programme which was generally in line withreflected the regulation's objectives, and set up a programme management office and generally suitableffective implementation arrangementmechanisms;
Amendment 13 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
Amendment 19 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on its Committee on Budgets and on the Committee on Budgetary Control to take the findings of this resolution into consideration when negotiating the new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) starting in 2014 in order to take into account the Court of Auditors' recommendation that a mechanism with a multiannual perspective in order to ensure better planning, implementation and sustainability;
Amendment 24 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that the existing de facto division of Cyprus dates back to Turkey's military invasion of in the Northern part of the island in July 1974; this followed after years of intercommunity struggles;
Amendment 30 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Acknowledges that a particular risk relates to the fact that an estimated 78 % of privately owned land in the northern part of Cyprus legally belongs to Greek Cypriots, whose consent is required for EU-funded infrastructure investments on their land;
Amendment 38 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls that according to Regulation 389/2006 the EU is bound not tothe objective of the programme is to facilitate the the reunification of Cyprus, and the granting of assistance shall not imply recognisetion of any public authority other than the Ggovernment of the Republic of Cyprus;Cyprus in which the government does not exercise effective control.
Amendment 39 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 46 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Takes note that the programme has assisted a great number of different beneficiaries across the Turkish Cypriot community and some important results have already been achieved but that the construction of a seawater desalination plant, which is the programme's largest bi- communal project (€27.5 million), ended in failure due to unacceptable restrictionshas unfortunately not succeeded until now;
Amendment 52 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Takes noteExpresses its agreement ofn the conclusions of the Special Report of the Court of Auditors and in particular that ‘the programme has already achieved some positive results but their sustainability is often in doubt, particularly given the uncertainty over future EU funding’, and that the Commission ‘has been able to develop a programme which addresses and appropriately prioritises all sectors referred to in the regulations's also found a way in the face of significant constraints to quickly set up a programme management office in the northern part of Cyprus and use largely suitable implementation methods and risk mitigation measures. The main weaknesses in the management of the programme resulted from the local support office not operating under more devolved procedures in the same way as EU delegations and from the staff contracts being too short for them to manage the projects financed from start to finish. In addition, monitoring in the framework of joint management with the UN was not sufficient’;
Amendment 56 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes that the programme has assisted many different beneficiaries across the Turkish Cypriot community; but observes nevertheless that it has not been possible to implement the single largest bi-communal project, the construction of a seawater desalination plant (27,5 million euro) due to restrictions imposed by the Turkish army. This represents a significant setback for the programme;
Amendment 61 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notices that ‘more generally, the sustainability of projects is often in doubt due to the limited administrative capacity, the delayed adoption of relevant laws and regulations and the uncertainties over future spending on the part of the beneficiaries;
Amendment 65 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Agrees with the Commission, that until a settlement of the Cyprus issue is achieved, the support to the TCc is toshould continue be based on the current Aid Regulation;
Amendment 66 #
Amendment 70 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Acknowledges that the situation described in the Court of Auditors' Special Report No 6/2012 the Commission has taken a number of initiatives and that since the audit, further efficiency improvements have been achieved; takes note of the Commission proposals in the context of the future MFF;
Amendment 77 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Regrets the loss of the seawater desalination plant project which was an unfortunate setback; recalls that this project was not only the main project in the water sector but also the largest bi-communal project funded under the instrument and that the plant was intended to provide 23 000 m3 of clean drinking water per day covering the needs of an estimated 100 000 people and recalls that water supply is becoming an increasingly critical issue for the island following a 40 % decrease in the mean annual rainfall in the past 30 years; is deeply concerned that the cancellation of the project due to the restrictions, imposed by the Greek Cypriot contractor by the Turkish army means that this serious environmental issue will not be addressed;
Amendment 79 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Regrets the loss of the seawater desalination plant project which was an unfortunate setback; recalls that this project was not only the main project in the water sector but also the largest bi-communal project funded under the instrument and that the plant was intended to provide 23 000 m3 of clean drinking water per day covering the needs of an estimated 100 000 people and recalls that water supply is becoming an increasingly critical issue for the island following a 40 % decrease in the mean annual rainfall in the past 30 years; is deeply concerned that the cancellation of the project due to the restrictions, imposed by the Greek Cypriot contractor by the Turkish army, and once those restrictions were lifted in March 2010 the contractor was unwilling to continue means that this serious environmental issue will not be addressed;
Amendment 82 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Deeply regrets that delays have affected most of the actions on local and urban infrastructures, although thesein most cases the delays were due to political difficulties and verification of land ownership, which are largely outside the control the Commission and the UNDP;
Amendment 85 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Takes note ofEndorses the conclusions and recommendations of the Court of Auditors and urges the Commission to take fully into consideration the recommendations of the Court of Auditors;
Amendment 87 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Welcomes the conclusion of the Court of Auditors that despite the difficult political context and a compressed timetable, the Commission managed to establish a programme which reflected the Regulation's objectives and to quickly set up a programme management office and introduce suitable implementing mechanisms;
Amendment 90 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Stresses the transitional and exceptional character of the EU aid to the TCc, pending the reunification of Cyprus; and, as the Commission, supports the continuation of assistance to the Turkish Cypriot community until a comprehensive settlement of the Cyprus problem in the framework of Regulation (EC) No 389/2006;
Amendment 94 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. BelieveRecalls that the assistance should be based on the current Aid Regulation, recognising the inefficiencies, related to insufficient predictability of the reunification process in Cyprus;objective of the programme is to facilitate the reunification of Cyprus, and the granting of assistance under Regulation (EC) No 289/2006 shall not imply recognition of any public authority other than the Government of Cyprus in the areas in which the Government does not exercise effective control.
Amendment 101 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Emphasizes that the main objective of Regulation 389/2006 is to facilitTakes note of the conclusions and recommendations of Special Report 6/2012 and proposes thate the reunification of the island; recommends reviewing once again the distribution of the aid to the TCc and the objective obstacles related toEU financial aid for the economic development of the Turkish-Cypriot community takes into account not only new projects but also the need to help secure the sustainability of theexisting projects; suggests considering whether large scale bi-communal infrastructure programs should still be pursued or a focus on smaller scale bi-communal projects, confidence building measures, the support when deciding on the allocation of any future funding, based ofn the civil society, the missing persons' related activities, the youth mobility, the preservation of historical sites should be considered instead;existing legal framework and in line with Council Regulation (EC) No 389/2006.
Amendment 105 #
2012/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30a. Considers that EU aid should continue to support the reunification process in Cyprus;
Amendment 13 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
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;
Amendment 18 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
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;
Amendment 21 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
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);
Amendment 22 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
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;.
Amendment 31 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
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;
Amendment 41 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
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;
Amendment 59 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
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;
Amendment 84 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
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;
Amendment 122 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 65
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;
Amendment 124 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 66
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;
Amendment 128 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 77
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;
Amendment 129 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraphs 77 a, b, c, d, e, f, g (new)
Paragraphs 77 a, b, c, d, e, f, g (new)
Amendment 133 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 79
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;
Amendment 28 #
2012/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. UrgesCalls on the EU to make asbestos screening and registration obligatorydevelop and implement proposals for obligatory screening of commercial/public buildings to identify the presence of asbestos containing materials, prepare plans to manage the risks they present and make that information available to workers who may disturb them in accordance with Article 11 Directive 2009/148/EC;
Amendment 36 #
2012/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Urges the EU to establish action plans for owners of public buildings for the safe management and where necessary, removal of asbestos, and to provide information and guidelines to encourage private house owners to auditeffectively audit and risk assess their premises for ACMs;
Amendment 45 #
2012/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Urges the Commission to make mandatory the establishment of public asbestos registers by Member States; work with Member States and Public Administrations to develop effective information sharing systems which would serve to provide relevant information on asbestos risks to workers and employers prior to renovation works being undertaken, and complement existing health and safety protections required under EU law;
Amendment 51 #
2012/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Urges the EU to make it mandatory for building owners to inform the Labour Inspectorateintain requirements set out in Art 4 Directive 2009/148/EC for employers to inform the Responsible Authorities about intended plans for work with ACMs;
Amendment 62 #
2012/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the EU to set up minimum requirements for mandatory asbestos- specific qualifications for civil engineers, architects and, employees of registered asbestos removal companies and to provide asbestos-specific qualifications for the training of other workers likely to be exposed to asbestos in accordance with Art 14 (1) Directive 2009/148/EC, as well as working with and supporting the social partners and other stakeholders to organise and run awareness raising activities for workers on the risks arising from asbestos and the need for appropriate training of all staff in the relevant sectors;
Amendment 68 #
2012/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Commission to propose a specific directive with minimum requirements for thework with and support the social partners and others stakeholders to improve implementation of Art 14(2) Directive 2009/148/EC through raising awareness of the need for appropriate training, such as vocational training, of construction and maintenance workers, including construction professionals who are working incidentally with asbestos and to develop information and materials to provide this;
Amendment 76 #
2012/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. UrgesCalls on the EU to start action plans for asbestos removal at European, national and regional levels, which are to include: legislation;work with social partners and other stakeholders at European, national and regional levels to develop and share action plans for asbestos management and removal where necessary in the interest of improved safety. These plans should include: education and information; training for public employees; national and international training; and awareness- raising activities related to the removal ofrisk from asbestos and products containing asbestos from buildings, public amenities and sites of former asbestos factories; cleaning premises, building landfills and installations for the destruction of asbestos and asbestos-containing debris; monitoring of the implementation of regulation(including during removal from buildings); monitoring of the effectiveness of existing legal requirements, exposure assessments of at- risk personnel, and health protection;
Amendment 86 #
2012/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. UrgesCalls on the Commission to lower the limit value for asbestos fibresundertake research to review the existing limit value for asbestos fibres, and if necessary lower it to an acceptable safety level based on the best available scientific evidence;
Amendment 95 #
2012/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls on the Ccommission to immediately revise the provisions on exemptions for chrysotile asbestos in annex XVII of REACHreview progress on the development of chrysotile- free diaphragms used in electrolysis installations, in accordance with REACH, Annex XVII, Part 6;
Amendment 5 #
2012/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas under Article 286 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the Members of the Court of Auditors must be chosen from among persons who belong or have belonged in their respective Member State to external audit bodies or who are especially qualified and whom independence is beyond doubt to hold the office in question;
Amendment 7 #
2012/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas some appointments have given rise to differences of opinion between Parliament and the Council, the persistence of which risks harming the good working relations of the Court with the aforementioned institutions and possibly jeopardising the credibilityhave serious negative consequences for the credibility and hence effectiveness of the Court;
Amendment 79 #
2012/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 – point 2
Paragraph 16 – point 2
· provision of performance audits evaluating the economy, efficiency and, effectiveness and allocation of public spending of Union policy instruments;
Amendment 117 #
2012/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 6 a (new)
Subheading 6 a (new)
In order to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of the Court article 285 of the TFUE should be changed in such a way that the number of Members of the Court of Auditors be brought down to half of the existing members now.
Amendment 118 #
2012/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. UnderlinNotes that the composition and appointment procedure of the Court are fixed in the Treaty; recogniFUE article 286; stresses, however, that the Court has significant flexibility to define the way e need for a Treaty change setting the Council and Parliament on equal footing which it organises itself; expects, furthermore, that when necessary, the EU's political authorities will take necessary decisions in a timely manner;en appointing Members of the Court of Auditors in order to ensure democratic legitimacy, transparency and complete independence of the Members of the Court of Auditors
Amendment 154 #
2012/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 – point a a (new)
Paragraph 34 – point a a (new)
(aa) While being neutral with regards to the person, deems it suitable to prefer Members from the Court coming from Member States which deliver a Member State declaration in order to provide a positive incentive for Member States to deliver a Member State Declaration.
Amendment 1 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph C
Paragraph C
C. wheregreats adequate arrangements must be put in place for transparency, accountability and audit where public funds are at stake;that the European Parliament has never received annual summaries of the EU Member States as provided by Article 44 of the Interinstitutional Agreement on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (2006/C 139/01) equally signed by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission; expects the European Commission to officially sent the annual summaries to the EP dating from 2007
Amendment 28 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that, in the light of its new mandateincreased tasks under its new mandate as well as the future implementation of EUROSUR, Frontex should be allocated additional staff;
Amendment 29 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Understands that the Commission, at the end of the programming period, puts the accent on the side of payments, as it intends to also provide a solution to the ever more growing level of RALs; while sharing this approach, is particularly concerned by the proposed freezing of commitment appropriations at the level of the estimated inflation rate for next year; stresses the importance of commitments for determining political priorities and, thus, ensuring that the necessary investments will eventually be put in place to boost growth and employment; does not believeis of the opinion that the freezing of commitment appropriations canis only a partial solution to the increasing RALs problem and cannot be considered as an acceptable strategy to keep the level of RAL under control;
Amendment 60 #
2012/2000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes that the level of payments, which, being the mere result of past commitments, should be determined on the basis of technical criteria such as implementation figures, absorption forecasts or the level of outstanding commitments (RALs), has become the main political issue within the Council in the past few budgetary procedures; points to the growing level of RALs at the end of 2011, amounting to € 207 billion, which represents almost 7 % more than the level at the end of 2010; insists that Council refrain from deciding the level of payments without taking account of actual needs view of the upcoming interinstitutional meeting on the difference between commitment and payment appropriations will establish a dialogue with the Commission in order to fully clarify how the RAL is composed in terms of the year in which commitments were adopted in the budget, member state(s) in which the commitments will be executed, how the n+x rule affects the particular commitment and the budgetary chapter in which the commitment is located. The current situation should be compared to the one in the previous MFF and definitive solutions should be proposed; insists that Council refrain from deciding the level of payments without taking account of actual needs; notes further that accruing RAL actually undermine a transparent EU budget in which it is clearly visible how commitments and payments are related in a specific budgetary year;
Amendment 377 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) In order to ensure that individuals are not deprived of the protection to which they are entitled under this Regulation, the processing of personal data of data subjects residing in the Union by a controller not established in the Union should be subject to this Regulation where the processing activities are related to the offering of goods or (free)services to such data subjects, or to the monitoring of the behaviour of such data subjects.
Amendment 379 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) In order to determine whether a processing activity can be considered to ‘monitor the behaviour’ of data subjects, it should be ascertained whether individuals are tracked, regardless onf the internetorigins of the data, with data processing techniques which consist of applying a ‘profile’ to an individual, particularly in order to take decisions concerning her or him or for analysing or predicting her or his personal preferences, behaviours and attitudes.
Amendment 383 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The principles of protection should apply to any information concerning an identified or identifiable person. To determine whether a person is identifiable, account should be taken of all the means likely reasonably to be used either by the controller or by any other person to identify the individual. The principles of data protection should not apply to data rendered anonymous in such a way that the data subject is no longer identifiable as for example data that has been anonymised for the purpose of medical research.
Amendment 399 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) When using online serservices or devices, individuals may be associated with online identifiers provided by their devices, applications, tools and protocols, such as Internet Protocol addresses or cookie identifiers. This may leave traces which, combined with unique identifiers and other information received by the servers, may be used to create profiles of the individuals and identify them. It follows that identification numbers, location data, online identifiers or other specific factors as such need not necessarily be considered as personal data in all circumstances.
Amendment 407 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Consent should be given explicitly by any appropriate method enabling a freely given specific and informed indication of the data subject’s wishes, either by a statement or by a clear affirmative action by the data subject, ensuring that individuals are aware that they give their consent to the processing of personal data, including by ticking a box when visiting an Internet website or by any other statement or conduct which clearly indicates in this context the data subject'’s acceptance of the proposed processing of their personal data. Silence or inactivityUser-friendly information about the types of processing that will be carried out should facilitate informed consent. Silence, inactivity such as not changing opt-in by default settings, should therefore not constitute consent. Consent should cover all processing activities carried out for the same purpose or purposes. If the data subject'’s consent is to be given following an electronic request, the request must be clear, concise and not unnecessarily disruptive to the use of the service for which it is provided.
Amendment 422 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) TIf a controller or a processor has multiple establishments in the Union, including but not limited to cases where the controller or the processor is part of a group of undertakings, the main establishment of a controller in the Union for the purposes of this Regulation should be determined according to objective criteria and should imply the effective and real exercise of management activities determining the main decisions as to the purposes, conditions and means of processing through stable arrangements. This criterion should not depend whether the processing of personal data is actually carried out at that location; the presence and use of technical means and technologies for processing personal data or processing activities do not, in themselves, constitute such main establishment and are therefore not determining criteria for a main establishment. The main establishment of the processor should be the place of its central administration in the Union.
Amendment 445 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) Consent should not as a rule provide a valid legal ground for the processing of personal data, where there is a clear imbalance between the data subject and the controller. This which is especifically the case where the data subject is in a situation of dependence from the controller, among others, where personal data are processed by the employer of employees’ personal data in the employment context. Where the controller is a public authority, there would be an imbalance only in the specific data processing operations where the public authority can impose an obligation by virtue of its relevant public powers and the consent cannot be deemed as freely given, taking into account the interest of the data subject.
Amendment 462 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39 a (new)
Recital 39 a (new)
(39a) The processing of personal data for direct marketing purposes should constitute a legitimate interest, if the controller has obtained the personal data of the data subject in the context of the sale of a product or service and that the personal data are used for direct marketing of the data controllers own similar products.
Amendment 477 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) Modalities should be provided for facilitating the data subject’s exercise of their rights provided by this Regulation, including mechanisms to request, free of charge, in particular access to data, rectification, erasure and to exercise the right to object. The controller should be obliged to respond to requests of the data subject within a fixedreasonable deadline and give reasons, in case he does not comply with the data subject’s request.
Amendment 502 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54
Recital 54
(54) To strengthen the ‘right to be forgotten’ in the online environment, the right to erasure should also be extended in such a way that a controller who has made the personal data public should be obliged to informwhere possible, taking into account the specific context in which the data was publicized and the responsibilities of the data subject and processor, to erase personal data made public. The processor should inform where this is possible third parties which are processing such data that a data subject requests them to erase any links to, or copies or replications of that personal data. To ensure this information, the controller should take all reasonable steps, including technical measures, in relation to data for the publication of which the controller is responsible. In relation to a third party publication of personal data, the controller should be considered responsible for the publication, where the controller has authorised the publication by the third party.
Amendment 505 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55
Recital 55
(55) To further strengthen the control over their own data and their right of access, data subjects should have the right, where personal data are processed by electronic means and in a structured and commonly used format, to obtain a copy of the data concerning them also in commonly used electronic format. The data subject should also be allowed to transmit those data, which they have provided, from one automated application, such as a social network, into another one. Data controllers should be encouraged to develop interoperable formats that enable data portability. This should apply where the data subject provided the data to the automated processing system, based on their consent or in the performance of a contract.
Amendment 528 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 65
Recital 65
(65) Each controller and processor should be obliged to co-operate with the supervisory authority. In order to demonstrate compliance with this Regulation, the controller or processor should document each processing operation. Each controller and processor should be obligs if one of the processing operations as mentioned in Article 33(2) is be being executed; tohe co-operate with the supervisory authorityntroller or processor should and make thisavailable documentation, on request, available to it by the DPA , so that it might serve for monitoring those processing operations.
Amendment 536 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 67
Recital 67
(67) A personal data breach may, if not addressed in an adequate and timely manner, result in substantial economic loss and social harm, including identity fraud, to the individual concerned. Therefore, as soon as the controller becomes aware that such a breach has occurred, the controller should notify the breach to the supervisory authority without undue delay and, w. The re feasible, within 24 hours. Where this cannot achieved within 24 hours, an explanation of the reasons for the delay should accompany the notificationsponsibility hereof should rest with the controller. The individuals with whose personal data could be adversely affected by the breach should be notified without undue delay in order to allow them to take the necessary precautions. A breach should be considered as adversely affecting the personal data or privacy of a data subject where it could result in, for example, identity theft or fraud, physical harm, significant humiliation or damage to reputation. The notification should describe the nature of the personal data breach as well as recommendations as well as recommendations for the individual concerned to mitigate potential adverse effects. Notifications to data subjects should be made as soon as reasonably feasible, and in close cooperation with the supervisory authority and respecting guidance provided by it or other relevant authorities (e.g. law enforcement authorities). For example, the chance for data subjects to mitigate an immediate risk of harm would call for a prompt notification of data subjects whereas the need to implement appropriate measures against continuing or similar data breaches may justify a longer delay.
Amendment 543 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 70
Recital 70
(70) Directive 95/46/EC provided for a general obligation to notify processing of personal data to the supervisory authorities. While t allowing the Member States to exempt processing, which was unlikely to pose risks to the data subjects, from this regulation. This obligation produces administrative and financial burdens, and it did not in all cases contribute to improving the protection of personal data. Therefore such indiscriminate general notification obligation should be abolished, and replaced by effective procedures and mechanism which focus instead on those processing operations which are likely to present specific risks to the rights and freedoms of data subjects by virtue of their nature, their scope or their purposes. In such cases, a data protection impact assessment should be carried out by the controller or processor prior to the processing, which should include in particular the envisaged measures, safeguards and mechanisms for ensuring the protection of personal data and for demonstrating the compliance with this Regulation.
Amendment 560 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 75
Recital 75
(75) Where the processing is carried out in the public sector or where, in the private sector, processing is carried out by a large enterprise, or where its core activities, regardless of the size of the enterprise, involve processing operations which require regular and systematic monitoring, a person or a team of professionals should assist the controller or processor to monitor internal compliance with this Regulation. Such data protection officers, whether or not an employee of the controller, should be in a position to perform their duties and tasks independently. However, final responsibility should stay with the management of an organization.
Amendment 571 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 77
Recital 77
(77) In order to enhance transparency and compliance with this Regulation, the establishment of certification mechanisms, data protection seals and standardised marks should be encouraged, allowing data subjects to quickly assess the level of data protection of relevant products and services.
Amendment 588 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 88
Recital 88
(88) Transfers which cannot be qualified as frequent or massive, could also be possible for the purposes of the legitimate interests pursued by the controller or the processor, when they have assessed all the circumstances surrounding the data transfer. For instance this would be the case if the purposes of processing forare historical, statistical andor scientific research purposes, the legitimate expectations of society for an increase of knowledge should be taken into consideration.
Amendment 607 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 110
Recital 110
(110) At Union level, a European Data Protection Board should be set up. It should replace the Working Party on the Protection of Individuals with Regard to the Processing of Personal Data established by Directive 95/46/EC. It should consist of a head of a supervisory authority of each Member State and of the European Data Protection Supervisor. The Commission should participate in its activities. The European Data Protection Board should contribute to the consistent application of this Regulation throughout the Union, including by advising the Commission and promoting co-operation of the supervisory authorities throughout the Union. The European Data Protection Board should act independently when exercising its tasks.
Amendment 646 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 127 a (new)
Recital 127 a (new)
(127a) The obligation to inform the data subject about the purposes of the processing, the right to erasure, the right to data portability, the right to objection, the obligation to take measures to ensure compliance as well as the prohibition to transfer data to countries outside the Union, should not apply to the processing of information relating to the professional capacity of an individual, such as such individual’s employer, job title, function, business address, business phone or fax number, business e-mail address or other organizational details. However, data subjects should have the right to request from the controller not to have such professional information disclosed to third parties.
Amendment 649 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 128
Recital 128
(128) This Regulation respects and does not prejudice the status under national law of churches and religious associations or communities in the Member States, as recognised in Article 17 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. As a consequence, where a church in a Member State applies, at the time of entry into force of this Regulation, comprehensive rules relating to the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data, these existing rules should continue to apply if they are brought in line with this Regulation. Such churches and religious associations should be required to provide for the establishment of a completely independent supervisory authority.
Amendment 768 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 9
(9) ‘personal data breach’ means a breach of security leading to the accidental or unlawful destruction, loss, alteration, unauthorised disclosure of, or access to, personal data transmitted, stored or otherwise processed;
Amendment 833 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) kept in a form which permits identification of data subjects for no longer than is necessary for the purposes for which the personal data are processed; personal data may be stored for longer periods insofar as the data will be processed solely for historical, statistical or scientific research purposes in accordance with the rules and conditions of Article 83 and if a periodic review is carried out to assess the necessity to continue the storage as well as for dispute resolution purposes;
Amendment 844 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) processed under the responsibility and liability of the controller, who shall be able to ensure and demonstrate for eachits processing operations the compliance with the provisions of this Regulation.
Amendment 949 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
4. Where the purpose of furtherPersonal data may not be processed further if the intended purpose for which the personal data will be processinged is inot compatible with the one for which the personal data have been collected, the processing must have a legal basis at least in one of the grounds referred to in points. The data controller must assess the compatibility of the purposes in taking into account: (a) the affiliation between the intended and original processing purposes; (ab) to (e) of paragraph 1. This shall in particular apply to any change of terms and generhe nature of the data concerned; (c) the consequences of the intended processing for the data subjects or third parties; (d) the ways and means used for the original condillections of a contractthe data; (e) any adequate safeguards the data controller has provided.
Amendment 950 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Further processing of personal data for historical, statistical and scientific purposes shall not be considered as incompatible when the data controller has provided all necessary precautions to ensure that the personal data can only be further processed for these specific purposes.
Amendment 953 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Further processing of personal data is prohibited if the processing is not compatible with any legal, professional or other binding obligation of secrecy.
Amendment 965 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5
Article 6 – paragraph 5
Amendment 990 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. Consent shall not as a rule provide a legal basis for the processing, of personal data in case where there is a significant imbalance in terms of dependence between the position of the data subject and the controller.
Amendment 1326 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. The data subject shall have the right to obtain from the controller communication of the personal data undergoing processing. Where the data subject makes the request in electronic form, the information shall be provided in electronic form, unless otherwise requested by the data subject.
Amendment 1328 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. To verify the lawfulness of the processing the data subject shall have the right to obtain from the controller communication of the personal data undergoing processing. Where the data subject makes the request in electronic form, the information shall be provided in electronic form, unless otherwise requested by the data subject.
Amendment 1628 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) national security;
Amendment 1653 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – title
Article 22 – title
Responsibility and accountability of the controller
Amendment 1655 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 1
1. The controller shall adopt policies and implement appropriate measures to ensure and be able to demonstrate in a transparent manner that the processing of personal data is performed in compliance with this Regulation. Accountability will always remain with the management.
Amendment 1689 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3
Article 22 – paragraph 3
3. The controller shall implement mechanisms to ensure the verification of the effectiveness of the measures referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2. If proportionate, this verification shall be carried out by independent internal or external auditors.
Amendment 1756 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 1823 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1
Article 27 – paragraph 1
The processor and any person acting under the authority of the controller or of the processor who has access to personal data shall keep the personal data confidential and not process them except on instructions from the controller, unless required to do so by Union or Member State law.
Amendment 2143 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1
Article 35 – paragraph 1
1. The controller and the processor shall designate a data protection officer or attract sufficient external advice in any case where: (a) the processing is carried out by a public authority or body; or (b) the processing is carried out by an enterprise employing 250 persons or more; or (c) the core activities of the controller or the processor consist of processing operations which, by virtue of their nature, their scope and/or their purposes, require regular and systematic monitoring of data subjects. The data protection officer can already be employed by the enterprise and fulfil his duties part time and will report to the board of an enterprise, organization or public authority which bears ultimate responsibility and is accountable.
Amendment 2159 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) where risks as mentioned in Article 33(2) are not negligible even though the company's main activity is not data processing;
Amendment 2161 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 2189 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
Article 35 – paragraph 2
2. In the case referred to in point (b) of paragraph 1, aA group of undertakings may appoint a single data protection officer.
Amendment 2238 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 9
Article 35 – paragraph 9
Amendment 2261 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2
Article 36 – paragraph 2
2. The controller or processor shall ensure that the data protection officer performs the duties and tasks independently and does not receive any instructions as regards the exercise of the function. The data protection officer shall directly report to the management of the controller or the processor which is responsible for protecting personal data in accordance with this regulation.
Amendment 2613 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 52 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The supervisory authority shall not disclose information provided to it, where such disclosure could adversely affect the rights and freedoms of others, including the controller or processor. This shall apply particularly to: (a) information related to the economic interests and trade secrets of the controller or processor; (b) the security measures taken in accordance with Article 30; and (c) information which Union or Member State law has designated as confidential.
Amendment 2879 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 79 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 79 – paragraph 3 – point b
Amendment 188 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Personal data should not be processed for purposes incompatible with the purpose for which it was collected. Personal data should be adequate, and relevant and not excessive for the purposes for which the personal data are processed. Every reasonable step should be taken to ensure that personal data which are inaccurate should be rectified or erased.
Amendment 204 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) Every natural person should have the right not to be subject to a measure which is based solepartially or fully on automated processing if it produces an adverse legal effect for that person or significantly affects that person, unless authorised by law and subject to suitable measures to safeguard the data subject's legitimate interests.
Amendment 213 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) The principle of fair processing requires that the data subjects should be informed in a transparent manner in particular of the existence of the processing operation and its purposes, its legal ground, how long the data will be stored, on the existence of the right of access, rectification or erasure and on the right to lodge a complaint. Where the data are collected from the data subject, the data subject should also be informed whether they are obliged to provide the data and of the consequences, in cases they do not provide such data.
Amendment 216 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) Any person should have the right of access to data which has been collected concerning them, and to exercise this right easily, in order to be aware of and verify the lawfulness of the processing. Every data subject should therefore have the right, when possible in advance, to know about and obtain communication in particular of the purposes for which the data are processed, for what period, which recipients receive the data, including in third countries Data subjects should be allowed to receive a copy of their personal data which are being processed.
Amendment 225 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) In order to ensure effective protection of the rights and freedoms of data subjects by way of preventive actions, the controller or processor should consult with the supervisory authority in certain cases prior to the processing. Where processing operations are likely to present a high degree of specific risks to the rights and freedoms of data subjects, the supervisory authority should be in a position to prevent, prior to the start of operations, a processing which is not in compliance with this Directive, and to make proposals to remedy such situation.
Amendment 226 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) A personal data breach may, if not addressed in an adequate and timely manner, result in harm, including reputational damage to the individual concerned. Therefore, as soon as the controller becomes aware that such a breach has occurred, it should notify the breach to the competent national authority. The individuals whose personal data or privacy could be adversely affected by the breach should be notified without undue delay in order to allow them to take the necessary precautions. A breach should be considered as adversely affecting the personal data or privacy of an individual where it could result in, for example, identity theft or fraud, physical harm, significant humiliation or damage to reputation or economic or social loss in connection with the processing of personal data.
Amendment 248 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 65 a (new)
Recital 65 a (new)
(65a) Transmission of personal data to other authorities or private parties in the Union is prohibited unless there is the prevention of an immediate and serious danger to public security, or the prevention of serious harm to the rights of individuals. The controller should inform the recipient of the purpose of the processing. The recipient should also be informed of processing restrictions and ensure that they are met.
Amendment 271 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point b
Amendment 293 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) processed fairly and lawfully and in a transparent manner;
Amendment 297 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) adequate, relevant, and not excessive in relationas much as possible limited to the purposes for which they are processed;
Amendment 310 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Data initially processed for purposes other than those referred to in Article 1(1) may only be used for the purposes of prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences granted they are processed on a valid legal basis that ensures sufficient guarantees for the data subject.
Amendment 316 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5
Article 5
Amendment 329 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall restrict the access to the personal data to a restricted group of duly authorised personnel.
Amendment 333 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Personal data may only be processed by personnel duly authorised by the responsible authority with the aim of the sound execution of their tasks and only as far as this authorisation extents.
Amendment 334 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. The authorisation shall contain a sound description of the tasks and processes of the processing operation for which the personnel concerned is authorised.
Amendment 338 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that, as far as possible, the different categories of personal data undergoing processing are distinguished in accordance with their degree of accuracy and reliabilityould provide for specific safeguards for the processing of personal data relating of persons who have not been convicted of a criminal offence, or in relation to persons of whom there is no serious ground for believing that they have committed a criminal offence.
Amendment 362 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall provide that measures which produce an adverse legal effect for the data subject or significantly affect them and which are based solepartially or fully on automated processing of personal data intended to evaluate certain personal aspects relating to the data subject shall be prohibited unless authorised by a law which also lays down measures to safeguard the data subject's legitimate interests.
Amendment 377 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall provide that the controller takes all reasonable steps to establish procedures for providing the information referred to in Article 11 and for the exercise of the rights of data subjects referred to in Articles 12 to 17.
Amendment 380 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Article 10 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall provide that the information and any action taken by the controller following a request referred to in paragraphs 3 and 4 are free of charge and in written form. Where requests are vexatious, in particular because of their repetitive character, or the size or volume of the request, the controller may charge a fee for providing the information or taking the action requested, or the controller may not take the action requested. In that case, the controller shall bear the burden of proving the vexatious character of the request.
Amendment 401 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 5
Article 11 – paragraph 5
5. Member States mayshall provide that the controller shall assess, in each specific case, by means of a concrete and individual examination, whether a partial or complete restriction for one of the reasons referred to in paragraph 4 applies. Member States may also determine categories of data processing which may wholly or partly fall under the exemptions of paragraph 4(a), (b), (c) and(d).
Amendment 418 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States may adopt legislative measures restricting, wholly or partly, the data subject's right of access to the extent that such partial or complete restriction constitutes a necessary and proportionate measure in a democratic society with due regard for the legitimate interests and fundamental rights of the person concerned:
Amendment 431 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Member States may determine by law categories of data processing which may wholly or partly fall under the exemptions of paragraph 1. These exemptions, however, shall not be applied in a general way but only in specific circumstances and accompanied by a reasoned justification. The controller shall be responsible for these individual, reasoned assessments.
Amendment 434 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. In cases referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, Member States shall provide that the controller informs the data subject with undue delay in writing on any refusal or restriction of access, on the reasons for the refusal and on the possibilities of lodging a complaint to the supervisory authority and seeking a judicial remedy. The information on factual or legal reasons on which the decision is based may be omitted where the provision of such information would undermine a purpose under paragraph 1.
Amendment 453 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall provide for the right of the data subject to obtain from the controller the erasure and abstention of further processing of personal data relating to them where the processing does not comply with the provisions adopted pursuant to Articles 4 (a) to (e), 7 and 8 of this Directive. The controller should take all reasonable steps, including technical measures, to inform third parties.
Amendment 457 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Instead of erasure, the controller shall mark theand restrict as far as possible the use of personal data where:
Amendment 489 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 2
Article 19 – paragraph 2
2. The controller shall implement mechanisms for ensuring that, by default, only those personal data which are necessary for the purposes of the processing are processed as well as stored no longer then deemed necessary by the responsible investigation authority.
Amendment 510 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 a (new)
Article 22 a (new)
Article 22a Where the processor is or becomes the determining part in relation to the purposes, means, or methods of data processing or does not act exclusively on the instructions of the controller, it shall be considered as a joint controller pursuant to Article 20.
Amendment 524 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 24 – paragraph 1
Article 24 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that records are kept of at least the following processing operations: collection, alteration, consultation, disclosure, combination or erasure. The records of consultation and disclosure shall show in particular the purpose, date and time of such operations and as far as possible the identification of the person who consulted or disclosed personal data.
Amendment 547 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 1
Article 27 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall provide that the controller and the processor implements appropriate technical and organisational measures and procedures to ensure a level of security appropriate to the risks represented by the processing and the nature of the data to be protected, having regard to the state of the art and the cost of their implementation.
Amendment 553 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 28 – paragraph 4
Article 28 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall provide that the controller documents any personal data breaches, comprising the facts surrounding the breach, its effects and the remedial action taken. This documentation must enable the supervisory authority to verify compliance with this Article. The documentation shall only include the information necessary for that purpose. The supervisory authority shall keep a public record of the breaches notified.
Amendment 557 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 28 – paragraph 5
Article 28 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission, after consultation of the European Data Protection Board, shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 56 for the purpose of specifying further the criteria and requirements for establishing the data breach referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 and for the particular circumstances in which a controller and a processor is required to notify the personal data breach.
Amendment 558 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 28 – paragraph 6
Article 28 – paragraph 6
6. The Commission, after consultation of the European Data Protection Authority, may lay down the standard format of such notification to the supervisory authority, the procedures applicable to the notification requirement and the form and the modalities for the documentation referred to in paragraph 4, including the time limits for erasure of the information contained therein. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 57(2).
Amendment 641 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 45 – paragraph 6
Article 45 – paragraph 6
6. Where requests are very vexatious, in particular due to their repetitive character, the supervisory authority may charge a fee or not take the action required by the data subject. The supervisory authority shall bear the burden of proving of the very vexatious character of the request.
Amendment 652 #
2012/0010(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 47 – paragraph 1
Article 47 – paragraph 1
Member States shall provide that each supervisory authority draws up an annual report on its activities. The report shall be made public and available to the Commission and the European Data Protection Board.
Amendment 5 #
2012/0000(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the definition of tax havens is no longer up-to-date and that (semi-)legal ways of avoiding or reducing tax liabilities are becoming more and more common in the Member States: for instance, transfers by ‘postbox companies’ in and through the Netherlands are estimated to amount to EUR 8000 billion a year alone;
Amendment 16 #
2012/0000(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Points out that ever since VAT was introduced its collection model has remained unchanged; stresses that this model is outdated, given the many changes in the technological and economic environment that have taken place, and that it therefore leads to substantial losses in terms of customs duties, VAT and excise dutiesVAT;
Amendment 26 #
2012/0000(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Emphasiszes the potential of e- government in terms of increasing transparency and combating fraud and corruption, thereby helping protect public funds; stresses the need for legislation that enables continuous innovation; emphasiszes that Europe is lagging behind its industrial partners, inter alia due to a lack of interoperability of systems*1; stresses that Europe must step up its efforts to introduce next-generation forms of e- government which would provide more transparency in public finances;
Amendment 60 #
2011/2201(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Considers that meaningful use of the term ‘shared management’ must be based on the fundamental principle that the Union delegates some of its powers to the Member States and that the Member States are obliged to carry out their part of the work in accordance with the legal acts of the Union; calls on the full implementation of point 44 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management; believes that annual summaries of the audits and declarations available, must be public so as to make a contribution towards improving management of the Union budget;
Amendment 71 #
2011/2201(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 – indent -1 a (new)
Paragraph 34 – indent -1 a (new)
– providing the Committee on Budgetary Control full insight into the Member States annual summaries; deplores the fact that the Commission until now has not given any information on the annual summaries, as without any knowledge of the content of annual summaries they cannot be regarded as national management declarations;
Amendment 100 #
2011/2201(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46 – indent 2
Paragraph 46 – indent 2
– decreasing the level of pre-financings in the various programmes and, especially in the area of Cohesion policy funding where majority of errors and mistakes are discovered, to a level absolutely necessary for the beneficiary to start the project;
Amendment 124 #
2011/2201(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59 – introductory part
Paragraph 59 – introductory part
59. Reiterates its invitation to the Council and Member States to give due consideration to the following requests concerning the implementation of the permanent crisis mechanism: - urges the Commission to report to Parliament and the Council twice a year on the risk that is incurred on the Union budget by its guarantee to the ESM/EFSF; asks the Commission how in case of a default this money would be transferred into the Union budget and then to the ESM/EFSF
Amendment 198 #
2011/2201(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas there shall be adequate arrangements for transparency, public accountability and public audit where public funds are at stake, whereas for the seventeenth year in the row the Court of Auditors has not been able to issue a positive declaration of assurance on the Union Budget.
Amendment 3 #
2011/2152(ACI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the political agreement reached on 27 June 2013 at the highest political level between Parliament, the Irish Presidency and the Commission on the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2014-2020 package (MFF Regulation and IIA), as the maximum achievable under the current circumstances and procedures; Is determined to make full usebut reminds that a set of conditions still needs to be met before the package can be put to the vote; Is determined to make full use of its legislative powers in the current negotiations of the legal basis for the new programmes as well as, in the course of forthcoming budgetary procedures, of the new instruments established, notably as regards flexibility;
Amendment 5 #
2011/2152(ACI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. ConsiderHighlights that the long and strenuous negotiations, both within Council and at interinstitutional level, and their outcome do not constitute a satisfactory implementationrevealed an infringement by Council of the new provisions of the TFEU concerning the MFF, which were implemented for the first time, in particular as regards the role and prerogatives of the Parliament;
Amendment 10 #
2011/2152(ACI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Deplornounces the fact that the Council considereds the European Council conclusions of 8 February 2013 as binding for Council negotiators; stresses that the European Council conclusions also included elements falling under the ordinary legislative procedure, such as detailed allocation criteria, envelopes by programmes or beneficiary, as well as discretionary financial allocations adjusting the level of national returns from the Union budget;
Amendment 12 #
2011/2152(ACI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. RegStrongly deplorets, moreover, that the numerous contacts and meetings held over the past few years between its delegation and the successive Council presidencies had no impact on the spirit, calendar or content of the negotiations or on the Council’s position, including, so far, the need to distinguish the legislative from the budgetary aspects of the MFF agreement;
Amendment 15 #
2011/2152(ACI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls for its Committee on Budgets, in cooperation with its Committee on Constitutional Affairs, to draw the necessary conclusions and come forward with new proposals, in due time ahead of the 2016 review / revision proposalspost electoral revision, on the modalities of such negotiations, so as to ensure the democratic and transparent nature of the whole budget setting process.
Amendment 13 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Member States to make better use of the support for applied research and investment in innovation and modernisation beneficial to animal welfare which is available from EU rural development funds and the EU Research Framework Programmes, and calls on the Commission to ensure appropriate focus and financing on this matter in the future;
Amendment 14 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. To meet the challenge of global food security, calls on the Member States and the Commission to step up financial investments in independent biotechnical and biotechnological research;
Amendment 25 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Reiterates its call for more coordinated research to be performed on new antimicrobials as well as other alternatives (vaccination, bio security etc) and evidence based strategies to avoid and control infectious diseases in animals; underlines the importance of the EU's Research Framework Programmes in this respect; stresses in this context the importance of developing systems for animal husbandry which reduce the need for antimicrobials to be used;
Amendment 26 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Points out that the development of sustainable, climate-friendly agriculture requires substantial research into effective pesticides that revert to non- hazardous components and do not pollute the groundwater, which should enable no- tillage agriculture;
Amendment 27 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Emphasises that the establishment of a vital lifecycle for nutrients, specifically phosphates, between town and country requires well-funded research into innovative systems to clean urban sewage sludge of pharmacological and toxic substances so that the sludge can be reused in fields as a nutrient;
Amendment 13 #
2011/2082(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Requests the Commission to investigate the possibilities of clearly indicating to EU-citizens which part of VAT in each commercial transaction is an EU-own resource.
Amendment 2 #
2011/2048(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls on the Commission to carry out the necessary analysis of rules stemming from EU case law in order to clarify the legal framework and give more legal security to all parties;
Amendment 17 #
2011/2048(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Invites the Commission to review the existing qualitative selection criteria by replacingadding to the balance sheets, as proof of the economic operator's economic and financial standing, withe cash flow statements, which represent a viable feature of financial soundness.
Amendment 18 #
2011/2048(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls the Commission to introduce means to simplify the procurement process and to reduce the administrative burden of bidders in order to improve the SMEs' chances to access public contracts as emphasised in the Parliament's report on Small Business Act (2008/2237(/INI)); stresses that these means will also reduce the risk of administrative errors; suggests working with a central or regional register or passport in order for SMEs to reduce the administrative burden caused by the requirements in the selection stage;
Amendment 1 #
2011/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas potential candidate and candidate states should continue their efforts to improve their judicial systems and fight against corruption if this is deemed necessary for accession, even when they have become EU Member States whereas at the 1999 Helsinki Summit, the European Council gave Turkey the status of candidate country for EU membership and the EU-Turkey Accession Partnership was adopted in 2001, and whereas at the 2003 Thessaloniki European Council the Stabilisation and Association Process was confirmed as the EU policy on the countries of the Western Balkans region, thus making them eligible for EU accession; whereas the "2011 New Approach" sets a new negotiation framework for candidate countries that focuses on the rule of law by introducing clear priorities and conditionalities in the areas of chapter 23 and 24. This would allow a better prioritisation of financial assistance under IPA2. whereas the proposed IPA 2 instrument is aimed at achieving more sustainable results in improving candidate states' readiness for EU-membership whereas IPA is not the only means through which the EU is supporting rule of law reform in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo. Support for law sector reform in Kosovo is also provided by EULEX and a police mission was conducted in Bosnia and Herzegovina between 2003 and 2012.
Amendment 15 #
2011/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3
Subheading 3
Funding against, enlargement priorities and co- financing
Amendment 18 #
2011/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. EmphasisWelcomes the Commission's new approach to addressing justice reform and home affairs issues early in the accession process; observes, however, that on average only 2.87 4,28% of the total EU pre- accession assistance envelope for the period 2007-2013 is devoted to justice and only 0.52 %1,12 to the fight against corruption; while approximately 7,4% of the total of pre- accession assistance is spend on Judiciary, Fundamental Rights and 'Justice Freedom and Security'. Overall 16,29% of projects allocated to component Nr. 1 are dedicated to the area of the rule of law.
Amendment 47 #
2011/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Notes that a more comprehensive sectoral approach in the areas of judiciary reform and the fight against corruption would entail positive changes, such as a better focus of the national reform efforts, enhancinged donor coordination and ensuring better interaction between individual projects; calls, nevertheless, on the Commission to reassess its sectoral approach, givenensure that sectoral approaches will be introduced in accordance with the Guidelines on Sector-Approach in Pre- Accession assistance and that the capacities of the beneficiary countries to draw up and implement meaningful sector strategies are enhanced; calls on the Commission to continue to provide guidance on the implementation of the sector-approach during the planning and programming stages of IPA2, considers that in most candidate and potential candidate countries neither institutional set-up nor budgeting processes are at a level that will allow this approach to work and that a clear overall strategy and guidance at EU level are still lacking;
Amendment 56 #
2011/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Observes that project fiches have improved over time with the inclusion of more and better-designed SMART objectives, as well as specific indicators for the different components of a project; is, however, concerned that external evaluation has reported that some projects lacked focus because of inappropriate indicators, with SMART indicators not always suited to the justice sector; insists on the need for designing qualitative indicators capable of measuring the long- term impact of the projects; Specific indicators in the sector of Justice, Liberty and Security should be developed in the framework of the IPA 2 program
Amendment 15 #
2011/2020(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that the low level of payments proposed by Council would lead to a bigger discrepancy between PA and CA, mechanically resulting in an increase of RALs at year end, particularly in subheadings 1a and 1b; warns in this context of the already extremely large amount of accumulated RAL so close to the end of this MFF;
Amendment 36 #
2011/2020(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Decides to restore DBaccept the Council's cut on payments for the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF) line; underlinhowever, notes the fact that the insertion of payment appropriations not only gives higher visibility to the fund but also helps to avoids transfers from other budget lines pursuing different aims and covering different needs;
Amendment 43 #
2011/2020(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Recalls the important role regional and cohesion policies play towards the achievement of the goals of the EU 2020 strategy and economic recovery of European regions; deplores Council's restrictive approach on payments, which were cut by some EUR 1 300 million as compared to Commission's forecasts of payment needs for 2012; notes that only the convergence objective and the technical assistance lines remained untouched by the cuts of Council; reminds that these cuts apply to budget allocations that were already far below Member States' own estimates (EUR 61 billion for 2012 or some 50% above DB) and widely considered as being the bare minimum for honouring upcoming payment claims and be consistent with the speeding up of implementation at the end of the programming period; requests an assessment of the implementation of regional and cohesion policy, with concrete proposals on how to reduce RALs;
Amendment 38 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Observes that according to the DB 2012 there is an overall margin of EUR 1 603 million in CA under the 2012 ceiling agreed in the MFF; is determined to make full use of this available margin as well as – if necessary – of other flexibility mechanisms foreseen by the IIA to support and strengthen certain targeted political objectives; expects Council’s full cooperationotes however that there is at present an amount of close to 200 billion of commitments still outstanding. Therefore the budget increase for commitments for 2012 should not increase in real terms. In cas regardse the need arises in the ucourse of these mechanisms budget year supplementary budgets can be presented;
Amendment 25 #
2011/0454(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Activities with the aim of providing better information, specialised training or technical and scientific assistance help significantly to protect the financial interests of the Union and at the same time to attain an equivalent level of protection across the Union. The allocation of resources to the several points of entry should be risk-based and allocation mechanisms should be able to quickly adjust to changing circumstances.
Amendment 62 #
2011/0427(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, notably, the right to life, human dignity, prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, right to liberty and security, right to the protection of personal data, non- refoulement, non- discrimination and rights of the child. This Regulation should be applied by Member States in accordance with these rights and principles.
Amendment 67 #
2011/0427(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) Any exchange of personal data using the communication network for EUROSUR should be conducted on the basis of existing national and Union legal provisions and should respect their specific data protection requirements. The Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data and, in the framework of police and judicial cooperation, the Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA 27 November 2008 on the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters are applicable in cases in which more specific instruments, such as Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004, do not provide a full data protection regime.
Amendment 83 #
2011/0427(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation shall apply to the surveillance of land and sea external borders of the Member States, including measures for monitoring, detection, identification, tracking, prevention and interception of illegal border crossings and rescuing and protecting the lives of migrants at risk.
Amendment 99 #
2011/0427(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – point b
Article 3 – point b
(b) ‘reaction capability’ means the ability to perform actions aimed at countering illegal cross-border movements, or rescuing and protecting the lives of migrants at risk, including the means and timelines to react adequately to unusual circumstances;
Amendment 157 #
2011/0427(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4
Article 9 – paragraph 4
4. Each incident in the events layer of the national situational picture shall be assigned with a single indicative impact level, ranging from ‘low’ and ‘medium’ to ‘high’ impact. Incidents regarding persons in distress at sea shall be assigned with a 'high' impact level. All events assigned with a ‘medium’ to ‘high’ impact level shall be shared with the Agency.
Amendment 188 #
2011/0427(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6 – point c
Article 10 – paragraph 6 – point c
(c) an intelligence picture sub-layer, which shall contain migrant profiles that shall not include personal data, routes, information on the impact levels attributed to the external land and sea border sections and facilitation analysis;
Amendment 195 #
2011/0427(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. If the Agency gains knowledge of persons in distress at sea, it shall immediately inform the neighbouring national coordination centres for the area in which the situation occurs. The Agency shall confirm the responsibility of the Member State concerned and coordinate the appropriate actions.
Amendment 236 #
2011/0427(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Member States shall ensure that the surveillance and, patrolling and certain rescue activities carried out at the external border sections correspond to the attributed impact levels in the following manner:
Amendment 48 #
2011/0368(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point d
Article 2 – point d
(d) ‘organised crime’ means a punishable conduct committed by a structured group of three or morewith a view to committing offences which are punishable by deprivation of liberty or a detention order of a maximum of at least four years or a more serious penalty, committed by a structured group of more than two persons, existing for a period of time and acting in concert in order to obtain, directly or indirectly, a financial or other material benefit.
Amendment 56 #
2011/0368(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a – paragraph 2
The achievement of this objective shall be measured by the Commission against indicators such as, inter alia, the number of cross-border-joint operations and the number and quality of best practice documents and events organised.
Amendment 57 #
2011/0368(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – paragraph 2
The achievement of this objective shall be measured by the Commission against indicators such as, inter alia, the number of tools put in place and/or further upgraded to facilitate the protection of critical infrastructure by Member States in all sectors of the economy and the number of threat and risk assessments produced at the level of the Union.
Amendment 58 #
2011/0368(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – paragraph 2 a (new)
Member States shall provide the Commission with the necessary information that is required for the assessment of the achievements, as measured against the indictors.
Amendment 46 #
2011/0367(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 a (new)
Recital 17 a (new)
(17a) It is important to ensure the right of access to documents as guaranteed by Article 42 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, 16 TEU, 15 TFEU and Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents1. 1 OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43.
Amendment 74 #
2011/0367(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Within the limits of the available resources, the emergency assistance may amount to 10075% of the eligible expenditure.
Amendment 146 #
2011/0367(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. Responsible Authorities shall carry out a systematic administrative control of all payment requests from the beneficiaries and shall supplement them by unannounced on-the-spot controls of the expenditure related to the final payment requests from the beneficiaries that are declared in the annual accounts in view of obtaining a sufficient level of assurance.
Amendment 101 #
2011/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a – paragraph 2
The achievement of this objective shall be measured by the Commission against indicators such as, inter alia, the number of consular posts equipped, secured and/or enhanced to ensure the efficient processing of visa applications and provide quality of service to visa applicants and the number of apprehended overstayers.
Amendment 108 #
2011/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – paragraph 2
The achievement of this objective shall be measured by the Commission against indicators such as, inter alia, the development of equipment for border control and the apprehensions of irregular third-country nationals at the external border in correspondence with the risk of the relevant section of the external border.
Amendment 113 #
2011/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – concluding paragraph
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – concluding paragraph
Member States shall provide the Commission with the necessary information that is required for the assessment of the achievements, as measured against the indicators. The Commission shall be responsible for the assessment of the achievements.
Amendment 115 #
2011/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) promoting the development and implementation of policies ensuring the absence of any controlfree crossing of internal borders onf persons, whatever their nationality, when crossing the internal bordersile at the same time, carrying out checks on persons and monitoring efficiently the crossing of external borders;
Amendment 122 #
2011/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) gradually establishing an integrated management system based on solidarity and responsibility for external borders, including the reinforcement of interagency co-operation between migration and law enforcement authorities of Member States at the external borders and measures within the territory and the necessary flanking measures related to document security and identity management;
Amendment 33 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The certification body shall be a public or private audit body designated by the Member State which shall provide an opinion, drawn up in accordance with internationally accepted audit standards, following risk-based controls and taking into account the past performance of the Member State, on the management declaration of assurance covering the completeness, accuracy and veracity of the annual accounts of the paying agency, the proper functioning of its internalthe control systems, the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions, as well as the respect of the principle of sound financial management. This opinion shall state, inter alia, whether the examination puts in doubt the assertions made in the management declaration of assurance referred to in Article 7(3)(b).
Amendment 36 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point d
Amendment 37 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) the sustainable development of the economical activity of holdings other than those referred to in paragraph (2)(d)farms including farm modernisation, competitiveness building, sectoral integration, innovation and market orientation;
Amendment 39 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44
Article 44
Whenre sectoral agricultural legislation requires Member States to submit, within a specific period of time, information on the numbers of checks carried out under Article 61 and their outcome and where the Member States overrun that period, the Commission may suspend the monthly payments referred to in Article 18 or the interim payments referred to in Article 35 for which the relevant statistical information has not been sent in time. , in accordance with the principle of proportionality, taking account of the extent of the delay and according to the detailed rules it has adopted on the basis of Article 48(5), the monthly payments referred to in Article 18 or the interim payments referred to in Article 35 for which the relevant statistical information has not been sent in time. In particular, the Commission shall clearly distinguish between a situation where the late submission of information places the annual budget discharge mechanism at risk, and a situation where such a risk does not exist.
Amendment 44 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 49 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The Commission shall give sufficient prior notice of an on-the-spot check to the Member State concerned or the Member State within whose territory the check is to take place and shall coordinate checks with a view to reducing any negative impact on paying agencies. Agents from the Member State concerned may take part in such checks.
Amendment 45 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 2
Article 54 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall assess the amounts to be excluded on the basis of the gravity of the non-conformity recorded. It shall take due account of the nature and gravity of the infringement and of the financial damage caused to the Unionamounts excluded shall be based on an assessment of the risk to the agricultural funds stemming from the infringement.
Amendment 46 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 54 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Commission shall base its financial corrections on individual cases of irregularity identified, or by taking account of the systemic nature of the irregularity to determine whether an extrapolated or flat rate correction should be applied. Flat rate corrections shall only be applied where it is impossible, due to the nature of the case, to either identify the extent and amount of the irregularity found or to extrapolate the amount to be corrected.
Amendment 53 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph 1
Article 61 – paragraph 1
1. The system set up by the Member States in accordance with Article 60(2) shall include, except where otherwise provided, systematic administrative checking of all aid applications and shall be supplemented by on-the-spot checid applications and payment claims by applying a risk-based approach according to the level of assurance that is required and shall be supplemented by on-the-spot checks whose purpose shall be to monitor the level of inherent risk and whose number shall be adjusted in the light of the inherent and control risks.
Amendment 54 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph 2
Article 61 – paragraph 2
2. As regards the on-the-spot checks, the authority responsible shall draw its check sample from the entire population of applicants comprising, where appropriate, a random part and a risk-based part in order to obtain a representative error rate, while targeting also highest errors. the areas in which the risk of error is highest. To ensure that the checks are proportional, account needs to be taken of factors including: – the size of the sums involved; – the outcome of earlier audits of the management and control systems; – voluntary participation in management schemes certified on the basis of recognised international standards.
Amendment 16 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1a) Regulation (EU) No [...] on the financial rules applicable to the annual budget of the Union lays down the general principles with regard to the implementation of the annual budget of the Union. Therefore it is necessary to ensure consistency between that Regulation and the provisions governing this Regulation.
Amendment 8 #
2011/0273(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1a) Regulation (EU) No [...]/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the financial rules applicable to the annual budget of the Union lays down the general principles with regard to the implementation of the annual budget of the Union. It is, therefore, necessary to ensure consistency between that Regulation and the provisions governing the ERDF.
Amendment 1 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
citation 8a (new)
citation 8a (new)
- having regard to the joint agreed statement on MFF-related issues attached to the consolidate agreement on revised Financial rules applicable to the general rules to the general budget of the Union;
Amendment 1 #
2011/0177(APP)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1a (new)
Paragraph 1a (new)
1a. Takes into account the important and ongoing changes in the real economy of the Member States due to the crisis; insists therefore that the actions provisioned in the MFF 2014-2020 consider the Member States´ current economic and social situation and where appropriate to be re-adjusted in order to be aligned with the overall objective of ‘The contribution of European policies to growth and employment’ as stated in the European Council’s conclusions of 28-29 June 2012;
Amendment 3 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)
Citation 4 a (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 3 July 2013 on the political agreement on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014- 2020;
Amendment 67 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17a (new)
Paragraph 17a (new)
17a. Is particularly concerned about the current ever-growing level of RALs; calls for a joint-interinstitutional strategy for keeping the level of RALs under control in the next Multiannual Financial Framework period and for appropriate measures to be taken in this regard, such as a strict application of the N+2 de- commitment rule to all Member States without derogation;
Amendment 135 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Believes that the effectiveness of EU expenditure depends on sound policy, regulatory and institutional frameworks at all levels; insists that, in accordance with Article 317 TFEU Member States, must shoulder their share of responsibility in making EU funding more effective; recalls that 90 % of the errors detected by the European Court of Auditors have been in Member States, and that the majority of those errors could have been avoided; calls onurges all Member States to issue national management declarations of assurance signed at the appropriate political level;
Amendment 168 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47
Paragraph 47
47. RNotes that each year the EU budget shows a surplus and that the Member States‘ contributions to the EU budget is lowered by this amount; At the same time, deplores the Council’s regular linear cuts to the Commission’s estimations for payment appropriations, as entered in the draft budget, as well as the Council’s repeated objection, over the last years, to provide the EU budget with the level of additional payments needed by the Commission, at the end of the budgetary year, to enable the EU to keep its financial commitments; Is of the opinion that such an approach is not good budgeting, and that while the returned surplus has no impact on the overall deficit level of Member States, this amount could make a clear difference to the EU’s annual budget; recalls the commitment made by the institutions to revise the Financial Regulation in order to allow the carry-over of unused appropriations and of the budgetary balance;
Amendment 51 #
2011/0154(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) The European Court of Human Rights has consistently held that the suspect or accused person should have access to a lawyer at the initial stages of police questioning, and in any event from the start of detention, to protect the right to a fair trial, and in particular the privilege against self- incrimination and to avoid ill treatment;.
Amendment 54 #
2011/0154(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
Amendment 55 #
2011/0154(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
Amendment 59 #
2011/0154(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) To be effective, access to a lawyer should entail the possibility for the lawyer to carry out all the wide range of activities which pertain to legal counselling, as the European Court of Human Rights has held. This should include active participation in any interrogation or hearing, meetings with the client to discuss the case and prepare the defence, the search for exculpatory evidence, support to a distressed client and control of detention conditions;
Amendment 65 #
2011/0154(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11 a (new)
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a) ) In order for the right to legal assistance to be practical and effective the suspect who has no lawyer should be provided with one when he is deprived of liberty. In proceedings before the court the suspect who has no lawyer should be provided with one when the interest of justice so require. There is no obligation to provide a lawyer when the suspect or accused person has waived his right to legal assistance in accordance with Article 9. Neither is it obligatory to provide a lawyer in the pre-trial stage when the suspected or accused person is not deprived of his liberty or in the trial stage when the interests of justice do not require that a lawyer is provided. In these cases the obligation of Member States to ensure the right to legal assistance is met when the lawyer is allowed to give legal assistance.
Amendment 70 #
2011/0154(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
Amendment 74 #
2011/0154(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Recital 22
Amendment 75 #
2011/0154(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
Recital 23
Amendment 92 #
2011/0154(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) before the start of any questioning official interview by the police or other law enforcement authorities;
Amendment 103 #
2011/0154(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Amendment 111 #
2011/0154(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. The lawyer shall have the right to be present at any questioning and hearing. HeMember States shall ensure that in cases where detention on remand is possible according to national law the suspect or accused person has the right for his lawyer to be present when he is officially interviewed. Member States shall ensure that this right is applicable to all cases where the suspected or accused person who is summoned to appear before a court having jurisdiction in criminal matters has to appear before that court. The lawyer shall have the right to ask questions, request clarification and make statements, which shall be recorded in accordance with national law.
Amendment 116 #
2011/0154(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The lawyer shall have the right to be present at any otherMember States shall determine in their national law in respect of which investigative or other evidence-gathering acts at which the suspect or accused person’s presence is required or permitted as a right, in accordance with national law, unless this would prejudice the acquisition of evidence– in accordance with national law – permitted as a right, the suspect or accused person has – in accordance with procedures in national law – the right for his lawyer to be present.
Amendment 128 #
2011/0154(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Notwithstanding provisions of national law concerning the mandatory presence of a lawyer, Member States shall ensure that in all cases where the suspect or accused person is deprived of liberty and, when the interests of justice so require, during the trial stage before a court having jurisdiction in criminal matters, a suspect or accused person who has no lawyer is provided with a lawyer, unless he has waived his right to legal assistance in accordance with Article 9.
Amendment 297 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall ensure that victims who wish to report a crime and who do not understand or speak the language of the competent authority, shall be enabled to report the crime. In order to achieve this result Member States shall as a minimum ensure that the victims are assisted in reporting the crime in a language that they understand.
Amendment 299 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Member States shall ensure that a victim who reports a crime, is notified in a simple and accessible language on the victim’s right to receive information regarding the rights to active participation in the criminal proceedings.
Amendment 308 #
2011/0129(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – point a
(a) the essential parts of the complaint of the criminal offence to the competent authority;
Amendment 1831 #
2011/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1
Article 28 – paragraph 1
1. Each controller and processor and, if any, the controller's representative, shall maintain documentation of all processing operations under its responsibilityif those operations pose a risk as stated in Article 33(2), so that it can at all times demonstrate compliance with this regulation.
Amendment 1949 #
2011/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 1
1. In the case of a personal data breach, the controller shall without undue delay and, where feasible, not later than 24 hours as soon as possible, after having become aware of it, notify the personal data breach to the supervisory authority. The notification to the supervisory authority shall be accompanied by a reasoned justification in cases where it is not made within 24 hours in the member state where the controller is established.
Amendment 1966 #
2011/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 31 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Controllers shall notify the supervisory authority of the Member State in which they are established. Where the notification is carried out in accordance with paragraph 4, the supervisory authority of the Member State in which the controller responsible for the personal data breach is established shall be notified. Controllers which are not established on the territory of the European Union, shall notify the supervisory authority of the Member State in which their representative is established.
Amendment 1980 #
2011/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 31 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
In case the controller is part of a group of undertakings or of joint controllers, the personal data breach may be notified by the main establishment, or by another controller or undertaking designated by the joint controllers or group of undertakings.
Amendment 2036 #
2011/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – point c
Amendment 321 #
2010/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Requests the Commission to provide Parliament with a list of projects benefitting the Roma population which have been financed by the Commission during the last ten years, giving indications about the results achieved;
Amendment 35 #
2010/2273(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls for closer and more efficient cooperation between the competent national authorities in checking the compliance of labour contracts with national and EU law; points out that mutual assistance and information exchange have to be guaranteed between the Member States in case of breaches; ask the Commission to supervise this process;
Amendment 52 #
2010/2273(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Urges the Member States to control more strictly the work of employment agencies and to fight against the abuse of EU migrant workers, in order to ensure that the rights of EU migrant workers are respected.
Amendment 11 #
2010/2248(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls on the Commission to obtain a statement from the EIB concerning activities with major multiplier effects which are guaranteed by the European budget;
Amendment 40 #
2010/2154(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission to impose deterrent sanctions for unauthorized recording or distribution of security screening images;
Amendment 8 #
2010/2151(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines once more, that the Tenth EDF should focus on a limited number of areas, while involving non-governmental organisations (NGOs) that are effective at local level and who are of crucial importance for sustainable development, in order to avoid the harmful effects arising from the proliferation of objectives; calls on the Commission to make wise use of local- and European-based NGO's, in particular when management of projects and programmes by NGOs is more efficient and cost-effective than management by the Commission; urges the Commission to provide Parliament with clear information on the composition of NGO own resources for specific projects which are partly financed by the EDF and by the NGOs themselves;
Amendment 15 #
2010/2137(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Invites the Commission to give an overview on taxation, leviesexcise duties and other kinds of levy, infrastructure financing and charging and VAT systems for different transport modes and effects on intermodal competition, and to include in this overview the effect of obligatory minimum rail infrastructure and voluntary maximum charging of road infrastructure;
Amendment 20 #
2010/2137(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission, while reviewing legislation on passenger rights and reimbursement for delays, to guarantee fair and equal compensation schemes for delays across all transport modes (25% compensation for a delay of more than 1 hour, 50% for a delay of more than 2 hours, according to the existing legislation in the field of railways) andtake account of the specific nature of each transport mode and to secure the setting- up of independent arbitration bodies between operators and clients;
Amendment 26 #
2010/2137(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the need to avoid unfair competition within the liberalised road transport sector by guaranteeing that social, safety and environmental rules are properly applied, paying special attention to the opening of this market for cabotage and dumping practices;
Amendment 40 #
2010/2137(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls on the Commission to publish clear guidelines on state support, particularly in the maritime area, to ensure there is a level playing-field in the European transport market;
Amendment 33 #
2010/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that the EU should strengthen its common approach to CBRN prevention, detection and response through the creation of specific mechanisms (regulatory, legislative or non-legislative instruments) which make cooperation and the provision of means of assistance compulsory in the event of a CBRN disaster caused by an accident or terrorist attack; recalls that the main objective of the EU institutions should be to ensure the efficiency of a national or transnational response to a CBRN accident or terrorist attack, on the basis of EU solidarity, in a coordinated manner under the auspices of the Commission and with a pan-European outreach;
Amendment 40 #
2010/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls for EU quality and security standards, as well as an EU system and network of laboratories for the certification of CBRN security equipment and technologies, to be developed; again under the leadership of the Commission, stresses that the necessary research and development funding should be provided to ensure that applied research and major demonstration programmes with an EU dimension are carried out, and that an EU industrial policy in the field of civil security is needed, stimulating cooperation between enterprises in the EU and with specific support for small and medium- sized enterprises/small and medium-sized industries (SMEs/SMIs);
Amendment 49 #
2010/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls for the urgent establishment of a European crisis-response mechanism based in the Commission services which should coordinate civilian and military means so as to ensure that the EU has a rapid- response capability to deal with a CBRN disaster; and reiterates its call for the establishment of a EU Civil Protection Force based on the existing EU Civil Protection Mechanism, which will enable the Union to bring together the resources necessary for providing emergency assistance, including humanitarian aid, within 24 hours of a CBRN disaster inside or outside EU territory;
Amendment 58 #
2010/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Stresses that suitable bridges and partnerships should also be built between bodies such as Europol, Interpol and law- enforcement authorities in the Member States with a view to creating an appropriate and effective network for proactive anticipation/real-time monitoring of emergencies and operational engagement/coordination to deal with CBRN-related disasters, and report to the Commission as well;
Amendment 111 #
2010/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Calls on the Council to entrust the Commission with the role of an ‘involved ac'coordinator’' with regard to emergency planning, so that it can act as a monitor, thus ensuring that local and national emergency plans do exist; stresses that the Commission should take the role of a depository of such plans, putting it in the best position to identify potential gaps and to act accordingly more promptly than the relevant authorities;
Amendment 112 #
2010/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Draws attention to the fact that the Commission, or a specialised mechanism at the EU level under its responsibility, should be leading in the setting of standards based on the needs on counter- measure capacities; stresses that this is the only way to achieve the highest possible standard of security throughout the whole of the EU, as it would be the only possible way to ensure that all Member States are following the same guidelines and applying the same principles when storing capacities and preparing the appropriate human and material resources to respond to a disaster, accidental or intentional;
Amendment 15 #
2010/2104(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes with concern that the detailed decommissioning plans of the three decommissioning programmes in question have not yet been finalised and, as a consequence, that there is no information on the timetables, nor on the costs of particular projects, nor on their sources of funding; inviturges therefore the corresponding national bodies to finalise the plans and the Commission to report on this process; states that the still ongoi and to provide a detailed long Pterformance Audit, should clearly state whether or not further allocation of funds will be necessary after 2013m financial planning of the decommissioning projects; invites the Commission to clearly describe the scope of the EU financing required to accomplish these plans;
Amendment 2 #
2010/0820(NLE)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) Expresses deep concern about corruption in the Member States, and stresses that the European Union must set requirements to fight corruption based on measurable criteria and standards.
Amendment 3 #
2010/0820(NLE)
Proposal for a decision
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
From the XXXX 2011XX, the provisions of the Schengen acquis referred to in Annex I shall apply to Bulgaria and Romania amongst themselves and in their relations with the Kingdom of Belgium, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Denmark, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Republic of Estonia, the Hellenic Republic, the Kingdom of Spain, the Republic of France, the Italian Republic, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, the Republic of Hungary, Malta, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Poland, the Portuguese Republic, the Republic of Slovenia and the Slovak Republic, the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden as well as the Republic of Iceland, the Kingdom of Norway and the Swiss Confederation.
Amendment 4 #
2010/0820(NLE)
Proposal for a decision
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
To the extent that those provisions regulate the abolition of checks on persons at internal borders, they shall apply as from XXXX 2011XX to air borders.
Amendment 244 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Part 1 – article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The budgetary provisions shall apply mutatis mutandis to the guarantee for borrowing-and-lending operations entered into by the Union in the management of the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) and the European Financial Stability Mechanism (EFSM) and payments to the Guarantee Fund for external actions.
Amendment 245 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 4
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 4
4. Interest yielded by the funds which are the property of the Union shall not be due to the Union save otherwise provided for in the agreements concluded with the entrusted entities listed in points (ii) to (viii) of Article 55(1)(b), and in grant decisions or agreements concluded with beneficiaries. In those cases, such interest shall be re-used for the corresponding programme or recovered.
Amendment 255 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 15 – paragraph 1
Part 1 – article 15 – paragraph 1
1. The balance from each financial year shall be entered in the budget for the following financial year as revenue in the case of a surplus or as a payment appropriation in the case of a deficit, in strict accordance with Article 7 of the Council Decision on Own resources, not including a quasi-automatic adaptation of Member States' contributions to the Union budget.
Amendment 256 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 15 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Part 1 – article 15 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The surplus and the unspent commitments of the previous budgetary years of the current multi-annual financial framework as well as decommitted appropriations shall be entered in the reserve for payments and commitments. This reserve shall be used in first instance for any additional and/or unforeseen needs as well as to compensate any negative reserve, which procedure is laid down in article 44. The decision to mobilise this reserve will be taken jointly by the two arms of the budgetary authority following a proposal by the Commission.
Amendment 264 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 22 – paragraph 3
Part 1 – article 22 – paragraph 3
3. Any institution other than the Commission may propose to the budgetary authority, within its own section of the budget, transfers from one title to another exceeding the limit of 105 % of the appropriations for the financial year on the line from which the transfer is to be made. Those transfers shall be subject to the procedure laid down in Article 24.
Amendment 267 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 23 – paragraph 1 – point c
Part 1 – article 23 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) as regards expenditure on staff and administration which is c, transfer appropriations fromm on to several titles, transfer appropriations frome title to another up to a maximum of 15 % of the appropriations for the year shown on the line from which the transfer is made, and up to a maximum of 30 % of the appropriations for the year shown one title to another; he line to which the transfer is made;
Amendment 268 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 23 – paragraph 1 – point d
Part 1 – article 23 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) as regards operational expenditure, transfer appropriations between chapters within the same title, up to a maximum total of 105 % of the appropriations for the year shown on the line from which the transfer is made.
Amendment 277 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 29
Part 1 – article 29
Amendment 289 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Part 1 – article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The draft budget shall contain a summary general statement of the expenditure and revenue of the Union, including a summary general statement of the reserve for payments and commitments, and consolidate the estimates referred to in Article 32.
Amendment 294 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 34 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Part 1 – article 34 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The Commission shall accompany the draft budget with a proposal to mobilise the reserve for payments and commitments for any arising needs not initially foreseen in the annual budget or the regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework.
Amendment 296 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 38 – paragraph 2
Part 1 – article 38 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall, save in exceptional circumstances, submit any the case of the mobilisation of the solidarity fund for which a draft amending budget can be presented at any time of the year, submit in a row its draft amending budgets, simultaneously to the European Parliament and the Council by 1 September each year at the latest, either in April and / or in September. It may attach an opinion to the requests for amending budgets from the other institutions.
Amendment 298 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 44 – paragraph 2
Part 1 – article 44 – paragraph 2
This reserve must be drawn upon as soon as possible and before the end of the financial year, in first instance by means of the reserve for payments and commitments, as laid down in Article 15 (3a), or by means of transfer in accordance with the procedure laid down in Articles 21 and 23.
Amendment 301 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 46 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Part 1 – article 46 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) as regards funding to international organisations, the Commission will specify in a document annexed to its section: (i) a summary of all those contributions, with a breakdown per EU programme/fund and per international organisation, (ii) a justification explaining why it was more efficient for the EU to fund those international organisations rather than to act directly.
Amendment 312 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 56 – paragraph 1
Part 1 – article 56 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall respect the principles of sound financial management, transparency and non-discrimination and ensure the visibility of Union action when they manage Union funds. To this end, Member States shall fulfil the control and audit obligations and assume the resulting responsibilities laid down in this Regulation. Complementary provisions mayshall be laid down in sector-specific rules.
Amendment 353 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 56 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Part 1 – article 56 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. National declarations of assurance Member States shall provide a national declaration on the expenditure made under the system of shared management. Such declaration shall be signed at the appropriate political level, and be based on the information to be provided under paragraph 5(c), and shall at least cover the effective functioning of the internal control systems in place and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions. It shall be subject to the opinion of an independent audit body and be provided to the Commission by 15 March of the year following the budgetary year concerned.
Amendment 392 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 116 – paragraph 1 – point a
Part 1 – article 116 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) reimbursement of a specified proportion of the eligible costs actually incurred, taking into account the full economic costs for the purpose of the project;
Amendment 395 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 116 – paragraph 1 – point e
Part 1 – article 116 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) a combination of the forms referred to in points (a) to (d). and taking into account the preferences of the beneficiaries with regard to their usual accounting principles;
Amendment 396 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 116 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Part 1 – article 116 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) For the purpose of this regulation, "very low value grants" shall be grants not exceeding EUR 10.000 and "low value grants" shall be grants not exceeding EUR 100.000. For those kind of grants, lower standards in accounting and authorisation maybe applied in order to create a beneficiary driven approach.
Amendment 404 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 117 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Part 1 – article 117 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. For the purpose of this regulation, grants may also be authorised in the field of basic research, where no outcome or result can be presented in consequence of the research activity.
Amendment 405 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 117 – paragraph 6
Part 1 – article 117 – paragraph 6
6. For lumps sums, standard scale of unit costs and flat rate financing, the no-profit and the co-financing rules laid down in paragraphs 3 and 4 shall be reasonably ensured at the time of their determination or at the stage of the evaluation of the grant application. Where the maximum amount per grant does not exceed EUR 100.000, the authorisation may be given by the competent officer.
Amendment 30 #
2010/0312(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The experience gathered during previous evaluations demonstrates the need to maintain a coherent evaluation mechanism covering, all areas of the Schengen acquis, except those where a specific evaluation mechanism already exists within EU law, judicial reform, and the fight against corruption and organised crime.
Amendment 50 #
2010/0312(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. By not later than 30 September each year, Frontex shall submit to the Commission a risk analysis taking into account migratory pressure and making recommendations for priorities for evaluations in the next year. The recommendations shall refer to specific sections of the external borders and to specific border crossing-points to be evaluated in the next year under the multiannual programme. The Commission shall make this risk analysis available to the Member States and to the European Parliament.
Amendment 71 #
2010/0312(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. A report shall be drawn up following each evaluation. The report shall be based on the findings of the on-site visit and the questionnaire, as appropriate. . It shall include a thorough assessment of compliance with the Schengen acquis as well as with the benchmarks regarding judicial reform and the fight against corruption and organised crime, as established in Commission decisions C(2006)6569 and C(2006)6570.
Amendment 40 #
2010/0273(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Member States should provide for penalties in respect of attacks against information systems. The penalties provided for should be effective, proportionate and dissuasive and could include imprisonment and/or financial penalties.
Amendment 99 #
2010/0273(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the offences referred to in Articles 3 to 8 are punishable by effective, proportional and dissuasive criminal penalties, including the imposition of adequate fines.
Amendment 102 #
2010/0273(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the offences referred to in Articles 3 to 7 are punishable by criminal penalties of a maximum term of imprisonment of at least two years including the imposition of an adequate fine.
Amendment 12 #
2010/0246(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) The licensing scheme and the obligation to report suspicious transactions should allow economic operators to continue trading all precursors, thereby limiting its impact on the freedom to conduct a business.
Amendment 14 #
2010/0246(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
(6a) Limiting the sales of those chemicals that exceed concentration thresholds to users who can prove a legitimate need to use the chemical should provide higher security in the marketing and use of explosives precursors.
Amendment 27 #
2010/0246(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
(4) ‘suspicious transaction’ means any transaction concerning the substances listed in the Annexes, or mixtures containing those substances, where there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the substance or mixture is intended for the production of home-made explosives, notably because of its unusual quantity, concentration, combination and frequency;
Amendment 48 #
2010/0246(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. Each Member State shall set up a national contact point with a clearly identified telephone number and e-mail address for the reporting of suspicious transactions. Such contact points shall be staffed by personnel of the law enforcement agencies.
Amendment 63 #
2010/0246(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Reporting under this Article shall be limited to the name, licence number, items purchased, the amount of the transaction and the method of payment and the reasons giving rise to suspicion, for a maximum period of 2 years, unless a suspicious transaction or theft has led to an investigation which is still ongoing. The processing of personal data revealing racial or ethic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, trade- union membership, as well as the processing of data concerning health or sex life, is prohibited.
Amendment 64 #
2010/0246(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7
Article 7
Each Member State shall ensure that the processing of personal data carried out in application of this Regulation shall be in accordance with Directive 95/46/EC. In particular, each Member State shall ensure that the processing of personal data required by the granting of license pursuant to Articles 4 and 5 of this Regulation, and the reporting of suspicious transactions pursuant to Article 6 of this Regulation, shall comply with Directive 95/46/EC. Guidelines contained in the implementing decisions referred to in Articles 5(6) and 6(6) shall ensure that: - information is only disclosed to competent law enforcement authorities for the purpose of investigating terrorist activities or other suspected criminal abuse of explosive precursors; - the licensing authority shall inform license holders about the fact that their purchases will be recorded and may be subject to reporting if found suspicious; - a clear and concrete definition of suspicious transactions is provided, as well as criteria to identify them; - data security is guaranteed; - data is accessible only on a need to know basis and the list of recipients is published; - data subjects have a right of access correction or deletion, when appropriate, and a redress mechanism is foreseen. The European Data Protection Supervisor shall be consulted prior to drawing up these guidelines.
Amendment 76 #
2010/0246(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
A review of this Regulation shall be made [54 years after adoption].
Amendment 125 #
2010/0210(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. This directive shall apply to the agriculture, horticulture and tourism sectors. Member States may decide to extend its application to additional activities that are dependent on the passing of the seasons. This additional activity has to be approved by the Commission.
Amendment 143 #
2010/0210(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – point e
Article 3 – point e
(e) ‘single application procedure’ means a procedure leading, on the basis of one application for themade by au thorisation of a third- country nird-country national, or by his or her employer, for the authorisational's of residence and seasonal work in the territory of a Member State, to a decision ruling on theat application for a seasonal worker permit;
Amendment 194 #
2010/0210(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
4. Member States may reject an application on the grounds of volumes of admission of third-country nationals. It should be avoided that the number of third country nationals who applies for seasonal work, should be greater than that of the nationals of the Member State who are looking to find a job as a seasonal worker.
Amendment 218 #
2010/0210(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall determine whether an application is to be made by the third- country national or by the employer. If the application is to be submitted by the third- country national, Member States shall allow the application to be introduced from a third country or, if provided for by national law, on the territory of the Member State in which he or she is already legally present.
Amendment 226 #
2010/0210(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The seasonal worker permit shall be a single document. Member States may indicate additional information related to the employment relationship of the third- country national in paper format, or store such data in electronic format as referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) 1030/2002 and point 16 of its Annex I as amended by Regulation (EC) 380/2008.
Amendment 230 #
2010/0210(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. Seasonal workers shall be allowed to reside for a maximum of six months in any calendar yearperiod of 12 months, after which they shall return to a third country.
Amendment 260 #
2010/0210(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14
Article 14
Member States shall require employers of seasonal workers to provide evidence that the seasonal worker will benefit from accommodation that ensures an adequate standard of living according to the minimum standards of national law. If seasonal workers are required to pay rent for such accommodation, its cost shall not be excessive in relation to their remuneration.
Amendment 280 #
2010/0210(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19
Article 19
Every threewo years, and for the first time no later than [threewo years after the date of transposition of this Directive], the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the application of this Directive in the Member States and shall propose any amendments necessary.
Amendment 40 #
2010/0209(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) As a result of the globalisation of business, increasing trade and the growth and spread of multinational corporations, in recent years movements of managerial and technical employees of branches and subsidiaries of multinationals, and specialists temporarily relocated for short assignments to other units of the company, have gained momentum.
Amendment 136 #
2010/0209(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – point k
Article 3 – point k
(k) ‘single application procedure’ means the procedure leading, on the basis of one application for themade by au thorisation of a third- country nird-country national, or by the host entity, for the authorisational's of residence and work in the territory of a Member State, to a decision ruling on theat application for a intra corporate transferee permit;
Amendment 155 #
2010/0209(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – point iii
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – point iii
Amendment 194 #
2010/0209(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. Member States may reject an application on the grounds of volumes of admission of third-country nationals. When adequate alternatives for graduates can be found nationally, they have preference.
Amendment 209 #
2010/0209(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall determine whether an application is to be made by the third- country national or by the host entity. If the application is to be submitted by the third-country national, Member States shall allow the application to be introduced from a third country or, if provided for by national law, on the territory of the Member State in which he or she is already legally present.
Amendment 226 #
2010/0209(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The intra-corporate transferee permit shall be a single document. Member States may indicate additional information related to the employment relationship of the third-country national in paper format, or store such data in electronic format as referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) 1030/2002 and point 16 of its Annex I as amended by Regulation (EC) 380/2008.
Amendment 240 #
2010/0209(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Article 15 – paragraph 4
4. By way of derogation from the first subparagraph of Article 5(4) of Directive 2003/86/EC, residence permits for family members shall be granted by the first Member State, if the conditions for family reunification are fulfilled, at the latest within two month30 days from the date on which the application was lodged.
Amendment 255 #
2010/0209(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the duration of the transfer in the other Member State(s) does not exceed twelve monthshe maximum duration of the transfer to the European Union provided for in Article 16(3);
Amendment 265 #
2010/0209(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
If the duration of the transfer in the other Member State exceeds twelve months-he maximum duration of the original transfer to the European Union provided for in Article 16(3), the other Member State may require a new application for a residence permit as an intra-corporate transferee in that Member State pursuant to Chapters II and III.
Amendment 271 #
2010/0209(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Where the relevant legislation requires a visa or residence permit for exercising mobility, such visas or permits shall be granted in a timely manner within a period that does not hamper pursuit of the assignment, whilst leaving the competent authorities sufficient time to process the applicationsccordance with the periods provided in Article 12.
Amendment 123 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. Causing a child to participate in pornographic performances shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least two years and an appropriate fine.
Amendment 128 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. Profiting from or otherwise exploiting a child participating in pornographic performances shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least two years and an appropriate fine.
Amendment 133 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Knowingly attending pornographic performances involving the participation of children shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least two years and an appropriate fine.
Amendment 138 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 5
Article 4 – paragraph 5
5. Recruiting a child to participate in pornographic performances shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least five years and an appropriate fine.
Amendment 143 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 6
Article 4 – paragraph 6
6. Causing a child to participate in child prostitution shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least five years and an appropriate fine.
Amendment 148 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 7
Article 4 – paragraph 7
7. Profiting from or otherwise exploiting a child participating in child prostitution shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least five years and an appropriate fine.
Amendment 151 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 8
Article 4 – paragraph 8
8. Engaging in sexual activities with a child, where recourse is made to child prostitution shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least five years and an appropriate fine.
Amendment 158 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 9
Article 4 – paragraph 9
9. Coercing a child to participate in pornographic performances shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least eight years and an appropriate fine.
Amendment 164 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 10
Article 4 – paragraph 10
10. Recruiting a child to participate in child prostitution shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least eight years and an appropriate fine.
Amendment 169 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 11
Article 4 – paragraph 11
11. Coercing a child into child prostitution shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least ten years and an appropriate fine.
Amendment 174 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Acquisition or possession of child pornography shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least one year and an appropriate fine.
Amendment 178 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Knowingly obtaining access, by means of information and communication technology, to child pornography shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least one year and an appropriate fine.
Amendment 182 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. Distribution, dissemination or transmission of child pornography shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least two years and an appropriate fine.
Amendment 185 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 5
Article 5 – paragraph 5
5. Offering, supplying or making available child pornography shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least two years and an appropriate fine.
Amendment 188 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 6
Article 5 – paragraph 6
6. Production of child pornography shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least five years and an appropriate fine.
Amendment 200 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
The proposal, by means of information and communication technology, by an adult to meet a child who has not reached the age of sexual consent under national law, for the purpose of committing any of the offences referred to in Articles 3 (3) and Article 5 (6), where this proposal has been followed by material acts leading to such a meeting, shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least two years and an appropriate fine.
Amendment 223 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. Member States authorities shall insure by any appropriate means and in accordance with national law that such information may also be obtained from the criminal records held in other Member States. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that twhe measure referred to in paragraph 1 is entered in the criminal record ofn recruiting personnel for activities which involve contacts with children, employers shall be entitled to obtain information from competent authorities in any Member State concerning the existence of convictions for an offence referred to in Articles 3 to 7 or of any additional measure related to those convicting Member Statons. If serious suspicion should arise during working relations, employers may, in accordance with national law, request such information even after the recruitment procedure.
Amendment 55 #
2009/0164(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. In examining whether an applicant has access to protection against persecution or serious harm in a part of the country of origin in accordance with paragraph 1, Member States shall at the time of taking the decision on the application have regard to the general circumstances prevailing in that part of the country and to the personal circumstances of the applicant, in accordance with Article 4. To this end, Member States shall ensure that precise and up-to-date information is obtained from various sources, such as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the European Asylum Support Office.
Amendment 1 #
2008/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
- Having regard to the Commission debate on GMOs held on 7 May 2008, when it was confirmed that a ‘technical solution’ to the low-level presence of non-approved GMOs had to be found ‘as soon as possible and at the latest before the summer of 2008’,
Amendment 97 #
2008/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls in particular for a separated, more proportional authorisation procedure for products of cisgenesis, in which only genes are used of the same species similar to traditional breeding practices;
Amendment 154 #
2008/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Underlines the economic impact of the possible contamination of unapproved GMOs in feed imports deriving from a wide commercial cultivation of GM events not yet authorized in the EU, although the EFSA often already declared these events to be safe; Regrets that the Commission has not yet come up with a technical solution to the low-level presence of non- approved GMOs, whereas the Commission had already stated that a technical solution had to be found before the summer of 2008;
Amendment 11 #
2008/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls for technical and political decisions to be separated; deals with political decisions with a regional approach and technical decisions with a scientific approach;
Amendment 16 #
2008/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Asks for multiannual plans to be drawn up between all stakeholders in the fisheries sector, laying down the rules and the TACs for a number of years;
Amendment 19 #
2008/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Believes that there should be progressive devolution of management responsibilities to RACs and direct stakeholders, as a result of which rights- based management tools in fisheries could be used as a system to regulate the allocation of fishing rights among fishermen;
Amendment 1 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 a (new)
Citation 5 a (new)
- having regard to the mandate issued by the European Council to the Commission for the negotiations in the field of agriculture, as laid down in the Commission’s Proposal for Modalities in the WTO Agriculture Negotiations (document 625/02) of January 2003,
Amendment 2 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)
Citation 6 a (new)
- having regard to the conference organised by the Commission in Brussels on 5 and 6 February 2007 on the topic of ‘Food Quality Certification – Adding Value to Farm Produce’,
Amendment 3 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
Citation 7 a (new)
- having regard to the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the provision of food information to consumers (COM(2008)0040),
Amendment 7 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas counterfeiting causes economic damage to both producers and end- consumers,
Amendment 10 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that ensuring conditions of fair competition for strategic goods such as agricultural and food products should be a major European objective of public interest; considers it vital that there should also be conditions of fair competition for imported products, which tend not to meet standards comparable to those governing Community products; believes that the EU's quality standards need to be appliedapplicable to third- country products having access to the single European market also need to be laid down on the basis of agreement in the WTO;
Amendment 13 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Reaffirms that the goal of higher food safety, animal welfare and environmental protection standards should be that of attaining a high level of product quality offering a strong competitive advantage to agricultural producers, and that food safety and the requirements of environment- friendliness must not be allowed to generate signiagricultural producers must also be able to earn enough to cover the costs generated by EU food safety, animal welfare and environmental requirements; believes that, should the competitive advantage offered to agricultural producers not be sufficaient extra costs for European farmers; belieto enable them to covesr thatose costs, a key role needs to be played here by CAP funding, which farmers in Europe should use for ensuring product safety and higher product qualitysafety, animal welfare and environmental protection in agriculture;
Amendment 20 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Recalls that the ongoing liberalisation of world agricultural markets is exposing EU producers to direct international competition, and that any additional measures that have to be complied with may be detrimental to competition; emphasises that the quality of agricultural products which meet EU requirements in the areas of food safety, animal welfare and environmental protection can offer agricultural producers a strong competitive advantage, but that European law must put them in a position to exploit that advantage;
Amendment 22 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Emphasises that in the WTO negotiations the Commission must seek to secure an agreement on the ‘non-trade concerns’ which ensures that as many imported products as possible meet the same requirements as those imposed on European farmers, so that the quality of agricultural products which meet EU requirements in the areas of food safety, animal welfare and environmental protection offers agricultural producers a strong competitive advantage;
Amendment 33 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Is concerned at the fact that the majority of European consumers are not sufficiently well-informed concerning the food chain, especially as regards products' and raw materials' origins; advocates mandatory indication of place of production of primary products via a 'made in the EU' or 'non-EU' label; believes such a system should also apply to processed food products and should account for the origins of the main ingredients and raw materials, specifying their place of origin as well as the place of final processingquality; takes the view that it should be easy to identify agricultural products which meet EU quality requirements in the areas of food safety, animal welfare and environmental protection; advocates mandatory indication of products which meet EU quality requirements through the use of an EU logo and, for example, a label bearing the words 'meets EU quality requirements';
Amendment 45 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Takes the view that the use of the general European quality label, bearing the words ‘produced in the European Union’, must ultimately ensure that European products stand out on the market, on the basis of the high quality standards governing their production;
Amendment 49 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Advocates taking measures to simplify the EU rules and limit the scope for self- regulation; believes that common marketing standards are necessary and can be established in a more efficient fashion; considers, in this connection, that joint regulation should be promoted as the usual means of adopting EU legislation in the field; calls for municipal authorities,alls for food industry representatives and farmers' representatives to be involved in the prodraw up their marketing standards together, where necessary;
Amendment 57 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls for detailed consideration of the option of a special label for European quality products which meet higher quality requirements than stipulated by EU law, on the basis of the existing models; calls on the Commission, in this connection, to examine and propose the launching of a European quality mark to complement the existing national and regional marks; reaffirms the position expressed in its resolution of 9 October 1998, as mentioned above; believes that any such label must also guarantee fair treatment for all market players at all stages of the production and distribution chain, in an environment- friendly context;
Amendment 60 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Believes that there needs to be a more transparent labelling system enjoying broad consumer recognition; advocates, in addition, a voluntary system for indicating place of origin for agricultural and food products, on the basis of which all of food products manufactured in the European Union would be labelled as genuine products of EU origin, and for the most important raw materials in all systems adopted;
Amendment 83 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Favours simplifying the procedure for registering designations of origin and reducing the time required for obtaining them; believes one means of achieving this would be to delegate responsibility to the competent national bodies;
Amendment 104 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Suggests setting up a European Office for Product Quality, which would work closely with the European Food Safety Authorityclose cooperation between the European Food Safety Authority, the Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) and the Commission’s units responsible for food quality;
Amendment 107 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Favours preserving and simplifying the system of guaranteed traditional specialities (GTSs); expresses disappointment at the performance of this instrument, under which so far only a small number of GTSs have been registered (20, with 30 applications pending); stresses that producers prefer the national instruments for certifying traditional products, in many cases in order to obtain exemptions from certain obligations (e.g. plant health rules);
Amendment 113 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Believes that organic farming offers European farmers a major growth opportunity; notes, however, that the EU regulation on the subject lays down a single standard, even though the certification procedure varies between Member States and is expensive;
Amendment 136 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33a. Calls on the Commission to facilitate mutual recognition of the various quality standards and systems employed in Member States, in order to simplify matters for consumers and minimise obstacles to trade; takes the view that ultimate supervision should be carried out by a Commission body;
Amendment 4 #
Amendment 5 #
2008/2186(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
Amendment 20 #
2008/2186(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the ECA's statement to the effect that the annual accounts of the European Communities present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Communities as of 31 December 2007, and the results of their operations and cash flows for the year then ended (Chapter 1, DAS, paragraph VII); calls the Commission nevertheless to pay due attention to the comments presented by the ECA in order to improve the comprehensiveness and accuracy of the basic accounting data;
Amendment 26 #
2008/2186(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Deplores the fact, nonetheless, that in extremely important Community spending areas (agricultural spending that does not come under the Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS), cohesion, research, energy and transport, external actions, education and culture), the ECA notes, once again, that complicated or unclear legal requirements, firstly, result in a large number of errors at final- beneficiary level and, secondly, result in only partially effective monitoring and control systems and that that complexity is instrumental in preventing the ECA from issuing a positive DAS (Chapter 1, DAS, paragraphs X and XI); calls therefore on the Commission to conduct an analysis to determine the extent of, and possible solutions to, the problems; stresses therefore the need for simplification of the underlying rules and regulations in order to achieve a positive DAS;
Amendment 34 #
2008/2186(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Welcomes the fact that annual summaries of audits by the Member States are being made available as from 2008, and the evaluation and declarations presented in the 2007 annual activity reports of the Structural Funds directorates-general, but; calls on the Commission to undertake efforts so that these annual summaries can be published together with the response of the Commission; observes with concern that, owing to disparities in presentation, the ECA considers that those annual summaries do not yet constitute a reliable appraisal of the operation and effectiveness of the control systems; welcomes in this light the revised Guidance Note of the Commission aimed at ensuring higher quality in the annual summaries for 2008;
Amendment 39 #
2008/2186(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. RegDeplorets also the fact that, to date, it has not received detailed information from the Commission on an assessment and comparative analysis of the initial annual summaries presented, and considers it of utmost importance that the quality of those annual summaries be reported on in order to ensure that value is added to the process by, among other things, identifying common problems, possible solutions and best practices and making this information available to all relevant parties, and to the public throughout the discharge process;
Amendment 41 #
2008/2186(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Considers that the annual summaries which Member States have to provide of available audits and declarations, pursuant to Article 44 of the IIA of 17 May 2006, ought to be a first step towards the introduction of national management declarations in all Member States; asks the Commission to declare what it has done in this respect taking into account previous discharge resolutions; calls on the Commission urgently to undertake all necessary efforts to upgrade the annual summaries so that they carry the same political weight as the national management declarations;
Amendment 45 #
2008/2186(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Calls on the Commission in addition, on the basis of the annual summaries received, to analyse the strengths and weaknesses of each Member State's national system for the administration and control of Community funds, together with an estimate of the cost of national systems for the control of Community funds; reminds the Commission of its commitment to improve the quality of the annual summaries of the Member States in order to make them useful instruments to mitigate the risk of errors for the years to come; asks the Commission to live up to its commitment in this respect;
Amendment 51 #
2008/2186(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Calls on the Commission, having regard to the seriousness of the situation, to quickly organise an interinstitutional conference involving all stakeholders in Community fund management and control (representatives of the Member States in the Council at the highest level, of the Commission, of the ECA, of national audit bodies, of national parliaments with responsibility for oversight over Member State governments, of the European Parliament, etc. and all other relevant actors in the discharge process) so as to embark on a comprehensive debate on the current discharge procedure system, on which the DAS has been negative for 14 years, and to give thought to the reforms needed in order to obtain a positive DAS as soon as possible;
Amendment 52 #
2008/2186(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Takes the view that the conference should culminate in tangible proposals with regard to improving the management and control of Community spending and, indeed, for some aspects, a degree of harmonisation, and proposes that, during the forthcoming budgetary procedure, its Committee on Budgetsthe Parliament gives the Commission the resources needed to mount the study and the conference;
Amendment 70 #
2008/2186(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51a (new)
Paragraph 51a (new)
Amendment 71 #
2008/2186(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
Paragraph 53
53. Is concerned, however, at the ECA's criticisms of errors in interpreting the provisions of the regulations and at the finding that the cumulative effect of all such errors, over a number of years, will be significant if they are not corrected, and calls on the Commission to take the appropriate measures, consisting of at least simplifying the policy together with ensuring clearer and consistent control systems, to correct the errors as quickly as possible and to inform Parliament in late 2009 about the measures taken;
Amendment 94 #
2008/2186(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 64
Paragraph 64
64. Also reminds the Commission of the ECA's recommendation to make as much use of possible, without undermining the effectiveness of spending, of the scope for simplification provided for by the spending rules, and calls on it to launch a discussion exercise on new simplification measures that might be adopted, including computerisation of the system; welcomes in this light the Simplification Working Group set up by the Commission and expects the Commission to come forward with concrete proposals for the period 2007-2013 for simplification based on the outcome of the proceedings of the Simplification Working Group;
Amendment 123 #
2008/2186(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 104 a (new)
Paragraph 104 a (new)
104a. Takes note of the efforts made by the Commissioner in charge of enlargement in order to inform the Parliament about the situation in both Bulgaria and Romania and of his intention to maintain the competent committee of the Parliament constantly informed of developments on this issue;
Amendment 17 #
2008/2178(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Considers that, in order to maintain fish stocks worldwide, upper limits must also be set on the number of days fishermen may remain at sea;
Amendment 18 #
2008/2178(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Stresses that there are significant differences between the various marine areas and their respective fishery resources, and also between the various fleets and fishing gear used and their impact on ecosystems, which requires fisheries management measures, such as technical modifications to nets, the closure of certain areas and the reduction of fishing effort, that are diversified, specific and adapted to each case;
Amendment 29 #
2008/2178(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Recognises that the existing fisheries management instruments, based on total allowable catches (TACs), have until now been the best means of controlling total fishing effort to the extent that they have a direct impact on catches and an indirect impact on fishing effort; considers, however, that management of fishing effort is needed to allow this method to work optimally;
Amendment 34 #
2008/2178(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Reiterates the need constantly to improve fishing gear in order to perfect their selectivity, which will be an important factor in reducing by-catches and their impact on the environment; also calls on the Commission to develop specific policy instruments to encourage fishermen to take all available measures to reduce their by-catches as far as possible;
Amendment 5 #
2008/2175(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Visa 3a (new)
Visa 3a (new)
- having regard to the Commission Communication "Food prices in Europe" COM (2008) 821/4,
Amendment 18 #
2008/2175(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas considerable price differences have been identified across Europe with regards to the spread between consumer and producer prices, which in some cases cannot be explained by the costs involved in the processing, distribution and selling of products,
Amendment 33 #
2008/2175(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Ea (new)
Recital Ea (new)
Ea. whereas the imbalance in bargaining power between agricultural producers and the rest of the supply chain has resulted in strong pressure being kept on producer margins in the agricultural sector,
Amendment 34 #
2008/2175(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. considers that it is in the European public interest in accordance with the Treaties to maintain an adequate level of prices and ensure fair competition, especially with regards to strategic merchandise such as agricultural and food products;
Amendment 76 #
2008/2175(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. is worriedbelieves that, in light of the CAP reform and in particular decoupling, farmer decisions on what to produce will be more market-orientated and more influenced more by signals coming from the retail sector in terms of prices and demand; believes that the increase of Community food imports of food that does not comply with EU standards is likely to reduce prices at the farm;
Amendment 95 #
2008/2175(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. calls on the Commission to analyse, in its annual reports, on the gap between producer and consumer prices, differences between prices in the Member States and differences in price between various agricultural products;
Amendment 134 #
2008/2175(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23 calls for the introduction of mechanisms to combat speculation with agricultural commodities and financial instruments based on them; further calls for adaptation of the rules of participation in futures markets and a better regulation of these markets in generalsupports the Commission's intention to examine what measures could be taken to contribute to a reduction in price volatility in agricultural commodity markets;
Amendment 137 #
2008/2175(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. calls for measures in support of cooperation between small agricultural producers so that they are able to compete with large producers, processors and retailers; considers that Member States and the European Union need to ensure the existence of varnotes that cooperation between farmers are a good way for them to increase their bargaining power; calls on the Commission to consider extending the support measures given to cooperatiouns forms of commerce and avoid a total liberalisation of the food market, that would lead to further concentrationin the fruit and vegetable sectors to other agricultural sectors as well; calls on the European Commission to launch a Green Paper on the issue of the market power of large retailers;
Amendment 5 #
2008/2063(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Regrets that the wording of Article 37(3) gives the impression that certain measures which were previously covered by the consultation procedure could now be taken by the Council alone without even consulting Parliament;
Amendment 9 #
2008/2063(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Notes that the comitology procedures adopted on the basis of Article 202 of the EC Treaty will be repealed; emphasises the key role that Parliament has to play with regard to Article 249C in formulating a new comitology framework (i.e. by adopting acts in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure), especially with regard to the role of committees in the field of agriculture; stresses, therefore, the need to ensure that the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development is represented in the interinstitutional negotiations that will formulate the new comitology framework;
Amendment 2 #
2008/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. having regard to Declaration No 9 by the European Parliament, in which Parliament considers it useful to assess the issue of cofinancing of agriculture in the context of the 2008 - 2009 review and requests the Commission to outline the advantages and disadvantages of compulsory cofinancing of income support in the European Union,
Amendment 10 #
2008/2055(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that the ceilings for the common agricultural policy (CAP) are fixed until 2013 and that the reliability of the agricultural budget until 2013 was a basic requirement for accepting the far-reaching CAP reform in 2003 and the subsequent health check in 2008 by the majority of Member States, as long-term planning and security of investment is essential to the agricultural sector;
Amendment 21 #
2008/2055(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Warns, however, that the current large margin within the agriculture budget is likely to be a temporary phenomenon, as the phasing-in of the EU-12 Member States, declining prices with additional pressure for market expenditure, the agreed reform in the fruit and vegetables sector, the introduction of the school fruit scheme and the increase in the most deprived persons programme will make increasing demands on the budget, as a result of which this margin is expected to disappear towards the end of this planning period, which could lead to a reduction of direct income support for farmers in the old Member States; notes furthermore that a possible outbreak of an infectious animal disease could eliminate that margin more rapidly, which could lead to an even earlier and greater reduction in income support for farmers in the old Member States; calls therefore for a review of the way in which outbreaks of infectious animal diseases are financed; stresses, therefore, that no structural use can be made of the current margin;
Amendment 35 #
2008/2055(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Warns against the threats posed by a possible introduction of co-financing for the first pillar, since its compulsory character can most likely not be guaranteed if one of the national parliaments, is unwilling to authorise the funds for nationalDraws attention to Declaration No 9 by the European Parliament concerning voluntary modulation annexed to the Interinstitutional Agreement on budgetary discipline and sound financial management of 17 May 2006, in which Parliament expresses the view that it would be useful to assess the issue of co-financing, resulting in considerable distortion of competition and a de-facto dismantling of the CAP, as of agriculture in the context of the 2008-09 review; urges the Commission, therefore, to formulate the advantages and disadvantages of cofinancing and its practical implementationed in the letter of the European Commission of 9 June 2008 as objectively as possible and inform the budgetary authority of these findings.
Amendment 47 #
2008/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Reminds the Member States of their obligations with regard to the Annual Summaries under Point 44 of the IIA; calls upon the Commission to investigate the possibilities to publish the Annual Summaries of the Member States and the reaction of the Commission; requests the Commission to undertake efforts for upgrading the Annual Summaries to the political level of the national management declaration;
Amendment 75 #
2008/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Recalls the commitments made by the Member States in 2005 in view of reaching the target of 0,7 % of EU GNI for the official development assistance (ODA) in 2015; believes that the support of the EU budget can be a useful incentive to help the Member States to keep to this goal; stresses the need for the EDF to be a part of the EU budget, so as to enhance transparency;
Amendment 29 #
2008/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Notes that the changes to the annual budgetary procedure should serve to make it more simpler by laying down the principle of a single reading for each institution and by introducing a number of mechanisms designed to help the two arms of the budgetary authority reach agreement; emphasises that these changes should lead to less bureaucracy;
Amendment 34 #
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) 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 polprovide the European Parliament with an opportunity to give some initical decisionguidelines concerning the pilot projects and preparatory actions;
Amendment 36 #
2008/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Stresses the importance of continuing to provide a forum for dialogue between the two arms of the budgetary authority in July of each year; proposes that this forum should take the form of a 'meeting to prepare the budgetary procedure'; takes the view that that forum willorganising a trialogue in July of each year in order to enable each institution to gain a clear insight into the priorities of the other parties and willto enable Parliament to apprise the other institutions of the substance of the resolution on the draft budget to be adopted in July;
Amendment 2 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2.Welcomes the overall agreement on Budget 2009, reached in the traditional budgetary conciliation meeting with Council on 21 November 2008, especially with regard to the financing of the Food Facility; is extremely concerned, however, about the possible effects of a recession on European citizens and regrets, therefore, that at the conciliation meeting, the Commission was reluctant to disclose any information on the possible budgetary impact of its coming proposal on tackling the economic crisis; invites the Commission and the European Investment Bank to report regularly on its activities to combat the economic crisis and to indicate what implications these activities will have on Budget 2009;
Amendment 3 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2a (new)
Paragraph 2a (new)
2a. Notes that there is still an available margin of EUR 2 113 billion under the ceiling of heading 2, proving the success of the reforms of the CAP;
Amendment 6 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3a (new)
Paragraph 3a (new)
3a. Is concerned about the difference in commitment and payment levels for Rural Development which was 25% for 2007, 30% for 2008 and a proposed 30% for 2009; requests, therefore, from the Commission a forecast for decommitments for 2009 and for the whole financial period for 2007-2013 and a forecast for the problems with clearing the build-up of overstatements still to be settled (currently the level of RAL∗ under Rural Development is nearly € 9 billion) at the end of the financial period 2007- 2013 since maximum payment levels under annex I of the Inter Institutional Agreement fall from 1.06% GNI in 2007 to 0.94% GNI in 2013;
Amendment 9 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that the pilot projects and preparatory actions currently running (PP/PA) in chapters 5, 6, 7 and 17, which were adopted in the 2008 Budget, are at a very early stage of programming and underlines the need for timely and efficient implementation;
Amendment 10 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines the need for a school fruit program and considers the positive impacts of such an activity on public health and nutrition awareness of children; regrets the fact that the Commission has still not tabled a proposal for such a program; calls on the Commission to present its proposal without any further delay and to introduce a new budget line for that purpose in its amending letter;
Amendment 12 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls for a pilot project for assessing the costs for farmers which stem from compliance with EU standards in the fields of the environment, animal welfare and food safety, as well as the costs for farmers associated with the provision of public goods such as landscape preservation through farming activities;
Amendment 13 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Calls for a significant increase in appropriations for the school fruit scheme;
Amendment 17 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Reiterates its conviction that climate change measures are still not satisfactorily included in the EU budget and will support all efforts to increase and concentrate adequate financial resources to boost European leadership in dealing with the consequences of climate change; repeats its first reading invitation to the Commission to present, by 15 March 2009, an ambitious plan to improve the budget capability to deal with climate change issues; would like to seriously reflect on whether the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) could not be considered as a potential resource at EU level in the future;
Amendment 20 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Reminds the Member States of their obligations with regard to national management declarations under Point 44 of the IIA; reminds the Commission also of its responsibilities in that context, especially with regard to the political support it pledged to give to the initiative, but which has so far not materialised;
Amendment 1 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the annual budgetary procedure as a whole will have to undergo fundamental changes as a consequence of the provisions of the new treaty and the differentiation between compulsory and non-compulsory expenditure as well as the (maximum) rate of increase for non- compulsory expenditure will be abandoned,
Amendment 31 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Is of the opinion that, if this sharp decrease is a direct or indirect result of the new Action Plan to strengthen supervision and shared management for structural actions, the Commission should communicate this also given that it could imply a lack of first-level controls in the Member States;
Amendment 32 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Underlines that only 0,5% of appropriations under heading 2, notwithstanding the environmental measures under Rural Development programming and the environmental standards underpinning the cross-compliance system for direct payments, are used for environmental priorities while the vast majority of funds are allocated to direct aids and market related expenditure;
Amendment 66 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 73 – indent (6 a) (new)
Paragraph 73 – indent (6 a) (new)
– state of play regarding the implementation of Point 44 of the IIA and of point 5(N) of the Action Plan towards an Integrated Internal Control Framework (COM(2006)0009);
Amendment 37 #
2008/2000(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 38 #
2008/2000(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)
Paragraph 36 f (new)
36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 54 #
2008/0268(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall present to the European Parliament and the Council a mid-term report on the application of this Decision by 30 JuneApril 2010, accompanied, and as appropriate, by a proposal for its amendment, drawing upon an external evaluation whose terms of reference are specified in Annex II of this Decision.
Amendment 28 #
2008/0242(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) It is appropriate to monitor and evaluate the performance of EURODAC at regular intervalsnnually.
Amendment 56 #
2008/0216(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – point 7 a (new)
Article 4 – point 7 a (new)
(7a) ‘recreational fisheries’ means all fishing activities where the catch shall be neither sold nor marketed except for philanthropic purposes;
Amendment 172 #
2008/0216(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 1
Article 47 – paragraph 1
Amendment 179 #
2008/0216(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 2
Article 47 – paragraph 2
Amendment 184 #
2008/0216(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 3
Article 47 – paragraph 3
Amendment 192 #
2008/0216(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 4
Article 47 – paragraph 4
Amendment 220 #
2008/0216(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 81 – paragraph 2
Article 81 – paragraph 2
2. The proceedings initiated pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be capabin principle, in accordance with the relevant provisions of national law, of effectively deprivinge those responsible of the economic benefit of the infringements and of producing results proportionate to the seriousness of such infringements, thereby effectively discouraging further offences of the same kind.
Amendment 221 #
2008/0216(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 82 – paragraph 1
Article 82 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that a natural person having committed or a legal person held liable for a serious infringement is in principle punishabled by effective, proportionate and dissuasive administrative sanctions, in accordance with the range of sanctions and measures provided for in Chapter IX of Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008.
Amendment 224 #
2008/0216(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 82 – paragraph 2
Article 82 – paragraph 2
2. In addition, for all serious infringements which level cannot be linked to the value of the fishery products obtained by committing the serious infringement, Member States shall ensure that a natural person having committed or a legal person held liable for a serious infringement is punishable by an administrative fine of a minimum of at least 5.000 EUR and a maximum of at least 300.000 EUR for each serious infringement. The flag Member State shall be immediately notified of the sanction imposed.
Amendment 225 #
2008/0216(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 82 – paragraph 3
Article 82 – paragraph 3
3. In case of a repeated serious infringement within a 5 year period, a Member State shall impose an administrative fine of a minimum of at least 10.000 EUR and a maximum of at least 600.000 EUR.
Amendment 226 #
2008/0216(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 82 – paragraph 4
Article 82 – paragraph 4
4. In fixing the amount of the fines the Member States shall also take into account the value of the prejudice to the fishing resources and the marine environment concerned.
Amendment 227 #
2008/0216(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 1
Article 84 – paragraph 1
Amendment 229 #
2008/0216(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 2
Article 84 – paragraph 2
Amendment 233 #
2008/0216(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 3
Article 84 – paragraph 3
Amendment 235 #
2008/0216(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 4
Article 84 – paragraph 4
Amendment 236 #
2008/0216(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 5
Article 84 – paragraph 5
Amendment 238 #
2008/0216(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 6
Article 84 – paragraph 6
Amendment 239 #
2008/0216(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 7
Article 84 – paragraph 7
Amendment 129 #
2008/0180(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. During slaughter operations, an appropriate back-up stunning equipmentmethod shall be immediately available on-the-spot and used in the case of failure of the stunning equipment initially used. Where this back- up stunning method concerns heavy installations, mobile equipment will be appropriate.
Amendment 135 #
2008/0180(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10
Article 10
Amendment 169 #
2008/0180(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 5
Article 14 – paragraph 5
Amendment 239 #
2008/0180(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – point 7.2
Annex II – point 7.2
7.2. Facilities for poultry shall be designed and built so that animals are onlyLive poultry should be conveyed into the gas mixtures ineither in their transport crates without being unloadedor on conveyor belts.
Amendment 259 #
2008/0180(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – point 1.7 – point c
Annex III – point 1.7 – point c
(c) lift or drag the animals by the head, ears, horns, legs (with the exception of the feet of poultry and lagomorphs), tail or fleece, or handle them in such a way as to cause them avoidable pain or suffering;
Amendment 5 #
2008/0149(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) measures to improve access to agricultural inputs and services, including fertilizers and seedsthe infrastructure and means of production of the poorest small-scale farmers to support local and sustainable development, i.e.: - access to agricultural inputs (tailored to the optimum use of local resources) and services (extension, vocational training), - access to land, water and financing (microcredits), - the collective organisation of producers (for production and setting up local markets and local seed banks), - crop storage;
Amendment 35 #
2008/0149(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) The measures adopted with this facility should help developing countries to boost agricultural productivity in the next seasons, to respond rapidly to immediate needs of the countries and their population and to take initial steps needed to prevent as far as possible further food insecurity situations, and also contribute to mitigating the effects of the high food prices globally, to the benefit of the poorest people, but also of the European consumers and farmers.
Amendment 36 #
2008/0149(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The very nature of measures provided for under this Regulation calls for the establishment of efficient, flexible, transparent and rapid decision-making procedures for their financing, with a strong cooperation between all Institutions concerned. This Regulation should in particular allow for the financing of measures already initiated that International Organisations are supporting or ready to support before the adoption of this Regulation, as from 20 June 2008, corresponding to the date of the European Council Conclusions.
Amendment 48 #
2008/0149(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5
Article 1 – paragraph 5
5. International Organisations, including Regional Organisations (hereafter "International Organisations")Local banks active in the agricultural sector will be selected on the basis of their capacity to deliver a speedy and high quality response to the specific needs of the targeted Developing Countries in relation to the objectives of this Regulation.
Amendment 52 #
2008/0149(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a)
(a) measures to improve the productive capacity, including access to credit for farmers and access to agricultural inputs and services, including fertilizers and seeds in appropriate cases based on the needs of the respective farmers and using market based solutions;
Amendment 63 #
2008/0149(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4
Article 4
The entities eligible for funding shall be International Organisations fulfilling the conditions laid down in Article 43 of Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002local banks active in the agricultural sector. If possible, also the European Investment Bank and affiliated organisations are eligible for funding.
Amendment 66 #
2008/0149(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The measures financed under this Regulation shall be in line with the Paris declaration on aid effectiveness. The reports as described in Article 9 shall address particular attention to this requirement.
Amendment 42 #
2008/0110(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) Regulation (EC) No 1923/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 amending Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 laying down rules for the prevention, control and eradication of certain transmissible spongiform encephalopathies makes it legally possible, subject to certain conditions, to again permit the use of meat and bone meal in feed intended for non-ruminants. It is expressly stated that the relaxation of the existing ban on meat and bone meal is conditional on the availability of tests which can distinguish animal proteins from different animal species. The European Commission is therefore doing everything possible to make validated species-specific tests available as quickly as possible so that meat and bone meal can be used as a valuable source of protein in animal feed for non-ruminants, while excluding cannibalism.
Amendment 43 #
2008/0110(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 b (new)
Recital 8 b (new)
Amendment 57 #
2008/0110(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point (b)
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point (b)
(b) the feeding of farmed animals other than fur animals with non-sterilised or sterilised catering waste or feed material containing or derived from such catering waste;
Amendment 83 #
2008/0110(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Animal by-products arise mainly during the slaughter of animals for human consumption, during the production of food of animal origin such as dairy products, and in the course of the disposal of dead animals and of disease control measures. Regardless of their source, they pose a potential risk to animal and public health and the environment. This risk needs to be adequately controlled, either by channelling such products towards safe means of disposal or by using them for different purposes, provided that strict conditions are applied which minimise the health risks involved.
Amendment 84 #
2008/0110(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
Amendment 85 #
2008/0110(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 b (new)
Recital 8 b (new)
(8b) The use of catering waste in animal feed has in the past repeatedly led to outbreaks of infectious animal diseases. In addition, if the use of catering waste in feed is permitted, it cannot be guaranteed that material from animals of a particular species will not be fed to animals of the same species.
Amendment 148 #
2008/0110(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the feeding of farmed animals other than fur animals with non-sterilised or sterilised catering waste or feed material containing or derived from such catering waste;
Amendment 139 #
2008/0104(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 4 – point 21
Article 4 – point 21
Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007
Part II – title I – chapter IV – section I – sub-section III – Article 95 a – point 1
Part II – title I – chapter IV – section I – sub-section III – Article 95 a – point 1
1. A premium of EUR 22,25 per tonne of starch produced shall be paid for the 2009/10, 2010/2011, 2011/2012 and 2010/112/2013 marketing years to undertakings producing potato starch for the quantity of potato starch up to the quota limit referred to in Article 84a(2), provided that they have paid to potato producers a minimum price for all the potatoes necessary to produce starch up to that quota limit.
Amendment 152 #
2008/0104(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 4 – point 32
Article 4 – point 32
Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007
Article 184
Article 184
"5. before 30 June 2011 to the European Parliament and Council on the conditions for smoothly phasing out the milk quota system, including, in particular, possible further increases in quotas or, possible reductions in the superlevy or other measures to ensure a soft landing in the dairy markets of all Member States. The report shall be accompanied, if necessary, by appropriate proposals."
Amendment 157 #
2008/0104(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Annex I
Annex I
Amendment 8 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) In order to achieve a better balance between policy tools designed to promote sustainable agriculture and those designed to promote rural development, a system of compulsory progressive reduction of direct payments (“modulation”) was introduced by Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003. This system should be maintained at the current rate of 5%, including the exemption of payments up to EUR 5000 from its application.
Amendment 9 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
Amendment 10 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29 a (new)
Recital 29 a (new)
(29a) The cross-compliance system and the common agricultural policy (CAP) will probably require further adjustment in the future, as the level of payments currently does not always seem proportionate to the compliance efforts made by the farmers concerned, because payments still depend to a large extent on historic spending. In particular, animal welfare legislation is obviously most burdensome for livestock farmers, which is not reflected in the level of their payments. However, if imported products met the same animal welfare standards, then there would be no need to compensate farmers for their compliance with Community legislation in this field. The Commission should therefore strive for recognition of non-trade concerns as import criteria within the World Trade Organisation negotiations.
Amendment 11 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) Member States should be allowed to use up to 105% of their ceilings for granting specific support in clearly defined cases. Such support should allow Member States to address environmental issues and improve the quality and marketing of agricultural products. Specific support should also be available to buffer the consequences of the phasing-out of milk quotas and the decoupling of support in particularly sensitive sectorby way of contributing to insurance and mutual funds. Given the growing importance of an effective management of risks Member States should be given the option to financially contribute to the premiums farmers pay for crop insurance as well as to the financing of financial compensation of certain economic losses in case of animal or plant diseases. With a view to respect the Community’s international obligations the resources that could be used for any coupled support measures should be limited at an appropriate level. The conditions applicable to the financial contributions to crop insurance and animal or plant disease related compensation should be established accordingly.
Amendment 12 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. Any amount of direct payments to be granted in a given calendar year to a farmer that exceeds EUR 5 000 shall be reduced forby 5% each year until 2012 by the following percentages: (a) 2009: 7% (b) 2010: 9% (c) 2011: 11% (d) 2012: 13%.
Amendment 13 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4
Article 9 – paragraph 4
4. The remaining amount resulting from the application of Article 7(1) and the amounts resulting from the application of Article 7(2) shall be allocated to the Member State where the corresponding amounts have been generated, in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 128(2). They shall be used in accordance with Article 69(5a) of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005.
Amendment 14 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. Any amount resulting from the application of Article 7(1) and (2) shall be allocated to the new Member State where the corresponding amounts have been generated in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 128(2). They shall be used in accordance with Article 69(5a) of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005
Amendment 15 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33
Article 33
Amendment 16 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Title III – Chapter 5 – title
Title III – Chapter 5 – title
SPECIFIC SUPPORTUPPORT BY WAY OF INSURANCE AND MUTUAL FUNDS
Amendment 17 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 1
Article 68 – paragraph 1
1. Member States may, for every calendar year, decide byefore 1 August 2009 at the latest to use from 2010of the preceding year to use up to 105% of their national ceilings referred to in Article 41 to grant support to farmers: (ad) for: (i) specific types of farming which are important for the protection or enhancement of the environment, (ii) for improving the quality of agricultural products, or (iii) for improving the marketing of agricultural products; (b) to address specific disadvantages affecting farmers in the dairy, beef, sheep and goatmeat and rice sectors in economically vulnerable or environmentally sensitive areas, (c) in areas subject to restructuring and/or development programs in order to avoid abandoning of land and/or in order to address specific disadvantages for farmers in those areasin the form of contributions to crop insurance premiums in accordance with the conditions set out in Article 69, (de) in the form of contributions to crop insurance premiums in accordance with the conditions set out in Article 69, (e) mutual funds for animal and plant diseases in accordance with the conditions set out in Article 70.
Amendment 18 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 2
Article 68 – paragraph 2
Amendment 19 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 3
Article 68 – paragraph 3
Amendment 20 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 4
Article 68 – paragraph 4
Amendment 21 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 5
Article 68 – paragraph 5
5. Support for measures referred to: (a) in paragraph 1(a) and (d) shall take the form of annual additional payments, (b) in paragraph 1(b) shall take the form of annual additional payments such us headage payments or grassland premia, (c) in paragraph 1(c) shall take the form of an increase of the unit value and/or the number of the farmer's payment entitlements, (d) in paragraph 1(e) shall take the form of compensation payments as specified in Article 70.
Amendment 22 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 6
Article 68 – paragraph 6
Amendment 23 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 132 a (new)
Article 132 a (new)
Article 132a Study on costs of compliance The Commission shall execute a study assessing the actual costs for farmers which result from complying with EU legislation in the fields of environment, animal welfare and food safety which provides for standards going beyond those to which import products are subject. Such legislation includes, inter alia, the regulations and directives listed in Annex II which underpin the cross-compliance system, as well as the standards defined as good agricultural and environmental condition (GAEC) in Annex III which are also part of the cross-compliance requirements. The study shall assess the compliance costs as described above in all Member States, which might vary between Member States and even their respective regions according to differences in climatic, geological, economic, social and production features.
Amendment 144 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a) Continuous efforts should be made towards achieving simplification, improvement and harmonisation of the cross-compliance system. The Commission should therefore present a report on the application of the cross- compliance system every two years.
Amendment 145 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 b (new)
Recital 2 b (new)
(2b) Reduced administrative burdens, harmonised checks, amalgamation of checks, including within the European institutions, and timely payments would increase the overall support among farmers for the cross-compliance system and thus increase the effectiveness of the policy.
Amendment 146 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 c (new)
Recital 2 c (new)
Amendment 147 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 d (new)
Recital 2 d (new)
(2d) Member States should ensure that farmers are not penalised twice (i.e. through the reduction or withholding of payments, as well as a fine following non- compliance with the relevant national legislation) for the same case of non- compliance.
Amendment 156 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) In order to achieve a better balance between policy tools designed to promote sustainable agriculture and those designed to promote rural development, a system of compulsory progressive reduction of direct payments (“modulation”) was introduced by Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003. This system should be maintained at the current rate of 5 %, including the exemption of payments up to EUR 5000 from its application.
Amendment 192 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
Amendment 206 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29 a (new)
Recital 29 a (new)
(29a) The cross-compliance system and/or the CAP is likely to require further adjustment in the future, as current payment levels do not always seem to be proportionate with the compliance efforts made by the farmers concerned, since payments still depend to a large extent on historic spending. Animal welfare legislation is obviously particularly burdensome for livestock farmers, something which is not reflected in the level of their payments. However, if imported products were to meet the same animal welfare standards, then there would be no need to compensate farmers for their compliance with Community legislation in this area. The Commission should therefore strive for recognition of the non-trade concerns as import criteria within the World Trade Organisation negotiations.
Amendment 216 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) Member States should be allowed to use up to 105% of their ceilings for granting specific support in clearly defined cases. Such support should allow Member States to address environmental issues and improve the quality and marketing of agriculfor insurance and mutural products. Specific support should also be available to buffer the consequences of the phasing-out of milk quotas and the decoupling of support in particularly sensitive sectorfunds. Given the growing importance of an effective management of risks Member States should be given the option to financially contribute to the premiums farmers pay for crop insurance as well as to the financing of financial compensation of certain direct economic losses in case of animal or plant 1 Texts Adopted P6_TA(2008)0310. diseases. With a view to respect the Community’s international obligations the resources that could be used for any coupled support measures should be limited at an appropriate level. The conditions applicable to the financial contributions to crop insurance and animal or plant disease related compensation should be established accordinglydiseases. The conditions applicable to the financial contributions to crop insurance and animal or plant disease related compensation should be established accordingly. Moreover, new legislation will be needed, obliging Member States to introduce cost-sharing schemes for farmers, which will deal with the costs which arise due to outbreaks of contagious animal diseases. The new legislation should set a common framework within which Member States will have to set up these cost-sharing schemes. The aim of this new legislation will be to do away with the distortion of competition between farmers from different Member States, caused by differences in national public contributions towards the costs which arise due to outbreaks of contagious animal diseases. The new legislation should also aim to encourage farmers to minimise the risk of infection and spread of contagious animal diseases. Member States that already have cost-sharing schemes for their farmers will have to modify these schemes in such a way as to ensure they are compatible with the common framework.
Amendment 234 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) As a consequence of the integration of new schemes into the single payment scheme, provision should be made for the calculation of the new level of individual income support under that scheme. In the case of nuts, potato starch, flax and dried fodder, such increase should be granted on the basis of the support farmers received in most recent years or production quotas of farmers in most recent years. However, in the case of the integration of payments that were so far partially excluded from the single payment scheme, Member states should be given the option to use the original reference periods.
Amendment 258 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that all agricultural land, especially land which is no longer used for production purposes, is maintained in good agricultural and environmental condition. Member States shall define, at national or regional level, minimum requirements for good agricultural and environmental condition on the basis of the framework set up in Annex III, taking into account the specific characteristics of the areas concerned, including soil and climatic condition, existing farming systems, land use, crop rotation, farming practices, and farm structures. For that sake the standards mentioned in the right column of Annex III shall be seen as indicative. Issues and standards of Annex III shall be deemed to have been met by a Member State in case they are already covered by controls on statutory management requirements of Annex II in the Member State concerned.
Amendment 271 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – Introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – Introductory part
1. Any amount of direct payments to be granted in a given calendar year to a farmer that exceeds EUR 5 000 shall be reduced for each year until 2012 by the following percentages:with 5 % until 2012.
Amendment 275 #
Amendment 282 #
Amendment 289 #
Amendment 296 #
Amendment 373 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4
Article 9 – paragraph 4
4. The remaining amount resulting from the application of Article 7(1) and the amounts resulting from the application of Article 7(2) shall be allocated to the Member State where the corresponding amounts have been generated, in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 128(2). They shall be used in accordance with Article 69(5a) of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005.
Amendment 391 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. Any amount resulting from the application of Article 7(1) and (2) shall be allocated to the new Member State where the corresponding amounts have been generated in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 128(2). They shall be used in accordance with Article 69(5a) of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005.
Amendment 403 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1
Article 24 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall carry out on-the- spot-checks to verify whether the farmer complies with the obligations referred to in Chapter 1. These controls shall take place within a period of not more than one day for a particular farm.
Amendment 406 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – indent 1
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – indent 1
2. Member States may make use of their existing administration and control systems to ensure compliance with the statutory management requirements and good agricultural and environmental condition referred to in Chapter 1. However, Member States shall endeavour to limit the number of controlling agencies and the number of persons carrying out the on-the-spot checks on a particular farm.
Amendment 407 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Member States may make use of private administration and control systems, provided they have been officially accredited by the national authorities.
Amendment 408 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 b(new)
Article 24 – paragraph 2 b(new)
2b. Member States shall endeavour to plan controls in such a way that farms which can best be controlled in a particular period during the year, due to seasonal reasons, are indeed controlled in that particular period. However, if the controlling agency could not control a particular statutory management requirement, or a part thereof, or good agricultural and environmental conditions during an on-the-spot check, due to seasonal reasons, those requirements and conditions shall be deemed to be met.
Amendment 415 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 26 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Where a reduction or exclusion of payments is being applied in case of non compliance with cross-compliance rules, as referred to in Article 25, no fine shall be imposed under the corresponding national legislation for the same case of non-compliance. Where a fine has been imposed following non-compliance with national legislation, no reduction or exclusion of payments shall be imposed for the same case of non-compliance.
Amendment 416 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 a (new)
Article 26 a (new)
Amendment 444 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2
Article 31 – paragraph 2
2. Payments shall be made up to twice a year within the period from 1 December to 30 June of the following calendar year, and shall include a payment of interest at market rates on the amount due from 30 June of the following calendar year.
Amendment 448 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 3
Article 31 – paragraph 3
3. PNo payments shall be made in respect of an application under support schemes listed in Annex I shall not be made before the controls with regard to eligibility conditions, to be carried out by the Member State pursuant to Article 22, have been finalised on that application.
Amendment 454 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33
Article 33
Amendment 514 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 2
Article 55 – paragraph 2
2. In 2010 and 2011, Member States that in accordance with Article 68(1), 68(2)(a)(ii) or 68(2)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 retained all or part of the national ceilings referred to in Article 41 of this Regulation corresponding to the slaughtering premium for calves, the slaughtering premium for animals other than for calves or the special male premium mayshall make an additional payment to farmer. The additional payments shall be granted on slaughtering of calves, on slaughtering of bovine animals other than calves and for holding male bovine animals, under the conditions provided for in Section 8 of Chapter 1 of Title IV. The additional payment shall be made at 50% of the level applied under Article 68 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 and within the limit fixed in accordance with Article 53(2) of this Regulation.
Amendment 526 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 1
Article 65 – paragraph 1
1. The amounts referred in Annex XI that were available for coupled support under the schemes referred under point I of Annex X shall be distributed by the Member States amongst the farmers in the sectors concerned in accordance with objective and non discriminatory criteria taking account, in particular, of support that those farmers received, directly or indirectly, under the relevant support schemes or production quotas during one or more years of the period 2005 to 200811.
Amendment 533 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter 5 – titre
Chapter 5 – titre
SPECIFIC SUPPORTUPPORT FOR INSURANCES AND MUTUAL FOODS
Amendment 541 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States may decide by 1 August 2009 at the latest to use from 2010for every calendar year before 1 August of the year before to use up to 105% of their national ceilings referred to in Article 41 to grant support to farmers:
Amendment 549 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 564 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 572 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 582 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 2
Article 68 – paragraph 2
Amendment 590 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 3
Article 68 – paragraph 3
Amendment 602 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 4
Article 68 – paragraph 4
Amendment 612 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 5 – point a
Article 68 – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) in paragraph 1(a) and (d) shall take the form of annual additional payments,
Amendment 613 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 5 – point b
Article 68 – paragraph 5 – point b
Amendment 615 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 5 – point c
Article 68 – paragraph 5 – point c
Amendment 617 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 6
Article 68 – paragraph 6
Amendment 635 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 69 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 69 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
1. Member States may grant financial contributions to premiums for crop insurance against losses caused by adverse climatic events, or adverse climatic events for which is know that they cause losses.
Amendment 665 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 70 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) 'mutual fund' shall mean a system accredited by the Member State in accordance with national law and European legislation still to be decided for affiliated farmers to insure themselves as described in paragraph 2a, by granting compensation payments to such farmers affected by economic losses caused by the outbreak of quarantine animal or plant disease or for affiliated farmers to insure themselves, by granting compensation payments to such farmers affected by direct losses caused by the outbreak of quarantine animal or plant disease;
Amendment 667 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 70 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) 'direct losses' shall mean any direct cost incurred by a farmer as a result of implementation of European veterinary or phytosanitary legislation.
Amendment 669 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 70 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Member States shall set up obligatory cost sharing schemes for their farmers, which will cater for the costs of outbreaks of contagious animal diseases within a common framework to be defined as part of new European legislation. The aim of this new legislation is to prevent that future outbreaks will have to be funded by diminishing income support and to abolish the distortion of competition between farmers from different Member States, following the differences in national public contributions to the costs of outbreaks of contagious animal diseases. Another aim of the new legislation is to stimulate farmers in minimising the risk of infection and spread of contagious animal diseases. Member States that already have obligatory cost sharing schemes for their farmers will have to modify these schemes in such a way that they become compatible with the common framework.
Amendment 671 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 3 − subparagraph 1
Article 70 – paragraph 3 − subparagraph 1
3. The mutual funds shall pay the financial compensation directly to affiliated farmers who are affected by economic or direct losses.
Amendment 676 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Article 70 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
The first subparagraph shall not prejudice any powers of Member States to cover their participation in the financing of the financial contributions in full or in part through obligatory systems of collective responsibility in the sectors concerned, pending the implementation of new European legislation introducing a framework for the obligatory introduction by all Member States of cost sharing schemes for outbreaks of contagious animal diseases.
Amendment 677 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 7
Article 70 – paragraph 7
7. Member States shall define the rules for the constitution and the management of the mutual funds, notably for the granting of compensation payments to farmers in case of crisis, or for the administration and control of these rules. These rules shall be in accordance with the common framework to be established as part of the new European legislation as mentioned in paragraph 2a.
Amendment 739 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 133 a (new)
Article 133 a (new)
Article 133a Study on costs of compliance The Commission shall execute a study assessing the actual costs for farmers stemming from complying with the EU's legislation in the fields of environment, animal welfare and food safety, and which go beyond the standards that import products are subject to. This legislation concerns among others the regulations and directives of Annex II underpinning the Cross Compliance system, as well as the standards defined as Good Agricultural and Environmental Condition (GAEC) of Annex III which is also part of the Cross Compliance requirements. The study shall assess the compliance costs as described above in all Member States, which might differ between Member States and even between regions within Member States following their differences in climatic, geological, production, economic and social features.
Amendment 745 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – point A – point 4
Annex II – point A – point 4
4. Council Directive 91/676/EEC of 12 December 1991 Directive 2006/118/EC of the European Parliament and of the Articles 4 and 5 concerning 6 Council of 12 December 2006 on the protection of watersgroundwater against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources (OJ L 375, 31.12.1991, p. 1) and deterioration
Amendment 764 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – line 5 – column 2 – indent 1
Annex III – line 5 – column 2 – indent 1
– Establishment of buffer strips along water courses in accordance with relevant common legislation on the protection of surface water,
Amendment 49 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) The indication of the country of origin or of the place of provenance of a food should be provided whenever its absence is likely to mislead consumers as to the true country of origin or place of provenance of that product. In other cases, the provision of the indication of country of origin or place of provenance is left to the appreciation of food business operators. In all cases, the indication of country of origin or place of provenance should be provided in a manner which does not deceive the consumer and on the basis of clearly defined criteria which ensure a level playing field for the industry and improve consumers' understanding of the information related to the country of origin or place of provenance of a food. Such criteria should not apply to indications related to the name or address of the food business operator. Products from the EU shall in every case be labelled as such.
Amendment 60 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41 a (new)
Recital 41 a (new)
(41a) It is important to inform consumers as well as possible about food allergies. However, it is not realistic to expect relatively small and/or craft entrepreneurs to label foods which are not prepackaged with information about potential allergens.
Amendment 77 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point (e)
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point (e)
(e) the net quantity of the food at the time of packaging;
Amendment 82 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
(ia) whether or not the food is of EU origin;
Amendment 93 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. Without prejudice to specific Community legislation applicable to particular foods as regards to the requirements referred to in Article 9(1)(a) to (k), when appearing on the package or on the label attached thereto, the mandatory particulars listed in Article 9(1) shall be printed on the package or on the label in characters of a font size of at least 3mm and shall be presented in a way so as to ensure a significant contrast between the print and background.
Amendment 98 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4
Article 14 – paragraph 4
Amendment 130 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – point (a)
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – point (a)
(a) transsaturated fats;
Amendment 131 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – point (a) a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – point (a) a (new)
(aa) industrial trans fats;
Amendment 153 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
Article 35 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to labelling in accordance with specific Community legislation, paragraphs 3 and 4 shall apply where the country of origin or the place of provenance of a food is voluntarily indicated to inform consumers that a food originates or comes from the European Community or a given country or placea given country or place. Food products originating in the European Union shall in every case be labelled as products of EU origin.
Amendment 156 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 4
Article 35 – paragraph 4
4. For poultry and meat, other than beef and veal, the only place which may be indication oned as the country of origin or place of provenance may be given as a single place only wheris the place where the animals have been born, reared and/or slaughtered in the same country or place. In other cas, and not, therefore the place where they were bred or where slaughter, proces sinformation ong or packaging took place. As an alternative, each of these different places of birth, rearing and slaughtermay be indicated where the animals were born, reared, bred or slaughtered or where slaughter, processing or packaging took place. In every case, EU origin shall be givenindicated.
Amendment 161 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37
Article 37
Amendment 163 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38
Article 38
Amendment 166 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39
Article 39
Amendment 168 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40
Article 40
Amendment 171 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41
Article 41
Amendment 183 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42
Article 42
Amendment 193 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 2
Article 53 – paragraph 2
Article 14(1)ll the articles shall apply from [the first day of the month 35 years after the entry into force].
Amendment 195 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 3
Article 53 – paragraph 3
Amendment 199 #
Amendment 201 #
Amendment 202 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – letter b – fourth indent
Annex I – point 1 – letter b – fourth indent
– proteinfibre,
Amendment 203 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 4
Annex I – point 4
4. ‘trans fat’ means fatty acids with at least one non-conjugated (namely interrupted by at least one methylene group) carbon- carbon double bond in the trans configuration, with the exception of trans fat of natural origin;
Amendment 208 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 10
Annex I – point 10
10. ‘protein’ means the protein content calculated using the formula: protein = total Kjeldahl nitrogen × 6,25 and 6,38 animal protein;
Amendment 220 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VI – part B – point 17 – column 1
Annex VI – part B – point 17 – column 1
17. Skeletal muscles of mammalian and bird species recognised as fit for human consumption with naturally included or adherent tissue, where the total fat and connective tissue content does not exceed the values indicated below and where the meat constitutes an ingredient of another food. The products covered byWith the exception of beef, this definition also includes meat which is obtained mechanically from meat containing bones and which falls under the definition of ‘'mechanically separated meat’ are excluded from this definition' in Annex I, point 1.14 of Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 and which complies with the requirements of Annex III, Section V, Chapter III, Point 3, of Regulation 853/2004.
Amendment 224 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex XI – part A – point 2
Annex XI – part A – point 2
As a rule, 15 % of the recommended allowance specified in point 1 supplied by 100 g othe following shall apply for the purpose of deciding what constitutes the significant recommended allowance specified: 15% per 100 g, 7.5% per 100 ml and 5% per 100 mlkcal, or per package if the packagelatter contains only a single portion should be taken into consideration in deciding what constitutes a significant amountone portion.
Amendment 139 #
2008/0016(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 a (new)
Article 18 a (new)
Article 18a Fuel tax differentiation Member States may introduce a dynamic system of fuel tax differentiation, based on the relative greenhouse gas emission savings of the respective (bio)fuels and other (bio)liquids as calculated in accordance with Article 17. The system should grant progressively lower fuel taxes for biofuels and bioliquids with higher greenhouse gas emission savings. Only biofuels and bioliquids that fulfil the environmental sustainability criteria as laid down in Article 15 shall benefit from such a system. Such a system shall be aimed to be budget neutral. Member States introducing such a system shall notify the Commission.
Amendment 349 #
2008/0013(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 - Point 7
Article 1 - Point 7
Directive 2003/87/EC
Article 10 - paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 10 - paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Revenues used under paragraph 3a should be spent on projects in different sectors, taking into account the relative contributions of the different sectors to the amounts accruing.
Amendment 22 #
2008/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation − amending act
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Under specific circumstances in order to stimulate research and development within the agri-food industry, and thus innovation, the newly developed scientific evidence and proprietary data provided in support of an application for inclusion of a novel food in the Community list should not be used to the benefit of another applicant during a limited period of time, without the agreement of the first applicant. The protection of scientific data provided by one applicant should not prevent other applicants from seeking the inclusion in the Community list of novel foods on the basis of their own scientific data. In addition, the protection of scientific data shall not prevent transparency and access to information with regard to the data used in the safety assessment of novel foods. Intellectual property rights should, however, be respected.
Amendment 24 #
2008/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation − amending act
Recital 21 a (new)
Recital 21 a (new)
(21a) The introduction of a European quality label will allow consumers to identify products that are produced in accordance with EU´s strict environmental, animal-welfare and food- safety standards and will form another essential part, in addition to this regulation, of the EU´s general policy of informing its citizens about the characteristics of products and the circumstances under which they were produced.
Amendment 5 #
2007/2285(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls for restrictions on the level of saturated and industrial trans fats and salt and sugar in food products, an excess of which leads to cardiovascular diseases, cancer, diabetes and obesity; also points out that the pace and extent of reformulation of products should take into consideration their quality and the technological and economic capacity of farmers and the food industry;
Amendment 18 #
2007/2285(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers it important to make information available about balanced eating and to support initiatives to increase consumption of fruit and vegetables and dairy products among young people and low-income population groups, as well as the elderly and women with children; urges the Commission in light of this to speed up the setting up of a Europe wide school fruit scheme;
Amendment 11 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas there is no difference between the quality of products derived from (emergency) vaccinated animals and products derived from unvaccinated animals, but markets in and outside the EU might not always be ready to accept products derived from (emergency) vaccinated animals and livestock farmers and other operators need sufficient guarantees that markets would be ready to receive those products without price cuts,
Amendment 13 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G b (new)
Recital G b (new)
Gb. whereas opening borders, increased global demand for food, increased global trade, increased global mobility of persons, global warming and illegal trade lead to increased animal health risks,
Amendment 16 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Invites the Commission to present an action plan, as envisaged in the animal health strategy;
Amendment 22 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises the importance of the role to be played by the veterinary profession, which should be at the forefront of the development and delivery of specialised and proactive services such as animal health planning; expresses its concerns about veterinary coverage of certain rural areas in the EU;
Amendment 42 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Points out that the proposed strategy can produce positive results if clear and transparent arrangements are laid down for the funding of the individual measures, something that the Commission communication fails to doand therefore calls on the Commission to work this out in the Action Plan; considers that the strategyAction Plan should clearly indicate by whom, and in what amount, individual measures – such as ensuring biological security on farms, vaccination programmes, scientific research or higher animal welfare standards – are to be funded;
Amendment 57 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 76 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Points to the heightened risks involved in long-distance transport of live animals, which spreads disease and hampers disease-control efforts; considers, in this connection, that restrictions should be placed on the transport of live animals and that thought should be given to placing an eight-hour ceil; considers, in this connection, that sanitary and animal welfare rules concerning transport of live animals should be intensely controlled and tightened if deemed necessary; believes that the quality of transport is more important in terms of animal welfare, than its duration; calls for the swift introduction of an integrated electronic European animal registration system, including onGPS transport timcking of lorries;
Amendment 81 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Stresses the need for a coherent communication strategy on the new Animal Health Strategy of the European Union, which should involve close co- operation with all stakeholders organisations at EU, national and local level;
Amendment 88 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Agrees that there is a need to ensure that unjustified national or regional animal health rules do not constitute an obstacle to the internal market, and in particular that the resources deployed in response to the outbreak of disease are proportional to the threat posed and are not used for unjustified trade discrimination purposes, especially with regard to products derived from vaccinated animals;
Amendment 97 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Acknowledges the need for a revision of the current cofinancing instrument, among others to prevent distortion of competition between farmers in different Member States, and stresses that cofinancing arrangements should cover, among other things, rdiskease categorisation, on the basis of the principle that the greater the risk, the greater the responsibility of anyone contributing to that risknature of the combat measures to be applied, risks for public health and other external effects;
Amendment 100 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Fully shares the view that the compensation system cannot be confined to the provision of compensation to owners of animals that are culled in response to the outbreak of disease, but should be combined with risk-prevention incentives, on the basis of the principle that the better the animal health and welfare standards owners maintain, the better they are compensated in the event of a disease outbreak; takes the view that that principle should also apply to Member States, as an incentive to reduce risk levelreductions of contributions by farmers to national or regional animal health funds, in case they take extra risk reducing measures;
Amendment 112 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Endorses provision being made in the EU legal framework for the possibility of covering indirect losses not resulting solely from disease-eradication measures; points out that indirect losses can in some cases be more severe than direct losses, and that provision should therefore be made for compensation for such losses; notes, however, that private insurance might be a more efficient instrument for dealing with such losses in certain cases;
Amendment 114 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Stresses that EU legislation is already based to a significant extent on compliance with OIE/Codex standards and that there is good reason to strive fully to comply with those standards and for the EU to promote its own animal health standards with a view to their adoption at international level; support therefore, with a view to increase the EU's negotiating power within the OIE, a possible EU membership to the OIE; stresses furthermore the importance to safeguard the input of stakeholders at OIE/Codex level;
Amendment 118 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Acknowledges in certain cases the grounds for introducing more stringent sanitary or phytosanitary standards than those adopted at international level; stresses, at the same time, that those standards should not distort competition;
Amendment 125 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Points to the need to improve the level of biosecurity on holdings and to encourage all operators to raise standards, while acknowledging that infectious diseases can strike on both small and large farms, on holdings where animals are kept for leisure, in zoos, in nature reserves, in slaughterhouses and during animal transport and transit;
Amendment 128 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Believes identification and tracing to be particularly important in animal health monitoring and disease prevention; supports, in this connection, action covering the electronic identification of animals and the introduction of a comprehensive animal movement monitoring system, but draws attention to the cost of such a system, particularly for small-scale livestock breeders; calls on the Commission to help farmers to cope with the high costs incurred by the procurement of the required equipment, by creating the possibility for Member States to incorporate such measures within their rural development programs;
Amendment 138 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Shares the view that better border biosecurity is particularly important in view of the fact that the EU is the world's largest importer of food, including animal products; considers that, in view of the risk of infection-carrying or diseased animals being brought into the EU, veterinary and sanitary checks at EU borders need to be particularly thorough and stringent, including strict controls of travellers arriving from outside the EU; calls furthermore on the Commission and the Member States to set up appropriate communication plans to inform civilians about the risks associated with the private import of animals and animal products;
Amendment 143 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Takes the view that veterinary and customs controls at EU borders should be particularly rigorous with a view to preventing the illegal import of or trafficking in animals and animal products, given the major risk of spreading disease that they entail; draws attention, in this connection, to the need for organisational, training and financial assistance to be provided to veterinary services at the EU's external borders, in particular in the new Member States;
Amendment 148 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
Paragraph 31 a (new)
31a. Calls on the Commission to significantly step up its cooperation with developing countries in providing them with technical assistance, on the one hand to help them to meet our sanitary standards and on the other hand to reduce the risk of spreading of animal diseases from these countries to the EU; believes that in veterinary cooperation with third countries priority should be given to countries bordering EU Member States;
Amendment 150 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Stresses the importance of veterinary surveillance in crisis situations and their prevention, as regards providing early warning and prompt detection of animal- related threats; call in this light on the Commission to examine the possible introduction of a system of farm audits for farms which are not regularly visited by veterinarians;
Amendment 154 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Points out that veterinary surveillance should be performed under objective conditions, which means that preferably there should be no relationship of employment or service provision between veterinary surgeons with a surveillance remit and livestock farms or processing plants; calls, in cases where this is not feasible, for other measures to be taken to ensure the impartiality of the veterinarians concerned;
Amendment 157 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Stresses the need for veterinary surgeons to be provided with effective training in prompt detection of animal- related threats and for support for such training at EU levelan update of EU minimum standards on veterinary training, together with measures to ensure its consistency; their implementation;
Amendment 169 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Strongly supports action to increase the use of vaccination, which should foster more effective disease prevention and containment and diminish the number of animals culled as part of disease eradication operations; draws attention to the fact that the introduction of an effective vaccination system requires the provision of appropriate financial support, in order to encourage its use; considers it essential, furthermore, for EU vaccine banks to be expanded;
Amendment 171 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)
Paragraph 35 a (new)
35a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to take various measures to ensure the indiscriminate circulation of products derived from vaccinated animals, which absency has so far placed a major brake on the use of vaccination as a tool in combating the spread of contagious animal diseases; calls therefore, among other measures, for a ban on the consumer labelling of products derived from vaccinated animals, effective public communication strategies regarding the harmlessness of products derived from vaccinated animals and for conventions to be concluded on the free circulation of products derived from vaccinated animals between governments, farmers organisations, consumer organisation, retail and trade;
Amendment 172 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 b (new)
Paragraph 35 b (new)
35b. underlines the need for an adequate emergency vaccination strategy for both existing diseases (like foot-and-mouth disease, classical swine fever, avian influenza and bluetongue) and emerging diseases (like African horse sickness, West Nile disease, African Swine Fever and Rift Valley fever);
Amendment 175 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Stresses that scientific research plays an essential role in animal health systems, since it enables advances to be made, in particular in monitoring the diagnosis and control of animal diseases, risk analysis, vaccination and other essential activities, which must be based on scientific knowledge; recalls in this light its amendment to EU budget 2008 increasing appropriations for the development of (marker) vaccines and testing methods; calls on the Commission to make effective use of these increased appropriations;
Amendment 181 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Points to the need for the developmentstrengthening of athe network of Community and national reference laboratories dealing with animal diseases, and agrees that scientifically uniform test methods should be applied;
Amendment 188 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
Amendment 37 #
2007/2214(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 38 #
2007/2214(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)
Paragraph 36 f (new)
36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 1 #
2007/2194(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)
Citation 2 a (new)
- having regard to the Lisbon Strategy, which is intended to make Europe, by 2010, the most competitive and the most dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world,
Amendment 30 #
2007/2194(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls therefore on the Commission to come forward with proposals for the introduction of a European quality label, which will allow consumers to easily identify products that were produced in accordance with Europe's strict environmental, animal-welfare and food- safety standards;
Amendment 34 #
2007/2194(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Calls, furthermore, for increased efforts to be made in explaining the European agricultural model, with its high standards in the field of the environment, animal welfare and food safety, to the public;
Amendment 70 #
2007/2194(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to develop new (fiscal) measures to help young farmers carry the heavy interest costs they face following the procurement of their farms; calls on the Commission to come up with specific proposals to that end within the framework of the CAP reform;
Amendment 75 #
2007/2194(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Reaffirms its opinion that rural development measures should be aimed directly at farmers;
Amendment 79 #
2007/2194(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Believes that EU young farmers should be able to compete with each other on a level playing field within the EU; calls, therefore, for cautious revision, and subsequent implementation, of the current Article 69 of Council Regulation 1782/2003 so as to prevent any distortion of competition on the European internal market;
Amendment 80 #
2007/2194(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Calls for all agricultural and rural development policies to be made fully coherent with the objectives the EU has set itself as part of the Lisbon Strategy, so as to enable young farmers to operate in a dynamic economic environment;
Amendment 124 #
2007/2194(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Believes that young farmers should be able to compete with foreign competitors on a level playing field; calls therefore on the Commission for priority to be given to recognition of the non-trade concerns (NTC) as import criteria in multilateral, as well as bilateral, trade negotiations;
Amendment 1 #
2007/2192(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
Citation 1 a (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 13 December 2007 on the proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 21/2004 as regards the date of introduction of electronic identification for ovine and caprine animals1,
Amendment 57 #
2007/2192(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission and the EU Council of Agriculture Ministers to reviewensure the introduction of an electronic identification system for sheep intended for 31/12/2009 due to the difficulty in implementation, high costs and unproven benefits; asks that each Member State; calls on the Commission and the Member States to help farmers cope with the high costs incurred in procuring the required equipment, bey allowed the discretion of introducing this system on a voluntary basiing such measures to be incorporated in rural development programs;
Amendment 72 #
2007/2192(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Commission to introduce a mandatory EU labelling regulation system for sheepmeat products, which would have an EU wide logo to allow consumers to distinguish between EU products and those from third countries, which would be underwritten by a number of criteria including a farm assurance scheme and on a voluntary basis a country of origin indication, ensuring that consumers are fully aware as to the point of origin of the product;
Amendment 35 #
2007/2063(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 36 #
2007/2063(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)
Paragraph 36 f (new)
36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 38 #
2007/2062(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 39 #
2007/2062(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)
Paragraph 36 f (new)
36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 41 #
2007/2061(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 42 #
2007/2061(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)
Paragraph 36 f (new)
36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 38 #
2007/2060(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 39 #
2007/2060(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)
Paragraph 36 f (new)
36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 38 #
2007/2059(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 39 #
2007/2059(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)
Paragraph 36 f (new)
36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 38 #
2007/2058(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 39 #
2007/2058(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)
Paragraph 36 f (new)
36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 38 #
2007/2057(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 39 #
2007/2057(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)
Paragraph 36 f (new)
36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 38 #
2007/2056(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 39 #
2007/2056(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)
Paragraph 36 f (new)
36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 35 #
2007/2055(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 36 #
2007/2055(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)
Paragraph 36 f (new)
36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 44 #
2007/2055(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61
Paragraph 61
Amendment 35 #
2007/2054(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 36 #
2007/2054(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)
Paragraph 36 f (new)
36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 44 #
2007/2054(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61
Paragraph 61
Amendment 38 #
2007/2053(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 39 #
2007/2053(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)
Paragraph 36 f (new)
36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 47 #
2007/2053(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61
Paragraph 61
Amendment 48 #
2007/2053(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 62
Paragraph 62
Amendment 49 #
2007/2053(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63
Paragraph 63
Amendment 50 #
2007/2053(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 64
Paragraph 64
Amendment 51 #
2007/2053(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 65
Paragraph 65
Amendment 52 #
2007/2053(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 66
Paragraph 66
Amendment 38 #
2007/2052(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 39 #
2007/2052(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)
Paragraph 36 f (new)
36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 47 #
2007/2052(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61
Paragraph 61
Amendment 48 #
2007/2052(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 62
Paragraph 62
Amendment 49 #
2007/2052(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63
Paragraph 63
Amendment 50 #
2007/2052(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 64
Paragraph 64
Amendment 51 #
2007/2052(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 65
Paragraph 65
Amendment 52 #
2007/2052(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 66
Paragraph 66
Amendment 53 #
2007/2052(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 67
Paragraph 67
Amendment 54 #
2007/2052(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68
Paragraph 68
Amendment 38 #
2007/2051(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 39 #
2007/2051(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)
Paragraph 36 f (new)
36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 38 #
2007/2050(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 39 #
2007/2050(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)
Paragraph 36 f (new)
36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 38 #
2007/2049(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors recommendations should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be put in linealigned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the modifications amendments of to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 39 #
2007/2049(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)
Paragraph 36 f (new)
36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 35 #
2007/2048(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 36 #
2007/2048(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)
Paragraph 36 f (new)
36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 38 #
2007/2047(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 39 #
2007/2047(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)
Paragraph 36 f (new)
36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 46 #
2007/2046(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 47 #
2007/2046(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)
Paragraph 36 f (new)
36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 17 #
2007/2038(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Amendment 19 #
2007/2038(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Welcomes the fact that the political groups have published their inexternal audit reports and accounts for 2006 on Parliament's intranet;
Amendment 20 #
2007/2038(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47
Paragraph 47
47. Notes that on 9 July 2007, the Bureau considered the political groups' reports on the execution of the budget, as well as the reports drawn up by the relevant auditors; notes, in this context, that the Bureau instructed the authorising officer to recover from the ELDR/ALDE Group EUR 25 403,77 in unused appropriations, it being impossible to carry over this sum;
Amendment 1 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Paragraph 1
1. .....Postpones its decision on granting the Commission discharge in respect of the implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2006;
Amendment 10 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Heading before paragraph -1 (new)
Heading before paragraph -1 (new)
Request the Commission to fulfil the following conditions before 10 April 2008:
Amendment 11 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
Amendment 19 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3a (new)
Paragraph 3a (new)
3a. Recalls that in 2006 Community funding of Structural Policies totalled EUR 32,4 billion; points out that for 2007 this amount has risen to EUR 46,4 billion not including co-financing by Member States;
Amendment 20 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3b (new)
Paragraph 3b (new)
3b. Notes with great concern that in its 2006 Annual report, the ECA indicates that the reimbursement of expenditure to Structural Policies projects is subject to material error; that the proportion of reimbursements in the sample affected by error was 44% and "at least 12% of the total amount reimbursed in structural policies should not have been reimbursed;
Amendment 21 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3c (new)
Paragraph 3c (new)
Amendment 22 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3d (new)
Paragraph 3d (new)
3d. Urges therefore Commission to make use of ex-ante checks to verify if supervisory and control systems for the 2007-2013 period are in place in all the Member States and to regularly follow-up on them;
Amendment 23 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3e (new)
Paragraph 3e (new)
3e. Regrets also that, according to the ECA, the Commission maintains only moderately effective supervision to mitigate the risks of control systems in the Member States, failing to prevent reimbursement of overstated or ineligible expenditure;
Amendment 24 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3f (new)
Paragraph 3f (new)
3f. Notes with regret that, as pointed out by the ECA, for expenditure under structural policies (such as under the CAP and internal policies) complicated or unclear eligibility criteria or complex legal requirements have a negative impact on the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions;
Amendment 25 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3g (new)
Paragraph 3g (new)
3g. Finds it unacceptable that according to Commission1 little evolution is to be expected concerning simplification for the existing regulations for the 2007-2013 period for Structural Funds and that further simplification will only be proposed for the next legislative round; __________ 1 Commission statement under Action 1 in the Progress report on the Action Plan towards an Integrated Internal Control Framework (COM (2008)0110)
Amendment 26 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3h (new)
Paragraph 3h (new)
3h. Urges the Commission to follow up on the recommendation given by the ECA (paragraph 6.45) concerning the Cohesion Fund and to present further simplification proposals as soon as possible to the legislative authority, among others including clear and straightforward rules, guidelines and eligibility criteria;
Amendment 27 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3i (new)
Paragraph 3i (new)
3i. Considers and fully agrees with the ECA on this point, that Member State authorities have a very important role in the effective implementation of Structural Funds and Commission should reinforce their audits and make supplementary efforts with the supervision of the Managing Authorities in the Member States;
Amendment 28 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3j (new)
Paragraph 3j (new)
3j. Regrets the lack of incentives for Member States to effectively control the expenditure, since any ineligible expenditure identified by the Commission or the ECA, can be substituted for eligible expenditure by the Member State; asks the Commission to make sure that in the future only irregularities identified by Member States themselves could be substituted for other expenditure without any loss of funding for the Member State concerned;
Amendment 29 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3k (new)
Paragraph 3k (new)
3k. Welcomes the Commission's new Action Plan to strengthen the Commission’s supervisory role for structural actions (COM(2008)0097) with 37 measures aimed at reducing irregular payments made by Member States; welcomes also the Commission's commitment announced publicly in the committee hearing held on 25 February2008 to report quarterly to the Parliament on the progress of this Action Plan; expects the Commission to develop the reporting scheme in cooperation with the ECA;
Amendment 30 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3l (new)
Paragraph 3l (new)
Amendment 31 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3m (new)
Paragraph 3m (new)
3m. Asks the Commission to present to Parliament a scoreboard with a final implementation date on the implementation of the Action Plan to strengthen the Commission's supervisory role under shared management of Structural Actions(COM(2008)0097), including a common scheme of quantitative indicators and intermediate deadlines for its implementation; Is of the opinion that Commission should focus on the reliability of national monitoring and reporting systems, guidance to Member States and coordination of audit standards and should always give a breakdown per Member State;
Amendment 32 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3n (new)
Paragraph 3n (new)
3n. Expects the Commission to initiate infringement procedures against those Member States which have not complied with their obligations under the Regulations on Structural Funds, the Financial Regulation and its implementing rules and the Interinstitutional Agreement, in particular those who are not presenting reports on recoveries and financial corrections and those who are not presenting the annual summaries in conformity with the guidelines or those where the quality of the annual summaries is inadequate;
Amendment 33 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3o (new)
Paragraph 3o (new)
3o. Stresses the importance of Commission guidelines to effectively live up to the Interinstitutional Agreement; is of the opinion that these guidelines as a first step, should at least entail what is requested under the sector regulation for Agriculture (i.e. Declaration of Assurance signed by the head of the Managing Authority accompanied by a certification report);
Amendment 34 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3p (new)
Paragraph 3p (new)
3p. Insists that the Commission should start suspension procedures against Member States where first level control systems are inadequate, it has to speed up the sanctions system and present to Parliament a concrete plan of the timing and sanctions to be applied upon identification of irregularities;
Amendment 35 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3q (new)
Paragraph 3q (new)
3q. Insists on auditable reporting to Parliament on corrections and recoveries by the Commission for all unduly made payments for all funds, with precise definitions of all these different categories of financial corrections; expects the Commission to develop these reporting schemes in cooperation with the ECA and asks the ECA to give an opinion on the quality of the reports presented;
Amendment 36 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3r (new)
Paragraph 3r (new)
Amendment 37 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3s (new)
Paragraph 3s (new)
3s. Recalls action 11N1 that should have been implemented by 31 December 2007; expects the Commission to act accordingly "To determine whether recovery and offsetting systems are working effectively, by identifying amounts recovered in 2005 and 2006 and their coherence with errors identified during controls the Commission will, in direct management, develop a typology of errors and the relationship with recoveries, financial corrections and adjustments to payments and for share management it will examine the reliability of national monitoring and reporting systems."; _________ 1 Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the European Court of Auditors on the progress of the Commission Action Plan towards an Integrated Internal Control Framework (COM(2007)0086).
Amendment 38 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3t (new)
Paragraph 3t (new)
3t. Is worried by Commission's statement in its Progress Report (COM(2008)0110) that only recoveries launched in 2008 will be recorded in the central financial and accounting system; urges therefore the Commission to record information in the central financial and accounting system on the control authority and the type of error and to retroactively encode all recoveries for the 1994-1999 and 2000- 2006 periods;
Amendment 39 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3u (new)
Paragraph 3u (new)
3u. Asks the Commission in this light to give an assessment of the efficiency and effectiveness of multi-annual recovery systems and report on this in the 2008 or 2009 accounts;
Amendment 40 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3v (new)
Paragraph 3v (new)
3v. Expects the Commission to present to Parliament an evaluation before 10 April 2008 of the quality of all the annual summaries received for Agriculture, Structural Policy and Fisheries; the evaluation should entail a breakdown per Member State and per policy area and should give an opinion on the overall assurance and overall analysis that can be drawn from them;
Amendment 41 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3w (new)
Paragraph 3w (new)
3w. Regrets the diversity of information given by the Commission itself on financial corrections and recoveries and expects that the information provided for the discharge concerns exactly the same definitions of financial corrections as asked for the three-monthly reports;
Amendment 42 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3x (new)
Paragraph 3x (new)
Amendment 45 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4a (new)
Paragraph 4a (new)
4a. Urges the Commission to present its definition of a “Non-Governmental Organisation”, focussing not only on legal aspects but also on the way the non- governmental financing of these organisations is ensured;
Amendment 88 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that the Commission must react to fulfil important requests of the previous discharge 2005, which is not the case in the field of national declarations, where Parliament had asked the Commission to submit before the end of 2007 to the Council a proposal for a national management declaration covering all Community funds under shared management; regrets the Commission's tacit acceptance of Member States' collective irresponsibility, with the exception of Denmark, Sweden, the Netherlands and the UK, concerning the financial management of the European Union;
Amendment 89 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that the Commission must present complete and reliable figures for recoveries, specifying the exact budget line and year to which the individual recoveries relate; any other presentation makes a serious control impossible; is aware that the Commission to a large extent has to obtain this information via and from Member States; points out that, for this purpose, Parliament for the last three years has proposed national management declarations in order to put the Commission in a position where it is able to present this information and fill the transparency gap;
Amendment 92 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Regrets the lack of clarity about legality, and the inevitable impact on the media, of the ECA's reporting as to EU funds being received by certain new beneficiaries (i.e. railway companies, horse riding/breeding clubs, golf leisure clubs and city councils) according to the eligibility rules; points out that from a formal legal perspective this is ultimately a discussion on eligibility rules; emphasizes that Parliament has however supported the ECA in the past, and will continue to do so, when commenting on efficiency and effectiveness in its Special Reports;
Amendment 93 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9a (new)
Paragraph 9a (new)
9a. Reiterates that the ECA made the use of available audits and reports of national audit institutions an integral part of its new methodology; asks the ECA to inform the Committee on Budgetary Control of how it uses this information and asks further the ECA to give an opinion on the usefulness of the information obtained from the national audit institutions when drawing up its annual report;
Amendment 94 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes that for the Structural Funds 2006 was the last year of the 2000 to 2006 programming period in which, by the end of the year, all commitments for that period had to be made;
Amendment 95 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14a (new)
Paragraph 14a (new)
14a. Is concerned that the N+2 pressure spending might interfere with a proper undertaking of the winding-up procedures for structural programs and projects; points out that already for 2007, payments concerning Structural Funds have gone up by almost 50% in comparison to 2006; stresses that the Commission should ensure an effective winding-up procedure and emphasizes the important role that Member States have in this procedure;
Amendment 96 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Regrets also that the spending rate for the Cohesion Fund, ERDF and ESF was less than expected in the new Member States, and linked to their difficulties in absorbing expenditure; asks the Commission to give a more detailed explanation for lower than nationally forecast spending on structural operations;
Amendment 97 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Recalls that in the 2005 discharge resolution Parliament asked to the Commission to submit before the end of 2007 to the Council a proposal for a national management declaration covering all Community funds under shared management, based on sub-declarations by the various national bodies responsible for the management of expenditure; rejects the answer given by the Commission in the annex to its report on the follow-up to 2005 discharge procedure (SEC(2007)1185):"the Commission will not be taking the recommended action given the different governmental structure and management structures for EU funds under shared management of the 27 Member States, the development of a single standard declaration would not yield significant benefits. The Commission will however continue to support such initiatives taken by national administrations"; considers this response more than unsatisfactory, taking into consideration the situation with respect to Structural Funds and that more than 80% of the European Union's budget falls under what is called "shared management" and even more so, in light of the current situation with respect to Structural Funds, as established by the ECA in its 2006 Annual Report;
Amendment 98 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. WelcomeStrongly supports the initiative taken by some Member States (the UK, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Denmark) to approve the adoption of a national declaration on the management of Community funding and expresses concern at the fact that, despite these initiatives, most other Member States are resisting its introduction; urges the Commission to present possible viable advantages in terms of control relations between the Commission and those Member States that have introduced the above-mentioned initiatives; requests the Commission to report on a regular basis to the Committee on Budgetary Control on progress made concerning these provisions;
Amendment 100 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Notes that the first annual summaries awere due by 15 February 2008 and; points out that Parliament considers these annual summaries as a first step towards the national management declarations; asks the Commission before the first reading of the 2009 budget to draw up a document analysing the strengths and weaknesses of each Member State's national system for the administration and control of Community funds and the results of the audits conducted, and to forward that document to Parliament and to the Council;
Amendment 102 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Reminds the Commission about Parliament's previous criticism of the solidity of the basis on which the Commission claims to assume its political responsibility by its synthesis report, whereas the Commission lacks full insight into 80% of funds under shared management and the quality of annual activity reports vary; points out that the source of this lack of insight is two-fold: on the one hand insufficient monitoring and supervision by the Commission, and on the other an absence of concrete solutions and accountability at Member State level;
Amendment 103 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Regrets the Commission'’s tacit acceptance of Member States'the collective irresponsibility of the majority of the Member States concerning the financial management of the European Union; welcomes and supports the initiatives taken by some Member States in this respect and calls on the other Member States to follow suit;
Amendment 105 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32a (new)
Paragraph 32a (new)
32a. Disagrees with Commission’s statement in its latest progress report on the Action Plan for an Integrated Internal Control Framework (COM(2008)0110), that Actions 1, 3, 3N, 5, 8 and 13 are completed; points out that so far Parliament has been unaware of supporting documents or statements justifying such a statement; is forced therefore to seriously question whether these measures have been put in place, let alone whether they are implemented or have an impact on the progress of that Action Plan;
Amendment 108 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33a (new)
Paragraph 33a (new)
33a. Highlights however that for the implementation of Actions 1, 3, 3N, 5, 10, 10N, 11, 11N, 13 and 15, the Commission is also dependant on cooperation with the Member States; stresses that Parliament fully supports these actions and urges therefore Commission to use every available tool at its disposal to implement them as soon as possible;
Amendment 109 #
Amendment 110 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35a (new)
Paragraph 35a (new)
35a. Finds it unacceptable that the Commission reduces the Eva’s audit results, which are based on widely accepted International Audit Standards, to "differences of opinion on the typology and impact of error and on the evaluation of systems deficiencies, and partly the different perceptions regarding the operation of financial correction mechanisms" (page 2, last paragraph of the report);
Amendment 111 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35b (new)
Paragraph 35b (new)
35b. Is of the opinion that all reservations concerning a lack of assurance on the legality and regularity of Community spending should be reflected in Annual Activity Reports as well as in the Synthesis Report; found it therefore highly surprising in this light that three Directors-General decided only in 2006 to insert a reservation concerning the management and control of INTERREG, which, as noted by them, had already existed for some years (page 4, last paragraph of the report);
Amendment 112 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35c (new)
Paragraph 35c (new)
35c. Is worried about the statements of the Internal Auditor in his first Overview Report which indicate that, despite some progress, half of the critical and very important recommendations have not been implemented before the target dates set (page 8, before last paragraph of the report); asks the Commission to put more emphasis on the implementation of these recommendations;
Amendment 147 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas its Committee on Budgets shouldParliament will take due account of the 2006 discharge results and recommendations during the next budgetary procedure,
Amendment 148 #
2007/2037(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L . whereas the Council is not the discharge authority and consequently its discharge recommendation should, in order to serve a constructive purpose,should aim to strengthen the reform efforts and the responsibility of the Member States to remedy the problems identified by the Court of Auditors (ECA) and secure better financial management in the European Union,
Amendment 224 #
2007/0286(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Where the Commission adoptpublishes a new or updated BAT reference document, Member States shall, within four years of publication, where necessary, reconsider and update the general binding rules for the installations concerned, taking account of investment cycles. Therefore, the general binding rules for existing installations for industrial activities as mentioned in Annex I, paragraph 6.6, should be reviewed and updated within 15 years.
Amendment 234 #
2007/0286(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
3. Where the Commission adoptpublishes a new or updated BAT reference document, Member States shall, within four years of publication, ensure that the competent authority, where necessary, reconsiders and updates the permit conditions for the installations concerned, taking account, in individual cases, of investment cycles. Therefore, the permit conditions for existing installations for industrial activities as mentioned in paragraph 6.6 of Annex I should be reconsidered and updated within 15 years.