6 Amendments of Pervenche BERÈS related to 2013/2087(BUD)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Deeply regrets 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 toresults of the final ex-post evaluation of EGF will 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, since the concerned EGF cases were not analysed in the EGF mid-term evaluation report.
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. WelcomNotes that the Commission will continue to workhas already started to work in 2011 on the electronic application form and on the standardised procedures for simplified applications, faster processing of the applications and better reporting; asks the Commission to present the progress made following the use of technical assistance in 2012; recalls the need to shorten the application procedures1 and in 2012.
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Commission to invite the Parliament to the seminars and meetings of the Expert Group of Contact Persons organised by means of technical assistance, by using the relevant provisions of the Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission1; __________________ 1. OJ L 304, 20.11.2010, p. 47.
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission to invite the social partners to the seminars for practitioners organised by means of technical assistance;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Is concerned about the possible adverse impact which reducing the staffing level may have on the swift, regular and effective evaluation of incoming applications and implementation of the EGF technical assistance; considers that any short-term or long-term revision in staff should be based on a prior impact assessment and should take full account, inter alia, of the Union's legal obligations and the institutions' new competences and increased tasks arising from the Treaties;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Regrets that the Commission does not envisage any particular awareness-raising activities for 2013 given that some Member States, including users of the EGF, question the utility and advantages of the EGF;