11 Amendments of Diana IOVANOVICI ŞOŞOACĂ related to 2024/2109(INI)
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas Horizon Europe (HEU) is the EU’s largest centrally managed funding programme and the largest publicly funded research and development (R&D) programme in the world, which can enable Europe to occupy a leading place in this field on the international scene;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Regrets that there have been negative experiences with the implementation of HEU because the shift from H2020 to HEU has mostly been experienced as an increase in complexity and bureaucracy, a bureaucracy which continues to be the main cause of the low uptake of research funding, especially in the countries in the east of Europe; underlines that the success rates in some parts of the programme are still so low as to discourage potentially excellent applications; considers that the high cost of strategic planning (due to increased complexity, time and resources invested, as well as slowed-down implementation of the framework programme (FP)) is not compensated by any substantial benefits, while European researchers are leaving Europe for countries which allocate suitable funding for research;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights the importance of an agile FP, with that agility being real time and based on concrete guidelines and priorities; notes that the Heitor report outlines the importance of responding to the fast-changing field of science and innovation and recommends more self- governance in the FP through the establishment of councils as well as less prescriptive calls; recalls that the Draghi report notes that the current governance of the FP is slow and bureaucratic, that its organisation should be redesigned to be more outcome-based and evaluated by top experts and that the future FP should be governed by people with a proven track record at the frontier of research or innovation;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that the Commission has not succeeded in creating agile but strong management of HEU, and has not allowed for sufficient agility to keep pace with the rapid technological developments taking place in all fields, which has led to complex implementation;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls that the Commission communication entitled ‘EU Missions two years on: assessment of progress and way forward’ did not positively evaluate missions, not justifying their activity, and concluded that missions had failed on core objectives such as crowding in external funding, notably through public-private partnerships that would allow for swift implementation of solutions from researchers, and especially young researchers;
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Considers it necessary to include as a key priority in the framework programme the identification of solutions for the earliest possible return of researchers to their country of origin and to Europe, respectively, so as to enable Europe to develop and swiftly implement new solutions to reduce dependency on products from non-EU countries;
Amendment 237 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 – point a – point i
Paragraph 15 – point a – point i
i. be oriented towards facilitating the best science and innovation, in order to keep pace with continuous and rapid progress in various fields;
Amendment 251 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 – point a – point iii
Paragraph 15 – point a – point iii
(iii.) contribute to EU priorities, but on the terms of science and innovation rather than on the terms of policymakers, with a focus on the return of researchers to their countries of origin in Europe, so as to prevent Europe from back-slippage vis-à-vis other non-EU countries;
Amendment 267 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 – point b
Paragraph 15 – point b
(b) setting up the four councils proposed by the Heitor expert group, composed of eminent experts from the field, to decide on the strategic direction of the different parts of FP10, and in particular a European technology and industrial competitiveness council and a European societal challenges council, and allocating these a limited time span in which to draw up viable and genuine proposals;
Amendment 276 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 – point c
Paragraph 15 – point c
(c) including positions for programme managers and external experts with a proven track record in the relevant field, who are appointed as special advisers to the Commissioner responsible for research and innovation to ensure their seniority in the Commission, and who must come from all the EU countries, and not just the established EU Member States, to manage portfolios of projects across the whole programme and to set out swiftly and efficiently challenges based on strategic intelligence with a view to fostering global leadership for Europe in specific areas of their field;
Amendment 285 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Recommends that the objective of the part of FP10 on advancing the ERA be to build an excellent, unified ERA; underlines that this requires attracting talent, including by proposing viable solutions for the return of European researchers to Europe, integrating newcomers, providing access to leading research and technology infrastructures, supporting joint early research programmes with national funders, and developing European universities alliances into European scientific institutes, so as also to attract other researchers to Europe;