33 Amendments of Gunnar HÖKMARK related to 2011/2107(INI)
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the EU has established the objective of increasing spending on R&D to reach 3 % of EU GDP by 2020, and whereas this objective requires increased public spending in research and science in order to attract more private investment for R&D in the European Union,
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the European Parliament in its resolution of 8 June 2011 on "Investing in the Future: A New Multiannual Financial Framework" has called for a significant increase of public spending on research and science,
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas other regions and countries of the world are increasingly investing in R&D&I, and whereas EU investment in this domain should therefore be oriented towards a reinforcement of scientific capacity and an improvement in overall EU competitive capacity, whereas priorities and spending on research should be set with the aim to get Europe in the lead,
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas, although EU funding for R&D&I has been increasing, scientifically and technologically more developed EU Member States (MS) still absorb the greatest slice of the available resources under the various funding schemeDI is aiming for European excellence, there is a need to increase this spending with strict criteria as and programmes (including large-scale projects), perpetuating the under-representativeness of some MS and European regions in terms both of access to fundecondition for global leadership; whereas Structural and Cohesion funds should play a bigger role for the emergence of excellence ing and of participatll parts of the Union,
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas there are still inequalities within the EU in terms of national levels of R&D funding capacities, industrial structures and higher education systemsresearch and innovation capacities throughout Europe should be enhanced and their optimal use should be ensured in order to support the emergence of world leading research in Europe; whereas there is no conflict between criteria for excellence and cohesion, without excellence there will be no European leadership and less investment in research in the Union as such,
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas theindustry and SMEs are of great importance of SMEs for the EU economy and employment is not mirrored in their level of access to EU R&D&I funds, and therefore there is a need to simplify and cut red tape in order to increase the accessibility and participation of SMEs as well as industry as such,
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the European Commission Green Paper defining a Common Strategic Framework (CSF) for funding in research and innovation, and considers that the new CSF core should be the articulation of tho make EU research programmes and funding schemes more attractive and easy to access for all participants;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Takes the view that enhanced synergies should be developed between EU research funds and programmes and the Structural and Cohesion Funds have different aims and, as such, should be kept separate, although on a complementary basi, to more effectively stimulate smart specialization, for example by strengthening the development of clusters;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Draws attention toUnderlines the importance of maintaining convergence policies, and asks the Commission to build stairways to excellence for those MS and regions that are underrepresented in the FP by developing appropriate instruments to intensify cooperation between MS with a strong participation and those with a weaker participation, and to substantially incstructural and cohesion funds in order to support the development of leading and excellent rease human capacity buildarch ing and infrastructure in the latterll parts of the Union;
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that althoughscientific excellence is consideredshould be the main general criterion for funding, it must be borne in mind that the nature of excellence differs with the type of participant or the very nature ofof the European research funding; believes that the cresearch and innovation project (the excellence criterion for a research institution is not the same as for an individual researcher or for an SME, and also differs between fundamental and applied projects)dibility of the framework program is based on scientific quality, which must not be qualified by other means;
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that in order to reach excellence and enhance European competiveness, the best and most excellent research and innovation communities in Europe must be encouraged to collaborate with the best research communities outside of Europe; believes that opening up the future CSF should primarily be based on a reciprocity principle, allowing participation on equal terms in programmes and activities of high mutual interest;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Is convinced that, in the future, unilateral opening of the CSF should also be considered when in line with European interests and when impact depends on the participation of third country actors; believes, furthermore that in order to tackle Grand challenges, the future CSF should facilitate a structure for global strategy processes and priority setting also engaging non European actors;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Underlines that FP8 must aim for research and structures enabling the creation of a European global research area;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls for clarification, simplification and reorganisation of the different EU programmes and instruments in existence, for a clear definition of the overall funding system, and for a more tight integration of research, education and innovation; calls for the EU research and innovation programmes budget for the next financial period to be doubled as of 2014 (excluding the budget devoted to Structural Funds and the EIB) as the appropriate response to the current economic crisis and to the great shared challenges; suggests, therefore, a new organisational model based on three different layers of funding aimed at stability and convergence:
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. The funding scheme within this layer includes the funding provided through the EIT, the part of the FP concerning the Capacities Programme and Marie Curie initiatives, the European funding components of large-scale projects, access to loans by the EIB (covering projects over EUR 50 million), grants associated with the above-mentioned components of the FP, and cooperation with Structural Funds associated with infrastructure; SME access to research infrastructure should be stimulated at regional level by using mainly Structural Funds covering both development and the running of research infrastructures in science, medicine, social sciences and the humanities;
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Stresses the need to fundat future large-scale projects, such as ITER, Galileo and Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES) should be funded outside the FP, creating autonomous budget lines for them, in order to guarantee a transparent and reliable financing structure; suggests that they should be partially funded through the issuing of project bonds by the EIB;
Amendment 204 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Calls for a more flexible funding scheme in order to make the Cooperation theme more attractive for SMEs, whereby SME's would be able to join Cooperation projects during the projects implementation where possible and an open budget line for this should be available for the project; believes that in this way the SME can see the opportunities more clearly since the timeframe from entering the project to market results is shortened;
Amendment 209 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls that the European Research Council (ERC) has proved to be successful and a strengthening element of the European Research Area (ERA); stresses the need to increase the proportion of the budget dedicated to grants to young researchers, as well to strengthen Marie Curie actions and initiatives, thus reinforcing mobility; believes that mobility can also be strengthened by introducing a mobility component, when suitable, in the ERC grants; calls for the implementation of the necessary measures to cope with the precarious conditions of scientific workers in the EU as a means to attract and retain researchers, bearing in mind that precarious working conditions (which are still more prevalent for women) constitute a bottleneck on the way to achieving excellence in Europe;
Amendment 220 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Calls for a new mobility component, already supported by the European Parliament, that could increase mobility and strengthen the financing of globally leading research in Europe, by a research voucher following researchers moving to a university or a research institute in another Member state, thereby supporting the financing of the most attractive and inspiring research projects, establishing a critical mass of researchers and resources based upon the knowledge and vision in the scientific society and leading researchers;
Amendment 223 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. Underlines that the mobility of researchers in Europe should be given priority in order to secure the diffuse dissemination of knowledge and to ensure that innovative frontier research in various disciplines benefits from dedicated and competent researchers, as well as increased financial resources;
Amendment 230 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. This layer is the space for marketing of products and services and generation of public wealth; innovative SMEs play a pivotal role here in developing novel products and services to meet societal needs;
Amendment 239 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Takes the view that increasing the innovative capacity of SMEs is crucial for future growth and job creation in Europe; believes that the Common Strategic Framework should be designed to meet this challenge and hence, any future instrument on European level targeting innovation in SMEs should be more oriented towards the demands of the companies; therefore, calls for measures to increase SME participation in collaborative projects;
Amendment 265 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Stresses that increased participation by SMEs needs appropriate funding instruments that respond to their specificities, including an increased margin of the tolerable risk of error and shorter timeframe from proposal to project implementation/market results; within this scenario soft loans should be considered, which are reimbursed in the event of success, excluding administrative costs;
Amendment 283 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Underlines that in order to more effectively attract private investment and to ensure that research and development most effectively contribute to enhancing European competitiveness, appropriate measures should be taken in the Framework programme for a strong and efficient regulatory framework for the protection of intellectual property rights at an early stage in the research process;
Amendment 289 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Stresses the need for relevant user groups to be involved in setting the research and innovation agenda in the future CSF; believes that business involvement in the priority setting process is a prerequisite for high impact RDTI- projects and increased business participation; believes that the European technology platforms (ETPs), which bring industry, regulators and financial institutions together to develop long term strategic agendas within specific fields of technology, should continue to play a key role in the priority setting discussion in the CSF;
Amendment 296 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Favours moving towards a ’‘science- based’ approach and calls for a trust-based and risk-tolerant attitude towards participants at all stages of the funding system; calls for a full-cost funding model for academic research in the next FP;
Amendment 321 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Stresses the need for further simplification to make the funding processes quicker and more dynamic, for example, the manifold of reports required within the financial and scientific management could be reduced significantly, financial reporting at the same time being simplified;
Amendment 327 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 b (new)
Paragraph 25 b (new)
25b. Calls for the Commission to establish a simplified reporting based upon the existing reporting schemes in universities and established research institutions;
Amendment 333 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Calls for consolidation of multidisciplinary research and recognition of the social dimension of research; in this context, recalls that great societal challenges (such as climate change, demographic ageisocial change and resources sustainability) cannot be dealt with only through technological responses and that therefore European research in social sciences and humanities is a pivotal asset in successfully addressing them; believes therefore that both a SSH-oriented programme to understand societal needs and dynamics, and an increased SSH-component in all agenda driven actions should be secured in CSF to promote smart, inclusive and sustainable growth;
Amendment 355 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Calls for a balance to be kept between bottom-up (cooperative like the current FET-open scheme) and top-down projects (’‘great societal challenges’), as well as for smaller bottom-up projects to be facilitated;
Amendment 371 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Calls for an intensification of international cooperation through effective reinforcement of capacity building and the establishment of fair partnerships wi- including the development of scientific excellence, education in primary and secondary schools and university undergraduate levels and the developing countries in order better to tackle global challengment of research in applied sciences to meet local needs and tackle global challenges - and establishment of fair partnerships with developing countries;
Amendment 379 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28a. Stresses that the next framework program must within its main scope to a greater extent than the previous framework be an attractive funding mechanism for private and public sector actors, which are also the main users and responsible for translating the knowledge produced into actual products and services;
Amendment 384 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 b (new)
Paragraph 28 b (new)
28b. Underlines that the overriding aim of the Framework Programme must be to contribute to the European Union becoming the world’s leading research area, which requires the Framework Programme to be strongly focused on promoting and investing in world-class research; believes therefore that it is imperative that the implementation of the specific programmes is based upon the principles of scientific excellence rather than other priorities, since only by creating state-of-the-art research it is possible for the EU to become the world’s leading research area;