Activities of Christofer FJELLNER related to 2015/2353(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Preparation of the post-electoral revision of the MFF 2014-2020: Parliament's input ahead of the Commission's proposal (A8-0224/2016 - Jan Olbrycht, Isabelle Thomas) SV
Amendments (16)
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that Article 311 TFEU states that the Union shall provide itself with the means necessary to attain its objectives and carry through its policies; considers, therefore, that should the review arrive at the conclusions that the current ceilings were too low, it would be a primary law requirement to increase the ceilings;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Underlines that the EU budget makes a significante fact that structural reforms are crucial for growth and jobs; states that the EU budget can support them and make a contribution to the fight against unemployment, especially through the European Social Fund and the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI); stresses that despite the initial delays in the designation of national authorities and the implementation of the YEI, the current figures indicate full absorption capacity; notes that an evaluation of this initiative will soon be concluded, and expects that the necessary adjustments will be introduced to ensure its successful implementation;
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Is convinced, on the basis of the above analysis, that the review of the functioning of the current MFF entails the conclusion that a genuine mid-term revision of the MFF as provided for in the MFF Regulation is absolutely indispensable if the Union is to effectiveaffords a major opportunity to prioritise EU spending so as to redistribute funds to areas where the EU is clearly confront a number of challenges while fulfilling its political objtributing added value, such as research and development, competitiveness and the internal market, and environmental protectiveson; recalls that delivering on the Europe 2020 strategy remains the main priority to be supported by the EU budget;
Amendment 218 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Expects, therefore, that new reinforcements in commitment appropriations will be accompanied by a corresponding increase in payment appropriareductions, including an upward revision of other annual payments ceiling if necessaryreas; considers, moreover, that the mid-term review/revision of the MFF provides an excellent opportunity to take stock of payment implementation and updated forecasts for the expected evolution of payments up to the end of the current MFF; believes that a joint payment plan for 2016- 2020 should be developed and agreed between the three institutions;
Amendment 225 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Is determined to settle in an unequivocal way the issue of budgeting the payments of the MFF special instruments; recalls the unresolved conflict of interpretation between the Commission and Parliament on the one hand, and the Council on the other, which has been in the forefront of the budgetary negotiations in recent years; reiterates its long-standing position that payment appropriations resulting from the mobilisation of special instruments in commitment appropriations should also be counted over and above the annual MFF payment ceilings;
Amendment 228 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Strongly believes that the automatic transfer to the following years of any surplus resulting from under- implementation offrom the EU budget or fines imposed on companies for breaching EU competition law wshould contribute to easing the payment problem; stresses that this surplus should be budgeted as extra revenue in the EU budget, with noinue to be accompanied by a corresponding adjustment tof the GNIP contributions; calls on the Commission to make appropriate legislative proposals in this regard;
Amendment 231 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Stresses that the mere frequency and level of mobilisation of the MFF special instruments over the past two years prove beyond any doubt the worth of the flexibility provisions and mechanisms enshrined in the MFF Regulation; stresses the long-standing position of Parliament that flexibility should allow for a maximum use of the global MFF ceilings for commitments and payments;
Amendment 235 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Believes, therefore, that the mid- term revision of the MFF Regulation should provide for the lifting of a number ofevaluate the constraints and limitations that were imposed by the Council on the flexibility provisions at the time of adoption of the MFF; considers, in particular, that, including any restrictions on the carry-over of unused appropriations and margins, either by setting annual ceilings (Global Margin for Payments) or by imposing time-limits (Global Margin for Commitments) should be revoked;
Amendment 237 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Stresses, in particular, the mobilisation of the full amount of the Flexibility Instrument in 2016; notes that this instrument allows for financing clearly identified expenditure that cannot be financed within the ceiling of one or more headings and is not linked to a specific EU policy; considers, therefore, that it provides genuine flexibility in the EU budget, especially in the event of a major crisis; calls, accordingly, for a substantial incstreasse in its financial envelope up to an annual allocation of EUR 2 billion, pointing out that this amount is budgeted only in the event of a decision of the budgetary authority for mobilisation of this instrument; recalls that the Flexibility Instrument is not linked to a special policy field and can be mobilised for any purpose that is deemed necessarys, however, that this does not obviate the need for significant redistribution of the financial envelope;
Amendment 240 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Points to the role of the Emergency Aid Reserve in providing a rapid response to specific aid requirements for third countries for unforeseen events, and stresses its particular importance in the current context; calls for a substantial increase inredistribution of its financial envelope up to an annual allocation of EUR 1 billionin order to meet those needs;
Amendment 244 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Attaches particular importance to the Contingency Margin, as a last-resort instrument for reacting to unforeseen circumstances; stresses that, according to the Commission, this is the only special instrument that can be mobilised only for payment appropriations and thus to prevent a payment crisis in the EU budget as in 2014; deplornotes the fact that, contrary to the previous period, a compulsory offsetting of the appropriations is stipulated in the MFF Regulation; is of the firm opinion that this requirement creates an unsustainable situation with regard to the MFF ceilings of the last years of the period; stresses that the Contingency Margin is in any event a last-resort instrument, whose mobilisation is jointly agreed by the two arms of the budgetary authority; calls, therefore, for the rule of compulsory offsetting to be lifted immediately with retroactive effectis essential in order to prevent a waste of taxpayers' money;
Amendment 290 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
Paragraph 46
46. Considers that the key priorities to be addressed must include adjustments to the duration of the MFF, a thorough reform of the own resources system, a greater emphasis on the unity of the budget, and more budgetary flexibility; is furthermore convinced that the modalities of the decision-making process need to be reviewed in order to ensure democratic legitimacy and comply with the provisions of the Treaty;
Amendment 308 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Underlines the need for a fully- fledged reform of the own resources system, with simplicity, fairness and transparency as guiding principles; is therefore expecting an ambitious final report from the High Level Group on Own Resources by the end of 2016, as well as an equally ambitious legislative package on own resources as of 2021 from thIs opposed to a reform of the own resources system and maintains that taxation should remain an exclusive Member State Ccommission by the end of 2017petence;
Amendment 316 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
Paragraph 53
53. Stresses the need to reduce the share of theMember States' GNI contributions to the Union budget in order to exit the ‘juste retour’ approach of Member States; underlines that this would reduce the burden on national treasuries and thus make the resources concerned available for Member States’ national budgets; recalls that the current VAT own resource is over- complex and is in essence a second GNI contribution, and therefore calls for this own resource either to be substantially reformed or to be scrapped altogether; considers it necessary, however, to keep the GNI contributions as an element of the budget, given the need for its function as a balancing contribution;
Amendment 318 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
Paragraph 54
Amendment 338 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58
Paragraph 58
58. Stresses that the rigid structure of the Union budget deprives the budgetary authority of the possibility of reacting adequately to changing circumstances; calnotes als,o therefore, for greater flexibility in the next MFF, in particular through more flexibility between headings and years with the aim of fully exploiting the MFF ceilingsat this is a guarantee that the financial framework ceilings will not be exceeded;