Activities of Ingeborg GRÄSSLE related to 2008/2053(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
The ABB-ABM method as a management tool for allocating budgetary resources - Mid-term Review of the 2007-2013 Financial Framework (debate)
Amendments (5)
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers it of utmost importance that, as the Executive responsible for implementation, the Commission has enough means and room for manoeuvre, but that it should report very clearly on the objectives achieved and the use of allocated financial and human resources; considers less important - from the point of view of a budgetary authority - exactly how the goals were achiethat the Commission should establish clear quantitative and qualitative indicators to measure the achievement of policy and administrative objectiveds and show the Commission worked internally; therefore advocates a correspondingly greater degree of freedom in that regarduld make them comparable over time and clearly indicate for every DG the number of staff employed for policy activities; considers it important - from the point of view of a budgetary authority - to link staff to policy activities; calls on the Commission to analyse the current ABB/SPP cycle in order to ensure that it is consistent in this regard and to present any relevant proposals for change;
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers that the practical presentation and synthesis of results and allocated resources used in Annual Activity Reports (AAR) is still lagging behind when compared to the time spent on administrative tasks presenting the goals and requested resources in the preparatory stages, i.e. APS, Annual Management Plans and Activity Statements; in this respect, considers that further development, is necessary in which the Commission's collective services take "ownership" of this process in a positive way and set clear qualitative criteria for the reports;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Is thus still not convinced that the SPP/ABM process sufficiently takes into account 'lessons learned' and previous results and how these are fed back into the system for the coming years; points out that this is also linked to how the vast array of studies and evaluations carried out by the Commission are taken into account and influence, as they rightly should, the resource allocation process; proposes therefore to more clearly demand a link to programme reviews and the budgetary process in the terms of reference of the evaluations; proposes further to include in the AAR a chapter on the lessons learned;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Considers that the long-term objectives and plans, i.e. the MFF and the five-year strategic objectives as well as APS also need to be better explained and linked to the work of individual DGs and services as an important part of motivating these staff and making them feel part of, and contributors to, the overriding objectives of the organisation as a whole; asks the DGs, therefore, to link more clearly the positive and negative priorities in their Annual Management Plans and Annual Activity Reports to multiannual and strategic objectives of the Commission as a whole;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Requests the Commission to better integrate and streamline the SPP-ABM cycle so that the actual results of the implementation of policies and activities can be taken into due consideration when allocating human and financial resources; emphasises that this should also result in the identification of possible "negative priorities"; stresses the need to consider and include in the yearly planning not only financial risks but also risks that might affect the achievement of policy objectives;