13 Amendments of Ingeborg GRÄSSLE related to 2013/2205(DEC)
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Regrets, however, that a better geographical balance has not yet been achieved; observes that the Member States which joined in the last 10 years are underrepresented at managerial levels, with only 14% of these posts occupied by officials from these Member State as regards appointments to management posts; urges the EEAS to implement measures that contribute to a better and more balanced representation;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Asks the EEAS to strengthen the geographical balance as regards the posts of Head of Union Delegations, where the Member States which joined in the last 10 years are underrepresented, holding only 20 out of the 131 Head of Delegation posts in the EEAS;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Recognises that efforts have been made to reduce the top-heavy EEAS administration; is concerned, however, that the EEAS has the biggest proportion of high-graded staff out of all Union institutions, having 514 individuals employed in AD 12 or grades above (over 50% of all EEAS AD staff), making it difficult to achieve significant reductions in the top-heavy administration; also points out that there are still directorates staffed by as few as 22, 27, or 30 persons and managing directorates with a staff complement of 44; considers that the reversion of this situation could be achieved in the coming years through efficient management policies;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Considers the responsibilities of the Union Special Representatives (EUSRs) to be very unclear; regrets that the information on the use of the budget they receive to implement their mandate continues to be obscure and is not forthcoming unless asked for; expresses its concern, especially in view of the fact that the High Representative was planning in 2010 to do away with EUSRs, but the EUSR budget was raised from EUR 15 m in 2011 to EUR 27 m in 2012, an increase of 80%, and, compared with 2011, the EUSR travel budget for 2012 was trebled;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls for the Special Representatives’ statute to be revised and for thosean end to the parallel foreign policy pursued through the Special Representatives and, in terms of pay, insists that EUSRs should not be treated more favourably than EU ambassadors in post; points out that EUSRs are placed in the highest salary grade, in other words at director-general level, but do not bear the same responsibility as directors-general; calls for EUSR positions to be fully integrated into the EEAS structure; recommends the transfer of the EUSR budget into the EEAS budget;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Welcomes the fact that the number of one-person EU delegations has been reduced from 18 in the preceding year to the present 15; calls on the EEAS to continue that trend and to merge delegations where appropriate;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Takes note that in 2012, the action plan for a better financial management of security contracts was initiated; acknowledges the results achieved as announced by the EEAS and asks to receive the text of the action plan and detailed information on the measures implemented in the next annual activity report;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33a. Notes with disquiet that security contracts in Rome, Tanzania, and Fiji have extended over a life of more than ten years without being put out to tender again during that period; calls on the EEAS to provide Parliament with details on its contractors in the above places, the value of their contracts, and the exact duration of those contracts;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 a (new)
Paragraph 37 a (new)
37a. Calls on the EEAS to make greater efforts to save costs by sharing buildings and facilities with the diplomatic services of Member States in delegations; calls on the EEAS to compile a summary – to be submitted to Parliament – showing how many embassies and consulates of Member States in countries with EU delegations have been closed since the EEAS was set up or specifying the countries where the establishment of the EEAS has served to create synergies;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 b (new)
Paragraph 37 b (new)
37b. Notes that in 2012 two senior managers at the EEAS were retired in the interests of the service (Article 50 of the Staff Regulations); notes further – with the proviso that the position at the Council cannot be ascertained – that no other EU institution invoked that provision in 2012; points out that officials to whom the above arrangement is applied are entitled to draw a full pension from age 55; calls on the EEAS to inform Parliament of the reasons, the age of the two officials concerned, and the annual costs to be incurred on their account;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 a (new)
Paragraph 40 a (new)
40a. Expresses concern at the fact that, contrary to the plan to make more selective use of, and shorten, leave for staff in non-EU countries, as was announced in connection with the reform of the Staff Regulations, such leave, treated as rest leave, is now even being applied to more countries than before; points out that, in addition to the leave, air tickets are provided for all the family; calls for an overview of the cost of this measure, which takes effect in 2014, whereas the leave cuts will not be implemented until 2015;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41 a (new)
Paragraph 41 a (new)
41a. Notes that payments for annual leave entitlement outstanding at the time of termination of service amounted on average to EUR 8 526 per person in 2012 and fell to EUR 5 986 in 2013; calls on the EEAS to take the steps required to lower these costs further;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Takes the view that improvements can be made at the financial management to prevent interests on late payments, in particular reducing the delay period; notes that the three highest amounts of late payment interest are EUR 3 714.84, EUR 4 395.71, and EUR 5 931.67;