BETA

14 Amendments of Jan OLBRYCHT related to 2011/0177(APP)

Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses that the EU budget is an investment budget and that 94 % of its total returns are invested in the Member States themselves or for external priorities of the Union; emphasises that, for the regions and Member States, public investment would be minimised or impossible without the contribution of the EU budget; which represents significant and sometimes even dominant share of public investment, believes that any decrease of the EU budget would inevitably hamper the growth and competitive strength of the entire Union economy;
2012/10/05
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that delivering on the Europe 2020 strategy’s seven flagship initiatives will require a huge amount of future- oriented investment, estimated at no less than EUR 1 800 billion up to 2020 ; sees the significant investment role of the Cohesion Policy in this respect; stresses that one of the main objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy, namely, to promote jobs and high-quality employment for all Europeans, will only be achieved if the necessary investment in education, in favour of a knowledge society, and in research and innovation, SMEs, and green and new technologies is made now and not delayed any longer; favours combining the reduction of public deficits and debt with the promotion of such investments;
2012/10/05
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that the Commission proposal, which represents a freeze of the MFF 2014- 2020 ceilings at the level of the 2013 ceilings, will not be sufficient to finance existing policy priorities linked to the Europe 2020 strategy, the new tasks provided for by the Treaty of Lisbon, or unforeseen events, not to mention the political objectives and commitments set by the European Council itself;
2012/10/05
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Reaffirms, in this context, its position in favour of a significant increase - notably through the Connecting Europe Facility - in the funding available for the Union programmes in the fields of competiveness, SMEs and infrastructures, which are at the heart of the Europe 2020 strategy; strongly believes that further cuts with respect to the Commission proposal will seriously jeopardise the EU’s credibility and its political commitment in favour of growth and jobs; Urges however for the amount transferred from the Cohesion Fund to the Connecting Europe Facility to be spent at least during the first years respecting the national allocations under Cohesion Policy;
2012/10/05
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Recalls its position that, given the wide array of tasks, challenges and objectives that the CAP is called on to respond to, the amounts allocated to the CAP in the budget year 2013 should be at least maintained during the next financial programming period; supports an idea of converging direct payments between and within the Member States; stresses, in this context, the important role played by the second pillar of the CAP, which makes a significant contribution to investment and job creation in rural areas and to enhancing the effectiveness and competitiveness of the farming industry and to the process of overcoming development gaps in rural areas between Member States;
2012/10/05
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Recalls its position that, given the wide array of tasks, challenges and objectives that the CAP is called on to respond to, the amounts allocated to the CAP in the budget year 2013 should be at least maintained during the next financial programming period; supports an idea of converging direct payments between and within the Member States; stresses, in this context, the important role played by the second pillar of the CAP, which makes a significant contribution to investment and job creation in rural areas and to enhancing the effectiveness and competitiveness of the farming industry;
2012/10/05
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 102 #
22a. Is firmly opposed to any cut in funding for the second pillar of the CAP, as this would undo the achievements of previous CAP reforms and drastically reduce the policy's efficiency and effectiveness, particularly in the light of the new challenges referred to, inter alia, in the Europe 2020 strategy;
2012/10/05
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Believes that the programme of assistance to the most deprived persons in the Union should continue after 2013; points out that, in addition to providing tangible proof of the fact that the EU feels a responsibility towards its most deprived citizens, the programme has for more than 20 years been helping to ensure EU food security and agricultural market stability, promote a spirit of solidarity and build a civil society, and is thus helping to meet the Europe 2020 strategy goals; takes the view that the Union budget for this purpose should not be cut;
2012/10/05
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
26. Reiterates its position that the new responsibilities conferred on the EU by the Treaties will require appropriate additional funding compared to MFF 2007-2013, so as to allow the Union to fulfil its role as a global actor and ensure its ambitions in promoting democracy, peace, solidarity, stability and poverty reduction in neighbourhood and partner countries, whilst upholding the undertakings it has already given, notably the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals by 2015; underlines the complementary nature of EU assistance to that provided by the Member States, and its catalyst effect in terms of intervening in regions where bilateral assistance is not delivered; is particularly supportive of joint programming between Member States and EU actions;
2012/10/05
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
28. Is of the firm opinion that the financing of these large-scale projects should be securallowed in the EU budget but, at the same time, ring-fenced, so as to ensure that possible cost overruns do not threaten the funding and successful implementation of other Union policies;
2012/10/05
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution
Title 4
BetterEffective spending
2012/10/05
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
41. Stresses the need for an obligatory mid- term revision to be enshrined in the MFF regulation, with a specific procedure including a binding calendar ensuring the full involvement of the next Parliament; considers that the Commission should table a legislative proposal enabling the revised MFF to be adopted in time for the 2018 budgetary procedure; stresses that mid- term revision should not affect the pre- allocated funds, in order not to hamper stability of investment prospects and protect the beneficiaries and stability of long-term programming and investments;
2012/10/05
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59 – point 6
6) in the event that implementation of the new own resources does not result in a significant decrease in Member States’ GNI-based contributions to the EU budget, the Commission will come forward with additional proposals on new own resources.deleted
2012/10/05
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 64 a (new)
64 a. Opposes any attempt to include policy related provisions under the ordinary legislative procedure into the MFF negotiations;
2012/10/05
Committee: BUDG