22 Amendments of Hermann WINKLER related to 2011/2043(INI)
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)
Citation 14 a (new)
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas delayed investment in Europe compared with other global powers is essentially due to a lack of private investment and the attractiveness of FP7 for the industrial sector is thus not fully demonstrated; but also, beyond the sums involved, there is a clear need for better coordination between the Union, the Member States, and the Unregions,
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Notes that the financial take out throughout Europe is highly unbalanced, and that the outcomes show that the old Member States absorb most of the financial resources; concludes that this is in contradiction with the territorial cohesion aim on a balanced development in Europe as added in the Lisbon Treaty;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that growth in financial and human resources, an ever-growing number of objectives and themes covered and diversification of instruments hasve reduced the capacity of FP7 to serve a specific headline European objective;
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Welcomes, in the ‘Ideas’ chapter, promising results obtained by the European Research Council (ERC) and its role aimed at enhancing the visibility and attractiveness of European research bodies; stresses the need to make the ERC an independent legal entity with decision- making power, directly responsible for its own scientific strategy and administrative management; calls on the Commission to use the ERC as a pilot for greater independence of funding agencies for R&D and innovation;
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Voices concerns regarding the heterogeneous nature of the objectives of the ‘Capacities’ chapter and the difficulties that result, notably with regard to international cooperation and actions in favour of SMEs and innovative SMEs; considers, however,the progress on the major Research Infrastructures (ESFRI); considers that there is a clear need for actions in favour of SMEs and innovative SMEs and calls on the Commission to at least maintain the level of funding for these measures, while solving implementation-related problems; considers that the ERA-NET and ERA- NET+ projects and the initiatives based on Article 185 fulfil their role aimed at structuring the European Research Area (ERA);
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Acknowledges that ‘Joint Technological Initiatives’ (JTIs) assist the competitiveness of European industry; regrets, however, the legal and administrative obstacles (legal personality, financial rules and in some cases also intellectual property), financial rules) and also the high operating costs specific to start-up of JTIswhich may discourage a large number of key research actors and SMEs from participating; also regrets the high operating costs specific to start-up of JTIs; calls on Member States to fulfil their obligations once they have agreed to co- fund JTIs; calls on the Commission to ensure harmonisation of rules and funding rates for similar categories of participants in all JTIs following the FP7 model, including with regard to national co-funding; asks to be more closely involved in political control of these instruments;
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Commission to carry out an analysis to improve the link between European and national actions; asks that calls for proposals, including those of July 2011, be issued in consultation with the Member States, not duplicating or competing with national initiatives but complementing them; suggests that FP7 should complement the efforts of actors managing national programmes involved in joint programming in order to move the RDFPs away from project management thinking towards programme management thinking, without neglecting small projects; asks that the last three years of FP7 be devoted to helping structure the European Research Area;
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Welcomes the results of FP7 in favour of SMEs, as regards both the 15% target set in the ‘Cooperation’ chapter and the ‘Eurostars’ programme; considers, however, that efforts to encourage SMEs to participate must nevertheless be stepped up; endorses the Commission view that SME participation in FP7 remains a major challenge; notes that the 'Eurostar’s programme has to date been of interest only to SMEs which are already R&D-intensive; advocates, therefore, long-term simplification of programme specifications for adaptation to SMEs; is of the opinion that better coordination between FP7 and the Structural Funds could facilitate the participation of under-represented Member States;
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Welcomes the results of FP7 in favour of SMEs, as regards both the 15% target set in the ‘Cooperation’ chapter and the ‘Eurostars’ programme; is of the opinion that better coordination between FP7 and the Structural Funds could facilitate the participation of under-represented Member States; consequently, calls on the Commission and the national and local authorities to improve the link between the cohesion funds and the Research Framework Programme as these funds should be used to enhance research infrastructure to enable research to reach the level of excellence necessary for access to research funds; in this respect underlines the need to set clear objectives and to assess whether the goals were achieved in these Member States;
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Welcomes the results of FP7 in favour of SMEs, as regards both the 15% target set in the ‘Cooperation’ chapter and the ‘Eurostars’ programme; is of the opinion that better coordination, coherence and synergy between FP7 and the Structural Funds could facilitate the participation of under-represented Member States;
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. In this respect, stresses the importance of cohesion policy as this has become a major source of European support in the field of Research & Development and Innovation, as the Member States – in conformity with the second Community Strategic Guideline on cohesion – have devoted a significant amount of their total financial allocations to R&D&I of a knowledge-based economy, resulting in 246 national or regional operational programmes with around EUR 86 billion allocated to R&D&I;
Amendment 200 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Proposes that research and development policies be territorialised; therefore stresses the importance of adapting the research and innovation policies to the specific needs of the territories; notes that since the involvement of regional and local authorities in the design and execution of the research and innovation programmes becomes crucial due to the impossibility of applying the same strategy for development to all the regions;
Amendment 227 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Notes that, for the period 2007-2013, within the Cohesion Funds (ERDF) EUR 86 billion is allocated in support for innovation (25% of the total amount), of which the allocation for core research and technological development (R&D) amounts to EUR 50 billion, equal to the total budget of FP7;
Amendment 231 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Stresses that financing of research infrastructures (oriented on the ESFRI- list) should be better coordinated between FP7, EIB instruments, the Structural Funds and national and regional policies; believes that duplication of research infrastructure in different Member States should be avoided;
Amendment 249 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Is of the opinion that commercialisation should be included in the parameters of future calls for projects under FP7 in the field of research and innovation;
Amendment 253 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Stresses the importance of better assistance in the implementation of policies and programmes that enhance the synergies within the research and development value chain (infrastructures - innovation - job creation);
Amendment 256 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Acknowledges that European Technology Platforms, ICTJTIs and PPPs contribute towards greater industry participation; stresses the need to ensure adequate rules for participation (including intellectual property rules) and funding rates (including funding rates for indirect costs) to attract a larger number of SMEs in JTIs and PPPs;
Amendment 263 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Is concerned by the excessive administrative burden of FP7; points out in this connection that EU acceptance specifically on the part of SMEs depends to no small extent on the presentation of attractive funding programmes which are of practical relevance; supports the proposal to review the Financial Regulation to simplify procedures;
Amendment 265 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Is concerned by the excessive administrative burden of FP7; supports the proposal to review the Financial Regulation to simplify procedures; and calls for the revision and/or extended interpretation of the EU Staff Regulations on the issue of personal liability;
Amendment 273 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Reiterates the importance of introducing, without delay, procedural, administrative and financial simplification measures into current management of FP7, such as those identified in Parliament'’s resolution of 11 November 2010; calls onwelcomes the Commission to make proposals onDecision of 24 January 2011 introducing threse simplification measures in the context of the current FP7 to complement its inand calls on the Commission to rapidly implement these measures in a uniform way; calls on the Commission to check whether additional proposalssimplification measures are still needed; reiterates its wish to see current legal proceedings between the Commission and beneficiaries across all of the framework programmes settled quickly, while respecting the principle of responsible management of public money; asks the Commission to allow beneficiaries to consult the Research Clearing Committee during or after a project to clarify issues related to cost calculation, rules for participation and audits, including ex-post audits; stresses the need to preserve what works well and only change the rules which need to be adapted;
Amendment 304 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30a. Calls for a further elaboration in the direction of an ameliorated approach in the FP8 under the title "Common Strategic Framework for Research and Innovation", or the "Research and Innovation Framework Programme";