25 Amendments of Monika HOHLMEIER related to 2008/2186(DEC)
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution
Heading after paragraph 124
Heading after paragraph 124
Second-generation Schengen Information System
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 124 a (new)
Paragraph 124 a (new)
124a. Is very concerned about the delays in setting up the second-generation Schengen Information System and the implications of these delays for the EU budget and the Member States’ budgets; notes that the so-called ‘milestone 1 test’ concerning the stability, reliability and performance of the SIS II project, carried out at the end of January 2010, was not successful;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 124 b (new)
Paragraph 124 b (new)
124b. Recalls the Commission’s obligation under Council Regulation (EC) No 1104/2008 of 24 October 2008 on migration from the Schengen Information System (SIS I+) to the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II)1 and Council Decision 2008/839/JHA of 24 October 2008 on migration from the Schengen Information System (SIS I+) to the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II)2 to submit a progress report concerning the development of SIS II and the migration from SIS I + to SIS II to the European Parliament and the Council every six months and for the first time after the first six months of 2009; notes that the first progress report, covering the period from January 2009 until June 2009 (COM(2009)0555) and published on 22 October 2009, is outdated and that the second progress report is not yet available;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 124 c (new)
Paragraph 124 c (new)
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 124 d (new)
Paragraph 124 d (new)
124d. Stresses that the Commission should comply with its reporting obligations in a more timely and transparent manner;
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 124 e (new)
Paragraph 124 e (new)
124e. Invites the European Court of Auditors to carry out an in-depth audit and to present a special report evaluating the management of the SIS II project by the Commission, from the beginning of the project starting with the initial call for tenders;
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 124 f (new)
Paragraph 124 f (new)
124f. Reserves the right to hold in reserve the funds to be allocated for the development of SIS II in the 2011 annual budget, in order to ensure full parliamentary scrutiny and oversight of the process;
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 150
Paragraph 150
150. Supports the suspension by the Commission of payments in Bulgaria under the three pre-accession programmes, Phare/Transition Facility, ISPA and SAPARD, made in 2008 in order to protect the financial interests of the EU in view of weaknesses and irregularities identified by its services in the management of these funds; welcomes the positive reaction from Bulgaria to all recommendations, which allowenabled the Commission to withdraw its payment suspensions in 2009; asks the Commission to provide information concerning the investigations carried out by the Bulgarian police against staff of the Bulgarian paying agency which resulted in a search of its premises and arrests in January 2010, and to state what amount of EU funds were affected by this in 2008; emphasises that Parliament recognises the efforts made by Bulgaria to achieve proper functioning of administrative systems and to combat corruption; considers it important that measures taken are sustainable and that European funds granted contribute in reality to stable economic and social conditions and result in the proper functioning of administration;
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154
Paragraph 154
154. Encourages the Commission to support the Turkish authorities in their goal to remedy two mainIs disappointed by the fact that key weaknesses (lack of programming readiness and uneven performance across sectors), which have resulted in a ‘moderately unsatisfactory’ overall performance as regards pre- accession assistance in Turkey, continue to prevail;
Amendment 177 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 251
Paragraph 251
251. Is concernedNotes that, according to the Court’s report, the recruitment practice in the executive agencies is to hire at lower grades for temporary posts, and to require contract staff to have more years of experience, than is the case as regards contract staff with similar tasks in the Commission; feelnotes that this might reduces the attractiveness of the job positions, despite the offer of renewable contracts in contrast to the maximum contract term of three years applicable to Commission contract staff, and warnnotes that this could affectresult in compromises in the quality of the operations of a gthe executiven agency; ies concerned;
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 252
Paragraph 252
252. Considers that future examinRequests the Commission to provide information ofn this issue could include an evaluation of any possible negative impact on the work of the agencies of shorter-term contracts and higher staff turnovere different contractual time periods applicable for the different contractual tasks and the duration of the different contractual employments in the executive agencies;
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 253
Paragraph 253
253. Considers that one of the major potential benefits of an executive agency is the recruitment of specialised staff, and therefore requests the Commission to review the recruitment criteria and conditions of the agencies’ stafftake measures to improve and simplify the recruitment of the agencies’ staff; moreover, requests the Commission to take the specific recruitment needs of the executive agencies into consideration;
Amendment 180 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 254
Paragraph 254
254. Requests the Commission to present a detailed comparative analysisinformation ofn the factors governnumber of contract staff employed ing the wage differential, taking into consideration the different requirements wiexecutive agencies and the tasks assigned to them and the salary levels corresponding th eregard to skills and educational qualifications, in respect of both the Commission staff and the staff of the executive agenciesto, as well as an overview on how much experience is required for each employment grade; moreover, requests the Commission to present information on the different cases in which suitable staff could not be rapidly found and on how much delay occurred in the staff recruitment, as well as an analysis of the reasons for the delay;
Amendment 181 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 255 – point b
Paragraph 255 – point b
(b) to undertake a peer-review with a view to identifying the success factors and conclusions which led to better results at the best performing executive agencies and to applying the lessons learned to all programmes which continue to be managed by the Commission services;
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 256
Paragraph 256
256. Refers to the fact that, in 2001, the Court, in a special report, recommended an abolition of milk quotas and that this recommendation has been followed by the Council, the CommissExpects the Commission, in view of the massive fluctuations and Parliament; requests the Court not to create confusion about the development of the common agricultural policy (CAP) and requests the Commission to continue to implement the political decisions so as to avoid any unnecessary confusion for the milk sectordisparities on the world market, to take effective precautionary and compensatory measures to strengthen small businesses and promote security of food supply through a wide range of businesses within the European Union;
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 257
Paragraph 257
257. Notes that the Court is particularly concerned about the consequences in mountain areas and less favoured areas; stresses that this concern is shared by Parliament but reminds the Court that milk quotas and support for agriculture should not be used as an instrument to cater for the interests of these areas; takes the view that EU policy for rural areas and subsidies are – and should be – used to accommodate these problem, as efficient farms are an integral part of development in many rural regions; considers that farms have a considerable impact on the development, stability and conservation of the countryside in rural areas;
Amendment 184 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 258
Paragraph 258
258. Does not agree that the EU milk market should focus primarily on the internal market and should not aim at competitiveness in the world market; stresses that global competition is a reality w; but shares the Court of Auditors’ view that in worldwide exports the European milk sector should be focused on the manufacture of milk products with hicgh the EU has to face, and takes the view that when the world market is further liberalised, dairy farmers in the EU should be able to keep up; furthermore, is of the opinion that, in the long term, competitiveness in relation to the world market will be a way of increasing prosperity among farmers, and stresses that not trying to be a part of this will lead to reprehensible useadded value; also points out that the Commission should give a high priority to fair competition on the world market without dumping, to counteract the disadvantaging and financial annihilation of businesses by sudden fluctuations in world trade; calls for the funding of appropriate marketing measures and market research studies in countries outside Europe, and points out that agricultural structures ofr the common funds and will, in the long term, mean a reduction in the earnings of European dairy farmerir creation in developing countries must not be destroyed by the export of agricultural goods and accompanying market measures;
Amendment 185 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 259
Paragraph 259
259. Agrees with the Court that there is a need for continuing supervision of the development of the milk market, and therefore recommends to the Commission that it shoulcalls for the Court’s recommendations to be acted on, so as to identify inappropriate developments as they arise and countinue the good work already done; eract them with suitable measures at an early stage;
Amendment 186 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 260
Paragraph 260
260. Recalls, moreover, that the various objectives of the CAP are contradictory, and considers that it is now more than ever necessary to holdPoints out, moreover, that a detailed and exhaustive debate on the purposeis necessary on the objectives of the CAP.
Amendment 188 #
Part XVIa. Special Report No 16/2009 on the European Commission’s management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey
Amendment 190 #
Motion for a resolution – Conclusions concerning the special reports issued by the Court of Auditors
Part XVI a – Paragraph 260 a (new)
Part XVI a – Paragraph 260 a (new)
260a. Welcomes the Court’s sound assessment regarding the administration by the Commission of pre-accession assistance to Turkey;
Amendment 192 #
Motion for a resolution – Conclusions concerning the special reports issued by the Court of Auditors
Part XVI a – Paragraph 260b (new)
Part XVI a – Paragraph 260b (new)
260b. Considers it worrying that the strategic planning of pre-accession assistance for Turkey in 2002-2006 as well as the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA 2007-2013) did not include strategic and measurable goals or any consideration of the indicators, level and measures required concerning progress towards accession;
Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution – Conclusions concerning the special reports issued by the Court of Auditors
Part XVI a – Paragraph 260 c (new)
Part XVI a – Paragraph 260 c (new)
Amendment 196 #
Motion for a resolution – Conclusions concerning the special reports issued by the Court of Auditors
Part XVI a – Paragraph 260 d (new)
Part XVI a – Paragraph 260 d (new)
260d. Given the inability to measure progress towards accession goals, regards the enhancement of resources for Turkey in the period 2007-2013 as inadequate and considers a yearly continuation of the financial level of accession assistance from 2006 as adequate until such time as measurable priorities are unambiguously defined and implemented in the respective regulations;
Amendment 198 #
Motion for a resolution – Conclusions concerning the special reports issued by the Court of Auditors
Part XVI a – Paragraph 260 e (new)
Part XVI a – Paragraph 260 e (new)
260e. Calls on the Commission to amend the objectives of the Instrument for Pre- Accession Assistance, which has to be accessible not only by virtue of EU membership but also by virtue of an intensified relationship with the EU, for example by means of special neighbourhood instruments or special forms of membership, in the event that inadequate political reforms and deficient implementation of the Instrument for Pre- Accession by the candidate for accession require such action;