7 Amendments of Monika HOHLMEIER related to 2009/2226(INI)
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that the inadequate funding for the GNSS programmes led in 2007 to a revision of the current MFF which increased the ceiling for Heading 1a by €2.4 billion for the period 2007-2013; points out that again in 2010 the Commission proposed an MFF revision to increase the ceiling for Heading 1a, owing to a shortage of funding for the ITER project; emphasises that such ad hoc, emergency solutions are likely to jeopardise the success and added value of strategic, large-scale EU projects and undermine the political momentum around them; considers that sound, long-term solutions for their fundingand financing plans must be devised instead;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. DIs convinced that the estimates in the current financial framework are inadequate for bringing an efficient, competitive service into operation and ensuring the necessary technological linkage; deplores the fact that in its mid- term review in January 2011 the Commission did not propose any additional funding for the GNSS programmes for the period to 2013, which may lead to unacceptable delays in their completion; points out that, should extra funds be needed during this period, redeployment from current multiannual programmes cannot be seen as a viable option and that further reductions under Heading 1a, in particular concerning the 7th Framework Programme, are unacceptable;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that GNSS is a critical technology that could revolutionise European transport infrastructure and various market sectors; points out that other, non-European GNSS programmes will come into operation in the medium term and that any delay would thus result in a loss of international competitiveness, in current infrastructure becoming obsolete, in an inability to use technologies and applications under development and in the loss of up to 60% of the expected benefits;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that Galileo is the first EU- owned project and that to avoid uncertainties, reassure market playerof this type; calls on the Commission to improve the management of the project, to ensure that a service involving a constellation of 30 satellites cand bring it toe competitive and fully operabilitytional within the shortest possible period its budget must be steadily increased, to avoid uncertainties and to send a positive signal to market players; points out that there may prove to be substantial differences between current investment costs and future running costs; supports, therefore, the proposal that in the future, where large- scale projects such as this are concerned, a predetermined annual amount should be covered from the EU budget and that the Member States should be responsible for financing any balance;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. To prevent future cost overruns, calls on the Commission to put in place stringent cost containment and risk mitigation policies, including those necessary to keep launch costs under control; suggests that the Commission study the findings obtained so far and, to do so, make use of independent experts, in reviewing andcluding industry representatives, in order significantly to improvinge the progress and management of the programmeefficiency of project management;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Commission to implement recommended risk mitigation measures such as dual procurement in all critical work packages, in order to be able to keep to the ambitious schedule; supports, in particular with respect to the launchers, the Council resolution inviting all European actors to consider as a high priority the use of launchers developed in Europe; calls on the Commission to favour a ‘double source’ selection process;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Is strongly convinced that additional funding for GNSS can only be secured if awareness of the benefits for the EU economy and society due to GNSS is raised considerably among decision- makers and the wider public; applauds the setting-up of concrete initiatives, such as the annual Galileo Masters competition for ideas, for which there were 350 entries from 44 countries in 2010, the Galileo children's competition and the GNSS innovation prize; urges the Commission and the EU GNSS Agency (GSA) to put much more effort into raising awareness of GNSS with potential users and investors;