Activities of Sophie AUCONIE

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1

(1) Article 3(4) of Directive 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable energy sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/777/EC and 2003/30/EC requires Member States to ensure that the share of energy from renewable energy sources in all forms of transport in 2020 is at least 10% of their final energy consumption. The blending of biofuels is one of the methods available for Member States to meet this target, and is expected to be the main contributor. However, in the light of new findings about the value-for-money aspect of biofuels, their development – and therefore the percentage of fuel which must, by 2020, be derived from renewable sources – should be scaled back. The Commission will have to assess whether additional measures are needed in order to meet the 20% target for renewable energy as a proportion of overall EU energy consumption.

2013/05/31
Committee: ENVI

2012/0288(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 5

(5) Based on forecasts of biofuel demand provided by the Member States and estimates of indirect land-use change emissions for different biofuel feedstocks it is likely that greenhouse gas emissions linked to indirect land use change are significant, and could negate some or all of the greenhouse gas savings of individual biofuels. This is because almost the entire biofuel production in 2020 is expected to come from crops grown on land that could be used to satisfy food and feed markets. In order to reduce such emissions, it is appropriate to distinguish between crop groups such as oil crops, cereals, sugars and other starch containing crops accordingly. New types of advanced biofuel unrelated to food crops, such as ligno-cellulosic residues, should also be developed.

2013/05/31
Committee: ENVI

2012/0288(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6

(6) Liquid renewable fuels are likely to be required by the transport sector in order to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. Advanced biofuels, such as those made from wastes and algae, provide high greenhouse gas savings with low risk of causing indirect land use change and do not compete directly for agricultural land for the food and feed markets. It is appropriate, therefore, to encourage greater production of such advanced biofuels as these are currently not commercially available in large quantities, in part due to competition for public subsidies with established food crop based biofuel technologies. Further incentives should be provided by increasing the weighting of advanced biofuels towards 10% target for transport set in Directive 2009/28/EC compared to conventional biofuels. In this context, oEstablishing progressively more ambitious mandatory targets for advanced biofuels will send a clear signal of support for them at Union level. Mandatory targets for advanced biofuels should thus be established according to a timetable so as to offer investors stability and allow them to plan ahead. Only advanced biofuels with low estimated indirect land use change impacts and high overall greenhouse gas savings should be supported as part of the post 2020 renewable energy policy framework.

2013/05/31
Committee: ENVI

2012/0288(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10

(10) The 5% limit set up in Article 3(4)d does not affect the Member States'’ freedom to arrange their own trajectory as to compliance with this prescribed share of conventional biofuels within the overall ~~10%~~ target for the percentage of fuel that has to be derived from renewable sources. As a consequence, the access to the market of the biofuels produced by the installations in operation before the end of 2013 remains fully open. Therefore this amending directive does not affect the legitimate expectations of the operators of such installations.

2013/05/31
Committee: ENVI

Proposal for a decision
Recital 1

(1) The Union land use, land use change and forestry (‘LULUCF’) sector is a net sink that removes from the atmosphere greenhouse gasses in an amount equivalent to a significant share of total Union emissions. It results in anthropogenic emissions and removals of greenhouse gases as a consequence of changes in the quantity of carbon stored in vegetation and soils. The increased sustainable use of harvested wood products can substantially limit emissions and enhance removals from the atmosphere. Emissions and removals of greenhouse gases resulting from the LULUCF sector are not counted towards the Union's 20 % greenhouse gas emission reduction targets for 2020 pursuant to Decision No 406/2009/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the efforts of Member States to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to meet the Community's greenhouse gas emission reduction commitments up to 202020 and Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC21 , though they count in part towards the Union's quantified emission limitation and reduction target pursuant to Article 3(3) of the Kyoto Protocol (‘Kyoto Protocol’) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (‘UNFCCC’), approved by Council Decision 2002/358/EC22 .

2012/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2012/0042(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Recital 1 a (new)

(1a) In accordance with the Roadmap for moving to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050, it is necessary to consider all land uses in a holistic manner and to address LULUCF within the Union's climate policy.

2012/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2012/0042(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Recital 3

(3) The 17th Conference of the Parties of the UNFCCC, meeting in Durban in December 2011, adopted Decision - /CMP.7 of the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (‘Decision -/CMP.7’). That decision set out rules for accounting for the LULUCF sector as of a second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol. This Decision should be fully in line with that decision to ensure an appropriate level of coherence between the Union's internal rules and methodologies agreed within the UNFCCC. This Decision should also reflect the particularities of the Union LULUCF sector.

2012/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2012/0042(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Recital 4

(4) The LULUCF accounting rules should reflect efforts made in the agriculture and forestry sectors to enhance the contribution of changes made to the use of land resources to the reduction of emissions. This Decision should provide for accounting rules applicable on a mandatory basis to the forestry activities of afforestation, reforestation, deforestation and forest ~~management, and to the agricultural activities of grazing land management and cropland~~ management. It should also provide for accounting rules applicable on a voluntary basis to revegetation ~~and~~, wetland drainage and rewetting activities, and the agricultural activities of grazing land management and cropland management.

2012/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2012/0042(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Recital 5 a (new)

(5a) Accounting rules based on Decision 2/CMP.7, and Decision 16/CMP.1 do not allow for accounting the substitution effect of using harvested wood products for energy and material purposes, since this would lead to double accounting. However, these are important contributions of forestry to climate change mitigation. For this reason, and for informative purposes, Member States may calculate emissions avoided through substitution effects of forest management. This would increase policy coherence.

2012/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2012/0042(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Recital 13

(13) The power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission to update the definitions laid down in Article 2 in the light of changes to definitions adopted by the bodies of the UNFCCC or the Kyoto Protocol or other multilateral agreement relevant to climate change concluded by the Union, to amend Annex I to add accounting periods and ensure consistency between those accounting periods and the relevant periods applicable to Union emission reduction commitments in other sectors, to amend Annex II with updated reference levels in accordance with the proposed reference levels submitted by Member States pursuant to Article 6 subject to corrections made in accordance with this Decision, to revise the information specified in Annex III in accordance with scientific progress and to revise the conditions relating to the accounting rules for natural disturbances laid down in Article 9(2) in the light of scientific progress or to reflect revisions to acts adopted by the UNFCCC or Kyoto Protocol bodies. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert ~~level~~s of the involved sectors. The Commission, when preparing and drawing-up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and Council.

2012/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2012/0042(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 7 – paragraph 1

1. Harvested wood products as such shall not be considered as emissions of greenhouse gas. Member States shall reflect in their accounts pursuant to Article 3(1) emissions from harvested wood products containing carbon on 1 January 2013 even where such harvested wood products were harvested prior to this date.

2012/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2012/0042(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 7 – paragraph 4

4. Where Member States reflect in their accounts emissions resulting from harvested wood products that were harvested for energy purposes, they shall do so also on the basis of the instantaneous oxidation method. For informative purposes, the emissions avoided through the use of this biomass may be calculated.

2012/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2012/0042(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

No later than six months after the beginning of each accounting period specified in Annex I, Member States shall draw up and transmit to the Commission draft LULUCF Action Plans to limit or reduce emissions and maintain or increase removals resulting from the activities referred to in Article 3(1). Member States shall ensure that ~~a broad range of~~interested stakeholders are consulted. LULUCF action plans are meant to be understood as an integral part of the national low carbon development strategies.

2012/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2012/0042(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)

An ad hoc working group of experts shall be constituted in order to assist the Commission in the evaluation of the national action plans.

2012/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2012/0042(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Annex IV – point g – indent 5

– increasing the harvested wood products pool. Wood products derived from harvested timber are also significant carbon pools, wooden material should be seen as substitute for energy-intensive materials. Increasing the use of harvested wood products should be supported in construction, renovation and in public procurement;

2012/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2011/2308(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas any type of fossil fuel and mineral extraction involves potential risks for the environment; whereas it is essential that athe precautionary principle and, if necessary, the ‘polluter pays’ principle, be applied to any future development of resources in Europe in order to minimise such risks via continuous research, proper management, regulation and monitoring at all stages of the exploration and exploitation process and in cases where pollution occurs;

2012/05/29
Committee: ENVI

2011/2308(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Recognises that industry bears primary responsibility for preventing and, where necessary, reacting to accidents; welcomes the progress made by the industry in setting high environmental and safety standards; stresses the importance of monitoring the industry’s compliance by means of regular inspections carried out by trained specialists; considers that, in cases of environmental pollution, the ‘polluter pays’ principle should apply;

2012/05/29
Committee: ENVI

2011/2308(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Recognises the relatively high water volumes involved in hydraulic fracturing; points out, however, that such volumes are not as significant in comparison to the needs of other industrial activities; highlights the need for strategic consideration of the water resources and requirements of citizens and various local economic operators as well as advance water provision plans based on local hydrology;

2012/05/29
Committee: ENVI

2011/2308(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. ~~Believes that~~Calls for water recycling, as far as possible, to be carried out in an on-site closed-loop ~~water recycling~~system, using steel storage tanks, which offers the most environmentally sound way of treating flow-back water by minimising water volumes, the potential for surface spills and costs/traffic/road damage relating to water treatment transportation;

2012/05/29
Committee: ENVI

2011/2308(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Recognises that drilling activities could temporarily worsen living conditions and calls, therefore, for this issue to be taken into account at the time of the necessary authorisation for the sourcing and exploitation of hydrocarbon resources and for all the necessary measures to be taken, in particular by the industry, to minimise the adverse consequences of such activities;

2012/05/29
Committee: ENVI

2011/2297(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas trends in water use are often unsustainable due to inefficient practices resulting in water wastage, and whereas water infrastructure systems are often outdated, whether in the most developed regions or in the less developed regions, and there is a lack of information about actual performance and losses;

2012/05/04
Committee: ENVI

2011/2297(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses that the efficiency and sustainability of water use by the agriculture sector can be improved by the introduction of innovative technologies and practices; recognises that with regard to the challenges of climate change and food security, adequate water resources must be mobilised for agriculture, for example, by developing water storage;

2012/05/04
Committee: ENVI

2011/2297(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Stresses the need for better consistency and better integration of water-related objectives into the legislation at the EU, national and regional levels; calls for a full evaluation of the effects on water resources to be taken into account in the design of the common agricultural policy and cohesion policy frameworks, in order to achieve a thematic concentration of available financing on water issues and to mainstream the issue of water into all policy areas to improve the quality of water in all European regions;

2012/05/04
Committee: ENVI

2011/2297(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Urges the Commission ~~to stimulate intersectoral dialogue and~~, the Member States and regional authorities to stimulate intersectoral dialogue as well as dialogue between the various economic operators and citizens on issues related to water and to foster full and transparent participation of local communities and stakeholders at all levels in the development of water policy; highlights the importance of effective multi-level governance in the field of water, water stewardship and exchange of best practices;

2012/05/04
Committee: ENVI

2011/2297(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Encourages local authorities to devote a proportion of the levies collected from users for the supply of water and sanitation services to decentralised cooperation measures; also draws attention to the principle of ‘1 % solidarity for water’ adopted by some Member States as a ~~possible~~n example to promote and to implement;

2012/05/04
Committee: ENVI

2011/2297(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 quater (new)

20c. Calls on the Commission, on behalf of the European Union and the Member States, to accede to the 1997 United Nations Convention on International Watercourses and to promote the entry into force of the amendments to the 1992 Helsinki Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes, in order to extend the scope of this instrument beyond the UNECE countries alone, and to encourage wider ratification of the Protocol on Health and Water to the 1992 Helsinki Convention, with a view to promoting the coordinated and fair management of water in national and international basins;

2012/05/04
Committee: ENVI

2011/2297(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 quinquies (new)

20d. Welcomes the active participation of the European Union in the 6th World Water Forum on 12–17 March 2012 in Marseille; calls on the European Union to continue its commitment on improving water access throughout the world, particularly with a view to the 7th World Water Forum which will take place in South Korea in 2015;

2012/05/04
Committee: ENVI

2011/2175(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Is of the opinion that excessive ‘quality requirements’ ~~(whether imposed by European or national legislation or by internal company rules) are at the basis of many unnecessary discards, which increase~~may be at the basis of unnecessary discards, which increase the amount of food wasted, at both the trade and the consumption stages; calls for initiatives to be developed to collect such food which is still fit for consumption, for the benefit of the amo~~unt of food wasted~~st deprived sections of society;

2011/10/21
Committee: ENVI

2011/2175(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Calls for the continuation of the European food aid programme for the most deprived persons, which makes it possible to use Common Agricultural Policy intervention stocks and at the same time to supply food and thus provide food security for millions of people in Europe;

2011/10/21
Committee: ENVI

2011/2175(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Antonyia PARVANOVA, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Gaston FRANCO, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Takes the view that the use of incineration ~~can only be acceptable if it is linked to energy recovery and prevents the production of GHG emissions~~should be limited to the minimum possible, unless it results in efficient energy recovery;

2011/10/21
Committee: ENVI

2011/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Emphasises that ~~top priority must be given to a preventive approach when promoting health and safety at work and that this approach must be firmly rooted both in the EU strategy and in the national strategies~~, when promoting health and safety at work, the EU and the Member States must give priority to a preventive approach and enable all workers fully to reconcile work and private life;

2011/10/06
Committee: ENVI

2011/2147(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Antonyia PARVANOVA, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Gaston FRANCO, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Calls on the EU and the Member States to develop a European programme for the monitoring of occupational hazards (in particular musculoskeletal and psychosocial problems), based on health indicators, definitions and epidemiological tools common to the 27 Member States; stresses the need for an integrated approach to monitoring, taking into account both the career paths of current employees and the state of health of those who have retired;

2011/10/06
Committee: ENVI

2011/2147(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Antonyia PARVANOVA, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Gaston FRANCO, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that ~~work-related accidents are more frequent amongst~~ certain categories of workers ~~than others~~ – e.g. young, older and migrant workers, and those with precarious jobs (including fixed-term contracts and temporary or part-time jobs) – are more frequently exposed to occupational hazards; calls therefore on the Commission and Member States to adopt more specific preventive measures for these target groups;

2011/10/06
Committee: ENVI

2011/2147(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2c. Points out that the main aims of the Community strategy for 2007-2012 include both guaranteeing the proper implementation of EU legislation and improving and simplifying existing legislation, inter alia through the implementation of non-binding instruments; also notes that, under Article 4 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the EU enjoys only shared competence with the Member States in the fields of employment and public health, and that in its 2007 communication the Commission emphasises the development and implementation of national strategies; stresses, therefore, the need to adapt EU legislation to social changes in a coherent manner and to avoid legislating unnecessarily at EU level;

2011/10/06
Committee: ENVI

2011/2147(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Antonyia PARVANOVA, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Gaston FRANCO, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Points out that the framework directive on health and safety at work (89/391/EEC) is already over 20 years old but has yet to see any substantial amendments, so it needs to be adapted to ~~the new challenges posed by changes in the working environment, such as the increase in mental health problem~~new occupational hazards, such as musculoskeletal problems, mental health problems and other psychosocial hazards;

2011/10/06
Committee: ENVI

2011/2147(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Antonyia PARVANOVA, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Regrets that the European framework agreement on harassment and violence at work (2007) is not binding and for this reason calls on the Commission to submit a proposal for a directive on the prevention of violence at worke fact that there is no single common definition of moral harassment at the European level; calls on the Commission and the Member States to develop effective national strategies for combating violence at work which are based on a definition of moral harassment common to the 27 Member States;

2011/10/06
Committee: ENVI

2011/2147(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Antonyia PARVANOVA, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Emphasises that ~~the incidence of physical~~men and women~~tal stress factors differs between men and women and these factors result in different pressures, complaints and work-related illnesse~~ are affected to differing degrees by occupational hazards, be these psychosocial or physical (including musculoskeletal problems); also points out that precarious employment contracts, in particular temporary or part-time jobs, may be linked to increased physical and psychosocial occupational hazards; for this reason, urges the Member States to ~~mainstream gender aspects~~take account, in their national strategies, of the gender dimension and the hazards associated with different types of employment contract;

2011/10/06
Committee: ENVI

2011/2147(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Gaston FRANCO, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7b. Points out that in its 2007 communication the Commission stated that one of its aims was to support small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the implementation of EU legislation and of their risk prevention policies; stresses, therefore, the need to support European SMEs and protect them from any unwarranted or inappropriate penalties, especially during the current recession;

2011/10/06
Committee: ENVI

2011/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas SGEI are services that cannot always be provided~~, or cannot be provided adequately,~~ without state intervention,

2011/09/19
Committee: ECON

2011/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas Protocol No 26 TFEU establishes that SGEI should be characterised by a high level of quality, safety and affordability, equal treatment and the promotion of universal access and of user rights, and explicitly recognises the ~~right of regional and local authorities to manag~~essential role and extensive discretionary powers of national, regional and local authorities to provide them, have them carried out and organise them,

2011/09/19
Committee: ECON

2011/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that reform of the EU rules on state aid for SGEI is only part of an urgently required horizontal legislative framework for SGEI, and that such a framework offers the only means of affording the requisite legal certainty and clarity in relation to EU law on SGEI; emphasises that a new legal basis for such a horizontal legislative framework has been created with Article 14 TFEU; points out that the Commission undertook, in the Single Market Act, to bring forward by the end of 2011, in addition to its communication, a series of measures on SGEI; calls on the Commission, therefore, to submit a proposal for the horizontal legislative frameworkthe necessary clarification of the legal provisions which apply to SGEI; emphasises that a new legal basis has been created with Article 14 TFEU which will make it possible to achieve more satisfactory legal certainty; calls on the Commission to bring forward by the end of 2011 a series of measures on SGEI, as it undertook to do in the Single Market Act;

2011/09/19
Committee: ECON

2011/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Asserts emphatically that public services must be of a high quality and accessible to all sections of the population; views with concern, in this regard, the restrictive stance taken by ~~certain Member States~~the Commission, which, in relation to state aid for social housing associations, classifyies the services provided by such associations as social services of general interest (SSGI) only if they are reserved for socially disadvantaged persons or groups, this restrictive interpretation being at odds with the higher goal of fostering an appropriate social mix;

2011/09/19
Committee: ECON

2011/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to include investment costs for infrastructure necessary to the functioning of SGEI within the costs that compensatory payments may cover and to devote attention to the fact that the provision of SGEI is sometimes based on long-term public investment aid rather than on annual operating subsidies;

2011/09/19
Committee: ECON

2011/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Welcomes the Commission’s concern to ensure, through a more diverse approach to the application of state aid rules, that the administrative burden placed on the public authorities is proportionate to the potential impact of the measure concerned on competition in the internal market; calls therefore~~, with reference to Article 106(2) TFEU,~~ for the provisions to be framed in such a way as to ~~ensure, on the one hand, that they are applied correctly and, on the other, that the under~~make it easier to understand and predict the right to State aid to SGEI and attakin~~gs entrusted with the operation of services of general interest can perform in full the specific tasks assigned to them~~ greater legal certainty for public authorities and operators;

2011/09/19
Committee: ECON

2011/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Calls on the Commission to clarify the concept of 'public procurement procedure', which should include all procedures that involve organising publicity and competition with respect being ensured for the principles of transparency and equal treatment; the concept of 'least cost', which should be interpreted as making it possible to take into account not just price but various criteria linked to the subject of the contract, such as qualitative, environmental or social criteria; the concepts of 'economic activity' and 'non- economic activity', 'impact on trade between Member States' and 'reasonable profit';

2011/09/19
Committee: ECON

2011/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Calls on the Commission, as part of the promised simplification of state aid rules, to introduce greater flexibility in the monitoring of over-compensation, on the basis, in particular, of measures to prevent over-compensation, as this would result in significant time and cost savings for both service providers and the public authorities; ~~suggests, to this end, that, in the case of multiannual contracts, checks for over-compensation should be carried out only at the end of the contractual period;~~

2011/09/19
Committee: ECON

2011/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Calls on the Commission to ensure the effectiveness of the ‘Guide to the application of the European Union rules on state aid, public procurement and the internal market to services of general economic interest, and in particular to social services of general interest’ of 7 December 2010 for the benefit of the public authorities and operators; calls on the Commission, if it proves necessary, to make available to public authorities and operators a methodology for instruction to guide them towards the proper application of these rules;

2011/09/19
Committee: ECON

2011/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Welcomes the Commission’s intention to introduce a ‘de minimis’ arrangement in respect of small-scale state aid to undertakings entrusted with the operation of SGEI where the locally limited scale of the activity means that only a negligible impact on trade between Member States is likely and where it is ensured that the compensation is used exclusively for the operation of the SGEI in questionsmall-scale SGEI of a social nature; asks the Commission to ascertain whether SGEI in the field of culture and education should also be the subject of a special arrangement;

2011/09/19
Committee: ECON

2011/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Commission to propose appropriate thresholds for the ‘de minimis’ arrangement; suggests as a possible reference in this respect the combined indices of size of municipality, amount of compensation payment and level of turnover of the undertaking entrusted with the operation of the serviceconsiders that the amount of the aid is the only criterion which will ensure easy and equitable application; considers furthermore that a threshold calculated over three financial years affords the requisite flexibility;

2011/09/19
Committee: ECON

2011/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Welcomes the Commission’s assertion that it wishes to exempt in principle further categories of SSGI from the requirement that aid to them be the subject of notification; calls for an assessment as to whether such an exemption should extend to care facilities for elderly people or people with disabilities, ~~or to health~~as is already the carse f~~acilitie~~or hospitals;

2011/09/19
Committee: ECON

2011/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Considers that the special remit and character of SSGI should ~~not only~~ be protected ~~but should also be clearly defined under sector-specific rules~~and clearly defined; calls on the Commission therefore to assess what would be the most effective way of attaining this objective;

2011/09/19
Committee: ECON

2011/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Points out that if the undertakings entrusted with the operation of SGEI are selected on the basis of efficiency criteria then the fourth condition set by the Court of Justice ruling in the Altmark case is fulfilled, and that, subject to observance of the three remaining conditions, the compensatory payments do not, according to the case law of the Court, constitute state aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU; recalls, in this connection, that the use of an equitable and transparent procedure remains the best way of assessing these efficiency criteria a priori;

2011/09/19
Committee: ECON

2011/2096(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Points out that a sustainable and environmentally friendly transport network is the nervous system of the European economy ~~which should be given the necessary incentives for~~and that proper legislative and/or financial incentives should be provided for it so as to enable a transition to non-fossil fuel propulsion to be made where possible;

2011/10/11
Committee: ENVI

2011/2096(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Takes note of the fact that in the recent past improvements in emissions from fossil fuel propelled means of transport have always been offset by higher demand, resulting in congestion and in air pollution still exceeding the legal limits; hence insists on the need for a switch to a different technology or the best possible fossil fuel technology and accordingly supports research carried out with or without the financial support of the EU aiming at accelerating the introduction of eco-innovations and new technologies in transport;

2011/10/11
Committee: ENVI

2011/2096(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

~~5. Insists that, where these incentives do not work on a market basis, the Commission and Member States should have the courage to intervene;~~(Does not affect English version.)

2011/10/11
Committee: ENVI

2011/2096(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Takes note of the fact that several regions in the EU with unmet transport needs still have to ‘catch up’ and will still show a big growth in transport once the infrastructure has been finalised and the economy is picking up; considers for this reason that it is also important to focus future actions on the elimination of disparities in infrastructure development between various European regions/countries, applying EU regional policy to that end;

2011/10/11
Committee: ENVI

2011/2096(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the European Commission to support, promote and provide financial support for ~~the~~ Europe~~-wide rolling highway~~an transport networks;

2011/10/11
Committee: ENVI

2011/2096(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. ~~Consider~~Notes that the Single European Sky and SESAR show how fuel consumption can be reduced by +/- 10% in addition to the launch of new, fuel-efficient and relatively silent aircraft;

2011/10/11
Committee: ENVI

2011/2096(INI)

Richard SEEBER, Eija-Riitta KORHOLA, Elisabetta GARDINI, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Points out that railways and high- speed lines in particular could make a major contribution to a competitive, resource-efficient transport system providing fast links between Europe’s regions;

2011/10/11
Committee: ENVI

2011/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C c (new)

Cc. whereas the European low carbon economy roadmap can only be realised when taking close account of global developments and international carbon reduction commitments,

2011/12/12
Committee: ENVI

2011/2095(INI)

Richard SEEBER, Eija-Riitta KORHOLA, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Recognises the benefits to Member States of developing a low carbon economy; therefore endorses the Commission'’s Roadmap to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050, together with its trajectory, the specific milestones for domestic emission reductions of 40%, 60% and 80% for 2030, 2040 and 2050 respectively, and the ranges for sector- specific milestones, as the basis for proposing legislative and other initiatives on economic and climate policy; Recognises that the trajectory and milestones are based on PRIMES modelling and the pre-set target and needs to be further developed by bottom- up, sector specific impact assessments and roadmaps;

2011/12/12
Committee: ENVI

2011/2095(INI)

Richard SEEBER, Eija-Riitta KORHOLA, Elisabetta GARDINI, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that the worldwide development and application of low carbon technologies is increasing rapidly, and Europe'’s future competitiveness will depend upon it increasing levels of investment ~~that currently lag far behind countries such as China as a proportion of GDP~~in research and innovation of these technologies;

2011/12/12
Committee: ENVI

2011/2095(INI)

Richard SEEBER, Eija-Riitta KORHOLA, Elisabetta GARDINI, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 d (new)

3d. Recognises that climate change is a global issue and recalls that the EU unilateral action is not sufficient and that the extensive involvement of big emitters is necessary,

2011/12/12
Committee: ENVI

2011/2095(INI)

Richard SEEBER, Eija-Riitta KORHOLA, Elisabetta GARDINI, Sophie AUCONIE, Peter LIESE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 e (new)

3e. Recalls the need for a clear timeline for an international post-2012 agreement and for firm and more ambitious commitments from big emitters to adopt ambitious and sufficient targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions;

2011/12/12
Committee: ENVI

2011/2095(INI)

Eija-Riitta KORHOLA, Sophie AUCONIE, Elisabetta GARDINI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 h (new)

9h. Stresses the need to step up energy efficiency in the building sector and the major contribution which could be made by European funds in this respect;

2011/12/19
Committee: ENVI

2011/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Calls on the Commission to develop a biomass supply policy as part of the upcoming 2050 energy roadmap to encourage sustainable biomass production; insists that meeting the EU'’s target for the use of biofuels must not result in the release of disproportionate quantities of greenhouse gases;

2011/12/19
Committee: ENVI

2011/2095(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Eija-Riitta KORHOLA, Richard SEEBER, Elisabetta GARDINI, Peter LIESE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)

10b. Calls upon the Commission to develop sustainability criteria for biomass that include the efficiency of the use of biomass, and focus the policies on a future where first value is created out of biomass raw materials, only after which biomass is used for energy;

2011/12/19
Committee: ENVI

2011/2095(INI)

Elisabetta GARDINI, Alejo VIDAL-QUADRAS, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)

11b. Calls on the Commission to ensure that Horizon 2020 and the European Innovation Partnerships under the Innovation Union prioritize the need to develop all kinds of low carbon technologies to spur EU competitiveness;

2011/12/19
Committee: ENVI

2011/2095(INI)

Eija-Riitta KORHOLA, Richard SEEBER, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)

14b. Expects the Commission and member states to support those sectors that have made roadmaps to further develop the initiatives and partnerships that follow from these roadmaps, for the development of breakthrough technologies to decarbonise these energy intensive industries;

2011/12/12
Committee: ENVI

2011/2095(INI)

Elisabetta GARDINI, Eija-Riitta KORHOLA, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 d (new)

17d. Calls for greater involvement of the maritime and air transport sectors through the introduction at international level of a market mechanism (tax or market in licences);

2011/12/12
Committee: ENVI

2011/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 i (new)

19i. Draws attention to the fact that the current 20% target is based on contribution made by nuclear power to the energy mix in number of Member States; notes that the IEA’s World Energy Outlook 2011 includes a Lower-Nuclear Case according to which the projected increase of world-wide CO2 emissions would be substantially higher in the medium-term due to an increased use of fossil fuels; states that according to the IEA, achieving the 2 degrees Celsius goal would require an acceleration of the development and deployment of CCS technologies, which are however at premature stage, thus calls for an increased support for the development and application of breakthrough technologies in order to increase energy efficiency and decouple economic growth from energy consumption;

2011/12/12
Committee: ENVI

2011/2087(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital 1 (new)

(1) whereas Article 165 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union entrusts to the European Union the task of ‘developing the European dimension in sport, by promoting fairness and openness in sporting competitions and cooperation between bodies responsible for sport, and by protecting the physical and moral integrity of sportsmen and sportswomen, especially the youngest sportsmen and sportswomen’,

2011/07/18
Committee: ENVI

2011/2087(INI)

Draft opinion
Citation 1

– whereas sport, in addition to being a socio-cultural phenomenon, is a dynamic economic sector capable of generating significant revenues and could contribute to the Europe 2020 strategy,

2011/09/06
Committee: ECON

2011/2087(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas sport hais a ~~very important social and financial impact in the EU~~dynamic growth sector and constitutes a real instrument of social cohesion, and whereas gambling services are excluded from the scope of the Services Directive (2006/123/EC) and the new Consumer Rights Directive (approved by the European Parliament on 23 June 2011), due to their specificity,

2011/09/14
Committee: IMCO

2011/2087(INI)

Draft opinion
Citation 2

– whereas sport does not behave like a typical economic activity because of its specific characteristics and its organisational structures underpinned by federations, which do not operate as commercial companies, and whereas a distinction must be made between sporting and commercial interests,

2011/09/06
Committee: ECON

2011/2087(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the Commission study on the implications of internal market policies on the funding of grassroots sports and calls for a bridging of the gap between ‘rich’ and ‘poor’ sports by means of financial solidarity mechanismsNotes that the risk of fraud in sports competitions – although present since the outset – is exacerbated by the growth of the online sport betting sector, and therefore constitutes a proven danger to the integrity of sport, which is a value that needs to be secured;

2011/09/14
Committee: IMCO

2011/2087(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2c. Calls on Member States and local authorities to afford broad access to sports facilities and to exchange good practices in this respect;

2011/07/18
Committee: ENVI

2011/2087(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Recalls that the EU is, in accordance with Article 165 TFEU, committed to promoting the equity and protecting the integrity of sport; considers therefore that the EU should introduce European-level structural cooperation in order to coordinate the fight against fraud and corruption in sport;

2011/09/06
Committee: ECON

2011/2087(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Supports any form of self-regulation in the sport sectors aimed at reinforcing accountability, transparency and financial stability; considers it essential, for the credibility of this kind of regulation, that an effective system of scrutiny and a balanced mix of sanctions and incentives be implemented; calls on the Commission to examine the possibility of a legislative instrument, on the basis of Article 114 TFEU, aimed at ensuring the existence of harmonised rules of sound financial management for European professional sports clubs;

2011/09/06
Committee: ECON

2011/2087(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. IConsistders th~~at the right to grant exclusive rights for~~e contributions made by lotteryies and other ~~number~~money games ~~remain with the Member States, given that umbrella sports organisations in the EU consider the contributions made by national lotterie~~and sports bets to the financing of sport and especially grassroots sports to be indispensable;

2011/09/14
Committee: IMCO

2011/2087(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Pascal CANFIN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Stresses that sport can make a worthwhile contribution to achieving the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth; adds that, as such, it must be fully incorporated into that strategy;

2011/09/14
Committee: IMCO

2011/2087(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Calls on the Commission to put forward specific proposals to remedy the shortcomings and discrepancies in the legislation concerning the activities – which are by their nature, cross-border – of sports agents which were documented by the independent study carried out in 2009 on behalf of the Commission;

2011/09/06
Committee: ECON

2011/2087(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Respects the right of Member States to ~~draw up penalising measure~~put in place penal sanctions to repress illegal online gambling; calls for a regulatory principle whereby a gambling company can only operate (or bid for the necessary national licence) in a Member State if it does not contravene the law in any other EU Member State;

2011/09/14
Committee: IMCO

2011/2087(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Stresses the importance of education in sport, and encourages initiatives by sporting organisations and games operators to teach sportspeople good sport betting practice;

2011/09/14
Committee: IMCO

2011/2087(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Calls on~~Reiterates its position that sports bets are a form of commercial use of sporting competitions, and recommends that the Commission and the Member States ~~to ensure that intellectual property rights, such as the partial redistribution of revenue derived from the exploitation of IPR in sports and merchandising, are taken into account~~protect sporting competitions from any unauthorised commercial use, notably by the introduction of a system for acquiring betting rights and the recognition of sports bodies’ intellectual property rights over the competitions they organise, not only in order to secure a fair financial return for their sectors, but also to combat match-fixing;

2011/09/14
Committee: IMCO

2011/2087(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Recalls that, under the terms of Article 165 of the TFEU, the European Union has a duty to promote fairness and protect the integrity of sport; takes the view, therefore, that the European Union should establish structural cooperation at European level to coordinate the fight against fraud and corruption in sport; calls, furthermore, on the Commission to study the desirability of a legislative instrument based on Article 114 of the TFEU seeking to secure harmonised rules on sound financial management for European professional sports clubs;

2011/09/14
Committee: IMCO

2011/2087(INI)

Damien ABAD, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Sophie AUCONIE, Konstantinos POUPAKIS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Calls for ~~a European Agency for S~~structural cooperation to be established at European Union level to defend sporting Iintegrity and Ffairness ~~to be established~~, with due regard for Articles 6, 83 and 165 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, w~~hose remit would be to~~ith the aim of coordinateing the combating of fraud and corruption in sport and to combating doping, without prejudice to the rules of the World Anti-Doping Agency or to how it operates.

2011/07/18
Committee: ENVI

2011/2084(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the Internet gambling market is growing constantly, and whereas this sector is unlike other markets on account the risks involved in terms of consumer protection and the fight against organised crime, as the CJEU has acknowledged on more than one occasion,

2011/09/08
Committee: IMCO

2011/2084(INI)

Damien ABAD, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Andreas SCHWAB, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas market fragmentation not only makes it difficult for regulated providers to supply legal offerings on a cross-border basis, but also makes it virtually impossible to protect consumers and combat the crime associated with gambling at the European level,

2011/09/08
Committee: IMCO

2011/2084(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Damien ABAD

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. calls for the introduction of statutory minimum consumer protection standards without prejudice to the right of Member States to adopt more stringent rules;

2011/07/19
Committee: ECON

2011/2084(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. considers that more effective coordination against illegal sites is also necessary to discourage illicit operations; urges the Commission therefore to consider the possible introduction of interoperable EU standards regarding fraud detection and prevention with a view to improving global market monitoring;

2011/07/19
Committee: ECON

2011/2084(INI)

Damien ABAD, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Andreas SCHWAB, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas Internet gambling and betting, if not properly regulated, involve a greater risk of addiction and dangers than traditional physical, location- based gambling,

2011/09/08
Committee: IMCO

2011/2084(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Damien ABAD

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. takes the view that the proliferation of on-line gambling represents a threat to the integrity of sport; stresses that keeping sporting events credible and honest is vital to the sports industry as a whole; stresses that this can only be done effectively at transnational level; considers that the European Union must therefore play a more prominent role in safeguarding the integrity of sport, a ~~goal to be pursued by~~longside all stakeholders;

2011/07/19
Committee: ECON

2011/2084(INI)

Damien ABAD, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Sophie AUCONIE, Konstantinos POUPAKIS

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas it is essential to ensure the integrity of sport and prevent further betting fraud, while ensuring a fair financial return for the sports and racing industries,

2011/09/08
Committee: IMCO

2011/2084(INI)

Damien ABAD, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Andreas SCHWAB, Sophie AUCONIE, Konstantinos POUPAKIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. Welcomes the fact that the Commission has taken the initiative of launching public consultation in connection with its Green Paper on online betting and gambling, which will facilitate pragmatic and realistic consideration of the future of this sector in Europe;

2011/09/08
Committee: IMCO

2011/2084(INI)

Damien ABAD, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Andreas SCHWAB, Sophie AUCONIE, Konstantinos POUPAKIS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. calls, therefore, for the establishment of ~~a European Agency for I~~structural cooperation at EU level for the defence of integrity and Ffair Pplay in Ssport consistent with Articles 6, 83 and 165 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union~~, with a specific remit to~~ for the purpose of promoteing player education and coordinateing action against fraud and corruption in sport by sharing information and expertise and by applying the common definition of offences and sanctions;

2011/07/19
Committee: ECON

2011/2084(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point 2

(2) co~~ntain~~mbat the illegal gambling market,

2011/09/08
Committee: IMCO

2011/2084(INI)

Damien ABAD, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Andreas SCHWAB, Sophie AUCONIE, Konstantinos POUPAKIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point 3

(3) guarantee effective protection for young people and vulnerable gamblers,

2011/09/08
Committee: IMCO

2011/2084(INI)

Damien ABAD, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Andreas SCHWAB, Sophie AUCONIE, Konstantinos POUPAKIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point 6

(6) that ~~risks to~~specific measures are promoted to guarantee the integrity of sporting competition ~~are precluded~~ and

2011/09/08
Committee: IMCO

2011/2084(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new)

(6a) that part of the value of bets goes to sports and horse-racing bodies, and

2011/09/08
Committee: IMCO

2011/2084(INI)

Damien ABAD, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Andreas SCHWAB, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1

Subsidiarity principle and European added value

2011/09/08
Committee: IMCO

2011/2084(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Is of the opinion that the gambling sector has been very much shap~~Emphasises that any regulation of the gambling sector is subject to, and must be underpinned by, the ~~Member States' different traditions and cultures and that gambling markets are very differently regulated, giving the subsidiarity principle a particularly important role in this sector~~subsidiarity principle; considers, however, that this principle must be understood to imply ‘active subsidiarity’ entailing cooperation among the national administrations to achieve closer harmonisation of practice;

2011/09/08
Committee: IMCO

2011/2084(INI)

Damien ABAD, Sophie AUCONIE, Konstantinos POUPAKIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Re~~spects the decision by a number of Member States to ban Internet gambling totally; is opposed to government monopolies over on-line gambling, however~~cognises the Member States’ discretion in determining how gambling is organised, while observing the basic EU Treaty principles of non-discrimination and proportionality; notes in this context the decision by a number of Member States to ban Internet gambling totally;

2011/09/08
Committee: IMCO

2011/2084(INI)

Damien ABAD, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Sophie AUCONIE, Konstantinos POUPAKIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. ~~Is of the opinion~~Emphasises that the principle of mutual recognition of licences on the gambling market does not apply, but ~~that nevertheless, in keeping with the internal market, simplified licence application procedures should be set up in some Member States;~~ nonetheless recognises the need to avoid unnecessary red tape with regard to licence applications, while ensuring the pre- eminent role of the regulator in the Member State in which the application has been submitted; considers, therefore, that mutual confidence among national regulators needs to be enhanced through closer administrative cooperation;

2011/09/08
Committee: IMCO

2011/2084(INI)

Damien ABAD, Sophie AUCONIE, Konstantinos POUPAKIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. C~~alls therefore for~~onsiders the establishment of a regulator with suitable powers in each Member State to be a necessary step towards more effective regulatory cooperation; encourages, in this context, cooperation between national regulatory bodies to be considerably expanded, with the Commission as coordinator, so as to develop common standards and take joint action against the unregulated black market; states that, in particular for identifying gamblers and combating money laundering, national standalone solutions are not successful; states that the Gaming Regulators European Forum (GREF) network and the Internal Market Information System could serve as the basis for this administrative cooperation;

2011/09/08
Committee: IMCO

2011/2084(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Calls on the Commission to review Directive 2005/60/EC1 on money laundering with a view to extending its scope to encompass all Internet betting and gambling

2011/09/08
Committee: IMCO

2011/2084(INI)

Damien ABAD, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Piotr BORYS, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3

Gambling and sport: the need to ensure integrity

2011/09/08
Committee: IMCO

2011/2084(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Notes that bthe risk of fraud in sports competiti~~ng on, in particular,~~ons – although present since the outset – has been exacerbated since the emergence of the on-line sports betting sector; stresses that this risk is particularly acute in minor-sports competitions ~~may~~, and therefore represents a risk to the integrity of sport; is therefore of the view that sport fraud and betting fraud should be penalised throughout Europe;

2011/09/08
Committee: IMCO

2011/2084(INI)

Damien ABAD, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Piotr BORYS, Sophie AUCONIE, Ivo BELET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16a. Reaffirms its position that sports bets are a form of commercial use of sporting competitions, and recommends that the European Commission and Member States protect sporting competitions from any unauthorised commercial use, notably by setting up a system for acquiring betting rights and by recognising sports bodies’ property rights over the competitions they organise, not only to secure a fair financial return for the benefit of all levels of professional and amateur sport, but also as a means to strengthen the fight against sports fraud, particularly match-fixing;

2011/09/08
Committee: IMCO

2011/2084(INI)

Damien ABAD, Piotr BORYS, Sophie AUCONIE, Konstantinos POUPAKIS, Ivo BELET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)

16b. Calls for instruments to increase cross-border police and judicial cooperation and, at the same time, for a framework for cooperation with organisers of sports competitions to be considered with a view to facilitating the exchange of information between sports disciplinary bodies and state investigation and prosecution agencies, by setting up, for example, dedicated national networks and contact points to deal with cases of match-fixing;

2011/09/08
Committee: IMCO

2011/2084(INI)

Damien ABAD, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Sophie AUCONIE, Konstantinos POUPAKIS, Ivo BELET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 c (new)

16c. Urges Member States to ensure that the fraudulent manipulation of results for financial gain or other advantage is prohibited by establishing as a criminal offence any threat to the integrity of competitions, including those linked to betting operations;

2011/09/08
Committee: IMCO

2011/2084(INI)

Damien ABAD, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Andreas SCHWAB, Sophie AUCONIE, Konstantinos POUPAKIS, Ivo BELET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 d (new)

16d. Stresses the importance of education in sport and calls on the Member States and sports federations to lay down well- defined rules on sports betting and to adequately inform and educate professional and amateur gamblers;

2011/09/08
Committee: IMCO

2011/2071(INI)

Sven GIEGOLD, Martin KASTLER, Peter LIESE, Sophie AUCONIE, Damien ABAD, Philippe LAMBERTS, Sylvie GOULARD, Herbert DORFMANN, Thomas MANN, Jürgen KLUTE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Is concerned that draft recommendations to member states under the European Semester contained to undermine the specific regulation of holidays and Sundays; asks the Commission and the Council to respect and support these achievements, especially for the work-family balance;

2011/07/15
Committee: ECON

2011/2051(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that the direct payments scheme should be retained in order to continue to ensure competitiveness, economic stability, decent farm incomes and the sustainable development of the EU farm sector, as well as EU food and environmental security, thus ensuring that other policies and strategies, including the Europe 2020 strategy, may be properly implemented; considers, in this connection, that objective and transparent criteria need to be drawn up to ensure the provision of an appropriate level of direct support throughout the EU and to move away from the ~~criteria~~historical benchmarks used to date for allocating funding under the direct payments scheme;

2011/03/25
Committee: REGI

2011/2051(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Sophie AUCONIE, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Maurice PONGA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus PIEPER, Philippe BOULLAND

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Points out that the current rules for the allocation of second-pillar funding were agreed on the basis of the cohesion criterion, i.e. the agricultural and rural development disparities existing between individual Member States and regions; believes, in view of the fact that those disparities still exist, that the current criteria and funding arrangements for rural development should be retained, in particular in the context of expanding the second pillar to take account of the Europe 2020 strategy objectives; points out that this will require ~~appropriate~~excellent coordination and the appropriate distribution of tasks between the CAP and cohesion policy.

2011/03/25
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 a (new)

- having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Fifth Cohesion Report’, adopted on 1 April 2011,

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas the purpose of cohesion policy is to foster the development of an innovative and protective Europe of solidarity in the face of the challenges associated with globalisation,

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)

Ab. whereas cohesion policy represents a genuine citizens’ issue, bringing Europe into people’s daily lives and making it tangible and visible across the EU,

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Markus PIEPER, Sophie AUCONIE, Philippe BOULLAND

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the cohesion and structural policies have proved flexible in crisis situations and have made a defining contribution to various national recovery and training programmes, and whereas it is important to maintain this flexibility,

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Markus PIEPER, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Jan OLBRYCHT, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas gearing the structural funds to the Lisbon Strategy objectives has proved effective, as is evident from the impressive commitment rates for the Convergence and the Regional Competitiveness and Employment objectives, a~~lthough it is regrettable that only~~nd whereas 20% of projects under the heading of Territorial Cooperation accord with the Lisbon aims,

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas the existing system of cohesion and structural policy objectives (Convergence, Regional Competitiveness and Employment, and European Territorial Cooperation), combined with a multi-level governance approach and security to plan on the basis of reliable funding and an agreed time frame (seven years), has ~~basic~~overally proved its worth, but whereas there have been considerable delays in programme planning as a result of protracted financial and legislative negotiations and substantial changes in the rules applying to cohesion policy,

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Alain CADEC, Philippe BOULLAND, Rodi KRATSA-TSAGAROPOULOU, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)

Fa. whereas, however, a significant threshold effect exists between regions with comparable levels of development but benefiting from very different levels of aid – growth regions exceeding the threshold of 75% of average per capita GDP for the EU in receipt of more financial support than stagnating regions above that threshold – and whereas this represents a real problem in terms of fairness between Europe’s regions,

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Alain CADEC, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Philippe BOULLAND, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas a comprehensive European cohesion policy continues to be essential, given the ~~significant~~ imbalances between regional economies and in social terms and the geographical disadvantages of certain regions (particularly the outermost regions), as well as specific structural problems and ~~geographical disadvanta~~the need to adapt to new challenges, and it is also a requirement under the Lisbon Treaty,

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)

Ha. whereas, given its strategic importance for the future, cohesion policy must not become an adjustment variable in future budget negotiations;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Alain CADEC, Philippe BOULLAND, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Recital H b (new)

Hb. whereas towns and cities are places of wealth creation, but also places where the most acute economic and social problems are concentrated,

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Recognises the special needs of regions particularly disadvantaged by virtue of their geographical ~~situation or natural environme~~or demographic situation or specific constraints; reiterates its call for special forms of preference to continue to apply in respect of those types of region, mentioned in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which are particularly disadvantaged (outermost regions, northernmost regions with very low population density and island, mountain and cross-border regions), and in particular the additional specific allocation granted to the outermost regions under the ERDF;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Philippe BOULLAND, Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Emphasises that cohesion policy must continue to focus on regional (territorial) cohesion and points out that the Lisbon Treaty added the objective of territorial cohesion to those of economic and social cohesion; affirms that this aim remains indissociable from the challenges of economic and social cohesion; emphasises that ‘territorial cohesion’ is also relevant at the sub-regional level, particularly in urban areas (urban districts facing difficulties, uncontrolled urban sprawl), even within regions considered to be rich;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Sees macroregional strategies as affording a major opportunity to harness forms of trans-regional potential and adopt a joint approach to shared challenges s~~temming from the natural environment, e.g. in relation to~~uch as environmental protection; considers that better coordination of existing support mechanisms can create scope for more targeted use of the EU structural funds;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Alain CADEC, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. ~~Doubts whether~~Stresses that specific operational programmes ~~for functional geographic~~, including multi-regional operational programmes, can yield additional benefits by meeting the shared chal len~~tit~~ges of functional territories such as metropolitan regions or, sea or river basins ~~will yield additional benefits; is particularly aware, in rel~~or mountain regions; considers that, in accordance with the partnership principle, the implementation tof such programmes~~, of the absence of political bodies (including democratically elected bodies) with a sufficiently wide- ranging remit to implement them; calls instead~~ is a shared responsibility which should be preserved; calls for closer coordination of macroregional or natural-environment strategies at inter-governmental levels;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Stresses the key role of towns and cities in achieving the economic, environmental and social EU 2020 objectives; encourages the dynamic process launched during the previous programming period for Integrated Urban Programmes and stresses the importance of the experiments currently under way; calls for support for ideas and projects which can serve as models, on the basis of integrated development plans, and for the upgrading of urban-rural links;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Rejects the ~~use of~~proliferation of applications for quotas in particular for national allocations under ESF/ERDF programmes, for urban development, for the countryside or otherwise according to categorisation on the basis of population density or territorial function; also regards as questionable the requirement to specify already at operational programme level which urban and other areas are to be eligible for support, and calls for the Member States and regions to be allowed to organise competitive selection procedures in this respect as well;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Emphasises that support from the cohesion and structural funds must be more strongly oriented towards the educational and socio-political challenges of the EU 2020 strategy; takes the view, however, that ~~across-the-board~~full ‘Europeanisation’ of the relevant policy areas is not desirable and would be a doomed endeavour ~~purely on~~for obvious financial ~~ground~~reasons; calls, therefore, for the further development of approaches that could serve as models, while retaining existing national and regional competences;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Seán KELLY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Emphasises that the trans-European transport networks play a decisive role in European regional cohesion and that development of TEN infrastructure and designated E-roads must therefore be stepped up and access to them improved, especially in border regions; suggests that ‘infrastructure’ be accorded more importance as a category of project eligible for support in connection with the ~~third~~ objective of European Territorial Cooperation;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16a. supports economic development and employment in SMEs and micro- enterprises; therefore requests that the fundamentals of the Small Business Act for Europe (SBAE), i.e. "Think Small First" and "Only once ", are considered as one of the bases of cohesion policy and considers that these principles should be applied by Member States and regions in the definition of their operational programs;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Alain CADEC, Philippe BOULLAND, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Emphasises that the core components of the EU 2020 strategy (innovation, education and training, energy, environment, employment, competitiveness, skills and combating poverty) are already integral to the cohesion and structural policies; takes the view that the EU 2020 challenges can be integrated very easily into the ~~system of three objectives (Convergence, Regional Competitiveness and Employment, and European Territorial Cooperation), which has proved its effectiveness~~architecture of the cohesion policy;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Philippe BOULLAND, Rodi KRATSA-TSAGAROPOULOU, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Calls for cohesion policy to continue, in accordance with the Lisbon Treaty, to target as a priority those regions that lag furthest behind; stresses that the neediest regions should be granted an appropriate share – commensurate with the seriousness of their development problems – of the funding under ~~Objective 1 (Convergence)~~the convergence objective;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls for ~~a dependable and appropriate phasing-out arrangement for areas formerly eligible for maximum support under~~the creation of a new intermediate category for regions with per capita GDP between 75% and 90% of the EU average, in order to resolve political problems (unequal treatment of regions in spite of their similar situations) and practical problems (difficulty of managing degressive funding) linked to the current phasing-out arrangement; considers that the creation of such a category will be made possible by the fact that a large number of regions have passed the threshold of 75% of the EU average per capita GDP and will thus automatically cease to be covered by the convergence objective; stresses that this change to the architecture of the cohesion policy should neither penalise regions currently benefiting from the Cconvergence objective ~~(convergence regions)~~and the competitiveness objective, nor lead to an increase in the cohesion policy budget; considers that this new category will make it possible to strengthen the justice and solidarity which are the fundamental principles of the cohesion policy;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Calls for Objective 2 (Regional Competitiveness and Employment), which is based on a cross-cutting approach, to be upgraded; rejects any cut in funding for regions currently eligible for Objective 2; stresses that the proven system of innovation clusters and competition for funding needs to be developed further;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Jan OLBRYCHT, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Philippe BOULLAND, Rodi KRATSA-TSAGAROPOULOU, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Takes the view that a general new funding category based on GDP/PE between the 75% and 90% rates would be at odds with the tried and tested principles of EU cohesion policy (to support the weakest and pool the inherent potential of the wealthier regions, taking a cross- cutting approach), and therefore rejects this intermediate category;deleted

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Takes the unequivocal view that efforts under Othe objective ~~3 (~~of European Territorial Cooperation) need to be stepped up at all EU internal borders and at all three levels of such cooperation (cross-border, inter- regional and trans-national) and calls for the ~~relevant share of the structural funds to be increased to 7%~~contribution by the ERDF to this objective to be increased to a level equivalent to 7% of the total budget for cohesion policy; stresses the importance of the border regions in terms of achievement of the EU 2020 objectives; considers there is a need for closer linkage with the TEN networks – in line with European priorities – and with cross-border infrastructure, and calls for a corresponding increase in funding for all border regions;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)

24a. Considers that EGTCs represent a unique, highly valuable territorial governance instrument which responds to the needs for structured cooperation, and must be promoted as a tool to set up systems of cross-border governance, ensuring the ownership of the different policies at regional and local level;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Philippe BOULLAND, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Calls for the ESF, as a component of cohesion policy, to continue to foster social integration, economic growth and employment; regards the ESF as the Union’s most important labour-market and employment-policy tool; attaches particular importance to developing skills and mobility~~, enhancing equality of opportunity between the sexes,~~ – with priority being assigned to training which meets local needs –, enhancing equality of opportunity between the sexes and people with disabilities, integrating and socially reintegrating people who are disadvantaged and supporting SMEs and the self-employed;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Calls for a common strategy framework for the ERDF, the ESF, the Cohesion Fund, the EAFRD and the EFF, for the post-2013 funding period; takes the view that the model of a standard regulatory approach (covering administration, eligibility, auditing and reporting rules) must be further strengthened by means of a joint framework regulatDoes not affect the English version;.

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Joachim ZELLER, Tamás DEUTSCH, Sabine VERHEYEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)

31a. Calls on States to take strict account of the partnership principle in the future partnership and development contracts which replace the former national strategic framework plans; considers that the quality of this strategic document will derive from compliance with the partnership principle; calls on the Commission to ensure that this multi-level partnership is a reality in the negotiation, drafting and assessment of these future partnership contracts;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Calls for the mandatory involvement of ~~federal Länder and regions~~regional and local authorities, in accordance with constitutional and institutional set up of Member States, in drawing up development partnerships and operational programmes; considers it essential to make appropriate provision for this in the regulations governing the Structural Funds;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Philippe BOULLAND, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Supports the system of thematic priorities that the Commission is proposing; points out that the lower the level of development in a Member State or region, the ~~more wide-ranging~~longer the list of priorities there needs to be, taking into account specific regional development needs; stresses the need for this system of thematic priorities to be flexible and negotiable, in order to take account of the variety of regional contexts;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Sophie AUCONIE, Seán KELLY, Richard SEEBER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35

35. Calls, in the event that certain binding priorities are set for all Member States, for these to cover innovation, infrastructure and resource management and to be tailored in each case to regions'’ specific needs; ~~stress~~Notes that SMEs are the main source of jobs in the EU and a breeding ground for business ideas; stresses that support to SMEs must be continued and strengthened in light of the key role they can play in the implementation of the EU 2020 Strategy stresses that in terms of the flagship innovation Union a broad concept of "innovation" has to be applied while the SME access to finances must still be facilitated, notes that it must be possible to suggest and pursue additional priorities on a voluntary basis and in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity; calls for suggested priority areas to include energy, education and training, and combating poverty;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37

37. Calls for the funding under investment partnerships to be made conditional ~~on the implementation of reforms by the Member State~~, for Member States to be called upon to implement reforms, in order to ensure that it is used efficiently in areas directly related to cohesion policy; considers it fair for such conditions to include, in particular, full implementation of existing EU legislation (e.g. on price regulation, tendering procedures, transport, the environment and health) in order to prevent irregularities and ensure effectiveness; rejects, however, the imposition of conditions requiring Member States to undertake fundamental social and economic reform;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38

38. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal for a stronger focus on results, to be achieved through the ex-ante establishment of appropriate objectives and indicators; stresses that such indicators must be few in number, that they must all be clearly defined, measurable and related directly to the impact of the funding, and that they should be established by agreement with the regions/Member States; considers, however, that all instruments and criteria proposed to measure performance should maintain a qualitative vision of the programmes;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41

41. Considers that the maximum level of support must not exceed 75%, otherwise applications will be driven less by the case for the projects than by the prospect of the funding they can attract; calls for it to be made easier for regions to use private co- financing and market-oriented credit options to cover their share of project financing;(Does not affect English version.)

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42

42. Calls, in the case of direct subsidies to undertakings, for it to be recognised that Cohesion Policy funding, rather than influencing decisions by companies – and particularly bigger companies – to open a plant in a given location, tends to be pocketed by companies which have already taken such decisions (deadweight effect), and calls, therefore, for support for undertakings to focus on investment in research and development or for it to be provided, in more cases, indirectly through infrastructure financing; also calls for clear provisions to be included in the general regulation governing the Structural Funds ruling out EU support for the relocation of undertakings within the Union~~, and for a substantial lowering of the threshold for review of relocation investments~~;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Alain CADEC, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42

42. Calls, in the case of direct subsidies to undertakings, for it to be recognised that Cohesion Policy funding, rather than influencing decisions by companies – and particularly bigger companies – to open a plant in a given location, tends to be pocketed by companies which have already taken such decisions (deadweight effect), and calls, therefore, for support for undertakings to focus on investment in research and development or for it to be provided, in more cases, indirectly through infrastructure financing; also calls for clear provisions to be included in the general regulation governing the Structural Funds ruling out ~~EU support~~the provision of any EU funding for the relocation of undertakings within the Union, and ~~for a~~ substantially lowering of the threshold for review of relocation investments;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51

51. Calls, in respect of Member States that ~~are falling significantly short of the EU stability criteria requirements and also~~ have a poor record on the use of monies from the structural funds, for a proposal for ~~the automatic application of~~ more stringent rules in order to monitor the use of such monies in accordance with the law and the relevant objectives; calls, at the same time, for unnecessary controls to be done away with in those Member States that have a satisfactory fund management system; considers that the ‘contract of confidence’ and ‘single audit’ principles should be implemented wherever possible;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Alain CADEC, Maurice PONGA, Philippe BOULLAND, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52

52. Calls on the Member States/regions to designate authorities ~~that will assume exclusive~~ responsib~~ility~~le for the proper administration of monies from the structural funds;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54 a (new)

54a. Is concerned at the fact that red tape is preventing small companies and organisations from gaining access to structural funding; calls for the relevant rules and technical documentation to be made as clear as possible, and asks the Commission and the Member States to set up technical working parties with a view to identifying appropriate simplification measures;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Sophie AUCONIE, Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Philippe BOULLAND

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55

55. Supports the Commission’s proposal that national authorities should not receive reimbursement until the EU funding has been paid out to the beneficiaries; envisages that this will speed up payment procedures and will be a crucial incentive to carry out stringent national auditing; notes, however, that cashflow problems could potentially arise at Member State or ~~federal-state~~regional level and that appropriate hedging arrangements will have to be made;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60

60. Draws attention – with up-to-date figures in support of its contention – to the extremely severe financial consequences for cohesion policy of the accession of new Member States; emphasises that, from a cohesion policy point of view, the Union’s capacity to absorb new members would, on the basis of these figures, be severely overstretched; calls for use of the IPA to be extended to special preliminary forms of EU neighbourhood status or membership and reiterates its call for graduated cohesion policy arrangements for large candidate countries such as Turkey;(Does not affect English version.)

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2034(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Theodoros SKYLAKAKIS, Anne DELVAUX, Bogusław SONIK, Christine DE VEYRAC, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Sophie AUCONIE, Antonyia PARVANOVA, Gaston FRANCO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Insists on the integrity of cohesion policy~~Stresses the integrated approach of cohesion policy, which draws together several different funds, and calls on the Commission to refrtain ~~from creating new sectoral funds, e.g. for energy or climate~~that approach; encourages the Commission to learn from experience with cohesion policy when establishing measures for energy policy, in particular with regard to project selection;

2011/03/24
Committee: REGI

2011/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)

- having regard to Article 122 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union,

2011/05/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2023(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Theodoros SKYLAKAKIS, Anne DELVAUX, Bogusław SONIK, Christine DE VEYRAC, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Sophie AUCONIE, Antonyia PARVANOVA, Gaston FRANCO

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 b (new)

- having regard to Article 222 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union (the solidarity clause) which lays down that ‘the Union and the Member States shall act jointly in a spirit of solidarity if a Member State is the object of a terrorist attack or victim of a natural or man-made disaster’,

2011/05/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2023(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Anne DELVAUX, Theodoros SKYLAKAKIS, Bogusław SONIK, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Christine DE VEYRAC, Sophie AUCONIE, Antonyia PARVANOVA, Gaston FRANCO

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 c (new)

- having regard to Article 23 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union,

2011/05/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2023(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Anne DELVAUX, Theodoros SKYLAKAKIS, Bogusław SONIK, Christine DE VEYRAC, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 d (new)

- having regard to the 1994 Oslo Guidelines on the use of foreign military and civil defence assets in disaster relief,

2011/05/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2023(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Anne DELVAUX, Theodoros SKYLAKAKIS, Bogusław SONIK, Christine DE VEYRAC, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Sophie AUCONIE, Antonyia PARVANOVA, Gaston FRANCO

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the European Union and its Member States are faced with seven major risks: earthquakes and tsunamis; fires, including forest fires; flooding and landslides; industrial and nuclear accidents; terrorist attacks; natural disasters; and major pandemics; whereas there has been a dramatic increase in the number and severity of these natural and man-made disasters affecting the Union and its citizens, as well as other countries and regions around the world, as tragically demonstrated by the recent severe catastrophe in Japan which was hit by a combination of earthquake, tsunami and nuclear catastrophe, with a corresponding increase in the loss of life and in economic, social and environmental damage and damage to cultural heritage,

2011/05/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2023(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Anne DELVAUX, Theodoros SKYLAKAKIS, Bogusław SONIK, Christine DE VEYRAC, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Sophie AUCONIE, Antonyia PARVANOVA, Gaston FRANCO

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the recent tragedies, notably the Haiti earthquake and the Pakistan floods, have demonstrated that the main tools available to the EU for responding to disasters (humanitarian aid and the EU Civil Protection Mechanism) proved to be working well for what they were designed for and given the circumstances, but whereas there is ~~scope~~a vital need for improvement in terms of effectiveness, efficiency, co~~herence~~ordination and visibility of the EU assistance as a whole,

2011/05/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2023(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Theodoros SKYLAKAKIS, Anne DELVAUX, Bogusław SONIK, Christine DE VEYRAC, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Sophie AUCONIE, Antonyia PARVANOVA, Gaston FRANCO

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas, moreover, during a number of crises, particularly the tsunami of 26 December 2004, many questions were raised about the lack of systematic scenarios or protocols at European level for responding to these seven major risks and the inadequate visibility of Europe's action in relation to the overall effort,

2011/05/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2023(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Bogusław SONIK, Christine DE VEYRAC, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Sophie AUCONIE, Gaston FRANCO

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas immediate coordination, coherence and communication within the EU and with international actors is crucial, ~~duplicating efforts and overlaps must be avoided~~whereas the current European coordination on the ground of several teams with differing chains of command inevitably leads to duplicating efforts and overlaps and proves costly in terms of human resources, coordination and efficiency; and twhe ~~right type of aid must reach affected populations quickly~~reas, given the context of the economic and financial crisis, the European Union must develop a protection system based on the sharing and rationalisation of existing resources without any increase in overall expenditure,

2011/05/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2023(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Theodoros SKYLAKAKIS, Anne DELVAUX, Bogusław SONIK, Christine DE VEYRAC, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Sophie AUCONIE, Antonyia PARVANOVA

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas an integrated European all- hazards approach aimed at responding to crises at all stages of their life cycle is the most effective strategy to deal with disasters; whereas this approach should link~~ing~~ disaster prevention (including mitigation and risk reduction), preparedness, response and recovery ~~is the most effective strategy to deal with disasters~~,

2011/05/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2023(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Anne DELVAUX, Bogusław SONIK, Christine DE VEYRAC, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Sophie AUCONIE, Gaston FRANCO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Underlines the need to rationalise and simplify the functioning of the current European disaster response and to optimise resources available for common benefit, whilst encouraging all Member States to contribute and thus guarantee European solidarity; considers, accordingly, that the EU’s reaction capacity should form part of an integrated multi-risk approach based on ‘bottom-up’ delegated management, on the voluntary sector and on Member States’ specialisations in one or more risk areas;

2011/05/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2023(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Maurice PONGA, Bogusław SONIK, Christine DE VEYRAC, Sophie AUCONIE, Gaston FRANCO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Further calls for the EU’s disaster reaction capacity to make use of Europe’s outermost regions and overseas territories which can form bases for facilitating logistics operations and for pre- positioning its resources in every ocean;

2011/05/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2023(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Anne DELVAUX, Bogusław SONIK, Christine DE VEYRAC, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Re-affirms the~~Emphasises that the European disaster response system should respect of the principle of double subsidiarity ~~concerning the capability of the Member States to use their own assets, especially in any case of conflicting national needs~~vis-à-vis the Member States and the United Nations, i.e. that it should respect the national and regional competences of each Member State on the one hand, and the coordinating role played by the United Nations in disaster relief operations on the other; points out that this strategy should live up to the expectations of the United Nations, which see clear value added in creating a European pole with a response capability;

2011/05/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2023(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Anne DELVAUX, Bogusław SONIK, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Considers advance planning and the preparation of operations by developing reference scenarios, mapping Member States’ assets potentially available for deployment in EU disaster relief operations and contingency planning as key elements of an enhanced EU disaster response and essential for rapid deployment and immediate appropriate response to each emergency; calls on the Commission and the Member States to implement these measures immediately and without prejudice to other actions; calls, finally, on the Commission to launch a feasibility study on the merits of setting up, allocating European research budget funding to, and naming European reference laboratories to combat bioterrorism and identify victims;

2011/05/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2023(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Bogusław SONIK, Christine DE VEYRAC, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. ~~Calls~~Asks that the existing relief systems coordinated by the United Nations be taken into account, whilst calling for improved, strengthened, more cost- effective and well-coordinated transport for all in-kind assistance to disaster sites, in particular through streamlined simplified procedures, an increased co-financing rate and the introduction of new ways of allowing access to additional transport capacities, possibly through framework contracts; considers that the complementary use of military resources should be systematically envisaged and analysed in future scenarios and protocols;

2011/05/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2023(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Bogusław SONIK, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Christine DE VEYRAC, Sophie AUCONIE, Antonyia PARVANOVA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Calls for a comprehensive communications strategy, involving all EU institutions and Member States, that will improve the overall visibility of the European actions; in the eyes of European citizens and the rest of the world; considers that this strategy should seek to simplify and standardise communication methods and tools; proposes to this end the establishment, for example, of a standard dress code and logo for all European staff, and the appointment of a single spokesperson responsible for communications on the emergency response;

2011/05/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2023(INI)

Philippe JUVIN, Bogusław SONIK, Christine DE VEYRAC, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to develop a clear information and prevention system for all European citizens when they travel; proposes, to this end, that European passports bear the numbers of the crisis units in each of the Member States and a reference to Article 23 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union which lays down that ‘every citizen of the Union shall, in the territory of a third country in which the Member State of which he is a national is not represented, be entitled to protection by the diplomatic or consular authorities of any Member State (...)’.

2011/05/13
Committee: ENVI

Proposal for a directive
Annex II – table – row 46

(46) 17alpha-ethinylestradiol 57-63-6 3,5 10-5 7 10-6 not not applic applic able able deleted

2012/11/08
Committee: ENVI

2011/0429(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex II – table – row 47

Directive 2008/105/EC
Annex I – table – row 47

(47) 17beta-estradiol 50-28-2 4 10-4 8 10-5 not not applic applic able able deleted

2012/11/08
Committee: ENVI

2011/0429(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex II – table – row 48

Directive 2008/105/EC
Annex I – table – row 48

~~(48) Diclofenac 15307-79-6 0,1 0,01 not not applicable applicable~~ deleted

2012/11/08
Committee: ENVI

2011/0429(COD)

Sophie AUCONIE, Mario PIRILLO, Anne DELVAUX, Gaston FRANCO, Philippe JUVIN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2

The ERDF shall contribute to the financing of support which aims to reinforce economic, social and territorial cohesion by redressing the main regional imbalances through support for the sustainable development and structural adjustment of regional economies, including the conversion of declining industrial regions and regions lagging behind.

2012/05/31
Committee: ENVI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20

(20) Section II of Title II of Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 lays down rules for a voluntary beef labelling system which provide for the approval of certain labelling specifications by the competent authority of the Member State. The administrative burden and the costs incurred by Member States and economic operators in applying this system are not proportionate to the benefits of the system. ~~That Section should therefore be deleted~~The rules on the voluntary labelling system should therefore be deleted. The deletion should, however, be balanced by the formulation of general rules ensuring consumer protection.

2012/02/17
Committee: ENVI

2011/0229(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 13 a (new)

Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000
Title II – section 2 – title

(13a) The Title of Chapter II, part II is replaced by the following: Voluntary labelling.

2012/02/17
Committee: ENVI

2011/0229(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 14

(14) Articles 16~~, 17 and 18 are deleted~~ is amended as follows: General rules Information other than that specified in part I of this Title which is added to labels by operators or organisations marketing beef must be objective, verifiable by the relevant authorities and comprehensible to consumers.

2012/02/17
Committee: ENVI

2011/0229(COD)

Sophie AUCONIE, Elisabetta GARDINI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 14

Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000
Articles 16 - 18

(14) Articles ~~16,~~ 17 and 18 are deleted.

2012/02/17
Committee: ENVI

2011/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 33 a (new)

(33a) Under the Commission’s legislative proposals of 6 October 2011 concerning the future of the European Union’s cohesion policy, it is likely that there will be a significant increase in the financial support for energy efficiency provided by the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund in the 2014-2020 period compared to the 2007-2013 period. Such funding will make a decisive contribution to the attainment of this Directive’s objectives

2011/11/07
Committee: ENVI

2011/0172(COD)

Peter LIESE, Anne DELVAUX, Vladko Todorov PANAYOTOV, Jo LEINEN, Sophie AUCONIE

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4 a (new)

4a (new) Member States shall draw up national roadmaps to provide details about national strategies to reduce carbon emission of the building stock by 80% in 2050 compared to 1990 levels. These national shall be adopted by January 1, 2014 (for public buildings), by January 1, 2015 (for commercial buildings), and by January 1, 2017 (for private buildings), and will also establish intermediary targets for average energy consumption of the building stock 2020, 2030, and 2040.

2011/11/07
Committee: ENVI

2011/0172(COD)

Sophie AUCONIE, Elisabetta GARDINI, Françoise GROSSETÊTE

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1

Member States shall ensure that, as far as possible, public bodies purchase only products, services and buildings with high energy efficiency performance, as referred to in Annex III.

2011/11/07
Committee: ENVI

2011/0172(COD)

Sophie AUCONIE, Elisabetta GARDINI, Françoise GROSSETÊTE

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 5 – introductory part

5. Within the energy efficiency obligation scheme, Member States ~~may~~shall be asked to:

2011/11/07
Committee: ENVI

2011/0172(COD)

Sophie AUCONIE, Elisabetta GARDINI, Françoise GROSSETÊTE

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 5 – point c

(c) allow obligated parties to count savings obtained in a given year as if they had instead been obtained in any of the two previous or two following years, so as to enhance the system’s flexibility.

2011/11/07
Committee: ENVI

2011/0172(COD)

Peter LIESE, Anne DELVAUX, Radvilė MORKŪNAITĖ-MIKULĖNIENĖ, Vladko Todorov PANAYOTOV, Sophie AUCONIE, Elisabetta GARDINI

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2

2. Member States shall ensure that enterprises not included in the second subparagraph of paragraph 1 are subject to an energy audit carried out in an independent and cost-effective manner by qualified and/or accredited experts at the latest by 30 June 2014 and every three years from the date of the previous energy audit. Audits may be carried out by in- house experts, provided that these are qualified and accredited, that they are not directly engaged in the activity audited, and that the Member state has put in place a scheme to assure and check their quality.

2011/11/07
Committee: ENVI

2011/0172(COD)

Peter LIESE, Anne DELVAUX, Vladko Todorov PANAYOTOV, Sophie AUCONIE

Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2

The Commission shall also monitor the impact of implementing this Directive on Directive 2003/87/EC, Directive 2009/28/EC as well as Directive 2010/31/EC. Until 30/06/2013 at the latest, the European Commission should come forward with a proposal to adjust the Effort Sharing Decision (Decision No 406/2009/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council).

2011/11/07
Committee: ENVI

2011/0156(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Title

Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on food intended for infants and young children ~~and on~~, food for special medical purposes and other foods for specific nutritional purposes

2012/01/26
Committee: ENVI

2011/0156(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7

(7) Directive 2009/39/EC foresees that specific provisions could be adopted regarding the two following specific categories of food falling within the definition of ~~foodstuffs for particular~~specialised nutrition~~al uses~~: 'food intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort, especially for sportsmen' and 'food for persons suffering from carbohydrate metabolism disorders (diabetes)'. With regard to food intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort, no successful conclusion ~~could~~has yet been reached as regards the development of specific provisions due to widely diverging views among Member States and stakeholders concerning the scope of the specific legislation, the number of sub- categories of the food to be included, the criteria for establishing composition requirements, compulsory information to ensure safe use of the food and the potential impact on innovation in product development. There is a real need for harmonisation of the category of food intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort, especially for sportsmen. Harmonisation would remove the barriers to the free movement of these products and provide sportsmen with a high level of safety, at the same time ensuring the absence of doping substances. The Commission considers the matter of doping to be a priority in its communication entitled ‘Developing the European Dimension in Sport’ of 18 January 2011. As regards special provisions for food for persons suffering from carbohydrate metabolism disorders (diabetes), a Commission report concludes that the scientific basis for setting specific compositional requirements is lacking.

2012/01/26
Committee: ENVI

2011/0156(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

(13) The~~refore, the~~ concept of “‘food~~stuffs for particular nutritional uses” should be abolished and~~ for specific uses’ should therefore be maintained but strictly limited to products able to demonstrate their unique capacity to meet the specific nutritional needs of vulnerable groups of the population which would otherwise not be able to be placed on the market in a harmonised way under current EU law whilst fully complying with the rules on free movement. Directive 2009/39/EC should be replaced by the present act. To simplify its application and to ensure consistency throughout the Member States, the present act should take the form of a Regulation.

2012/01/26
Committee: ENVI

2011/0156(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) A limited number of categories of food constitutes the sole source of nourishment of certain groups of the population or represent a partial source of nourishment; such categories of food are vital for the management of certain conditions and/or are essential to maintain the intended nutritional adequacy for certain well-established vulnerable groups of the population. Those categories of food include infant formulae and follow-on formulae, processed cereal-based food and baby food and food for special medical purposes, as well as food intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort. Experience has shown that the provisions laid down in Commission Directive 2006/141/EC, Commission Directive 2006/125/EC, as well as Commission Directive 1999/21/EC ensure the free movement of such food in a satisfactory manner, while ensuring a high level of protection of public health. It is therefore appropriate that this Regulation focuses on the general compositional and information requirements for infant formula and follow-on formulae, processed cereal-based food and baby food for infants and young children and to food for special medical purposes, ~~taking into account these three directives~~as well as food intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort, taking into account these three directives. The concept of ‘food for specific uses’ should therefore be maintained but strictly limited to products able to demonstrate their unique capacity to meet the specific nutritional needs of vulnerable groups of the population which would otherwise not be able to be placed on the market in a harmonised way under current EU law whilst fully complying with the rules on free movement.

2012/01/26
Committee: ENVI

2011/0156(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) To ensure legal certainty, definitions laid down in Commission Directive 2006/141/EC, Commission Directive 2006/125/EC and Commission Directive 1999/21/EC should be transferred to this Regulation. However, the definitions of infant formulae and follow-on formulae, processed cereal-based food and baby food, ~~and~~ food for special medical purposes and food intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort should be regularly adapted taking into account technical and scientific progress and relevant developments at international level, as appropriate.

2012/01/26
Committee: ENVI

2011/0156(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19

(19) This Regulation should provide the criteria for the establishment of the specific compositional and information requirements for infant formula, follow-on formula, processed cereal-based food and baby food, and food for special medical purposes, as well as food intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort, taking into account Commission Directive 2006/141/EC, Commission Directive 2006/125/EC and Commission Directive 1999/21/EC. In order to adapt the definitions of infant formula, follow-on formula, processed cereal-based food and baby food, ~~and~~ food for special medical purposes and food intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort laid down in this Regulation taking into account technical and scientific progress and relevant developments at international level, to lay down the specific compositional and information requirements with respect to the categories of food covered by this Regulation and the procedure and timetable for placing on the market foodstuffs resulting from scientific and technological innovations, including for additional labelling requirements to, or derogations from, the provisions of Directive 2000/13/EC and for the authorisation of nutrition and health claims, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission. It is of particular importance that the Commission carries out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Commission, when preparing and drawing-up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and Council.

2012/01/26
Committee: ENVI

2011/0156(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20

(20) It is appropriate to establish and update a Union list of ~~vitamins, minerals, amino acids and other substances that may be added~~substances that may be added for particular nutritional requirements to infant formula, follow-on formula, processed cereal-based food and baby food~~, and~~ for infants and young children, food for special medical purposes and food intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort, subject to certain criteria laid down in this Regulation. Given the fact that the adoption of the list implies the application of criteria set out in this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission in that respect. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers. The Commission should adopt immediately applicable implementing acts updating the Union list, where, in duly justified cases relating to public health, imperative grounds of urgency so require.

2012/01/26
Committee: ENVI

2011/0156(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27 a (new)

(27a) Low-calorie diets pursued in particular with specific food programmes are becoming more popular, a trend which is encouraged by modern lifestyles and media development. Such diets can cause nutritional imbalances and inequalities in the supply of the most essential nutrients (too little or too much) which are likely to endanger the health of those involved. Scientific studies point to clinical, biological, behavioural and psychological risks when these diets are based on misleading, erroneous or scientifically invalidated recommendations. The Commission must submit a report on low-calorie diets, taking into account Member States’ experience and after consulting the European Food Safety Authority. The report should aim to assess the impact of suitable measures to enable consumers wishing to undertake such diets to enjoy an appropriate level of protection.

2012/01/26
Committee: ENVI

2011/0156(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. This Regulation establishes compositional and information requirements for ~~the following~~ categories of food for specific nutritional purposes:

2012/01/26
Committee: ENVI

2011/0156(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

(ca) foods intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort.

2012/01/26
Committee: ENVI

2011/0156(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. This Regulation establishes rules for placing on the market of other foods for specialised nutritional purposes.

2012/01/26
Committee: ENVI

2011/0156(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)

(aa) ‘food for specialised nutritional purposes’ means foodstuffs which, owing to their special composition or manufacturing process, are clearly distinguishable from foodstuffs for normal consumption, which are suitable for their claimed nutritional purposes and which are marketed in such a way as to indicate such suitability;

2012/01/26
Committee: ENVI

2011/0156(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point h

(h) '‘food for special medical purposes'’ means food specially treated or formulated and intended for the dietary management of patients to be used under medical supervision. It is intended for the exclusive or partial feeding of patients with a limited, impaired or disturbed capacity to take, digest, absorb, metabolise or excrete ordinary food or certain ~~nutrients contained therein~~of their ingredients or metabolites, or with other medically- determined nutrient requirements, whose dietary management cannot be achieved only by modification of the normal diet. Dietary foods for special medical purposes are classified in the following three categories: (a) nutritionally complete foods with a standard nutrient formulation which, used in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions, may constitute the sole source of nourishment for the persons for whom they are intended; (b) nutritionally complete foods with a nutrient-adapted formulation specific for a disease, disorder or medical condition which, used in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions, may constitute the sole source of nourishment for the persons for whom they are intended; (c) nutritionally incomplete foods with a standard formulation or a nutrient- adapted formulation specific for a disease, disorder or medical condition which are not suitable to be used as the sole source of nourishment. The foods referred to in points (a) and (b) may also be used as a partial replacement or as a supplement to the patient’s diet.

2012/01/26
Committee: ENVI

2011/0156(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point h a (new)

(ha) ‘food intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort’ means food specifically formulated and presented to compensate for expenditure sustained during intense muscular effort, in particular for sportsmen.

2012/01/26
Committee: ENVI

2011/0156(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3

3. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 15 to adapt the definitions of 'infant formula', 'follow-on formula', 'processed cereal-based food' and 'baby food' ~~and~~, 'food for special medical purposes' and ‘food intended to meet expenditure for intense muscular effort’ taking into account technical and scientific progress and relevant developments at international level, as appropriate.

2012/01/26
Committee: ENVI

2011/0156(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3

Food referred to in Article 1(1) and (2) may be placed on the market only if it complies with the provisions of this Regulation.

2012/01/26
Committee: ENVI

2011/0156(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. The composition, presentation and labelling of food referred to in Article 1(1) and 1(2) satisfy the nutritional requirements of the persons for whom they are intended. They give consumers sufficient information to promote risk- free use of these products and safe food, in line with generally-accepted scientific data.

2012/01/26
Committee: ENVI

2011/0156(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. In the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs for normal consumption the following shall be prohibited: (a) the use of the words ‘specialised nutrition’, either alone or in conjunction with other words, to designate those foodstuffs; (b) all other markings or any presentation likely to give the impression that one of the products referred to in Article 1(1) and 1(2) is involved.

2012/01/26
Committee: ENVI

2011/0156(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1

1. Food referred to in Article 1~~(1)~~ shall comply with any requirement of Union law applicable to food, save as regards changes made to them to ensure their conformity with the definitions given in Article 1.

2012/01/26
Committee: ENVI

2011/0156(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. No later than ...*, the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and the Council a report – accompanied, where appropriate, by a legislative proposal – on the need to control the marketing of low-calorie diets. ______________ * OJ: please insert date: three years after the entry into force of this Regulation.

2012/01/26
Committee: ENVI

2011/0000(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses the urgent need to reduce tax barriers for cross-border workers and employers in order to facilitate ~~citizens’~~their mobility;

2012/03/30
Committee: ECON

2011/0000(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Emphasises the importance of pursuing a European strategy to support social entrepreneurship, a sector marked by inclusive, smart and sustainable growth; considers that the regulation aiming to create a European social entrepreneurship fund label is a first step in this direction and welcomes it;

2012/03/30
Committee: ECON

2010/2304(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that the cost in administrative and planning terms of implementing national and European broadband support programmes is considerable; calls, therefore, on the Commission and the Member States to simplify conditions for support as well as procedures as far as possible, in order to step up the flow of funds and foster the economic development of the areas concerned;

2011/03/24
Committee: REGI

2010/2277(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. WObserves that European Union policies on the single market and regional development are highly complementary and are both conducive to a Europe marked by cohesion and competitiveness; welcomes the Commission’s proposals aimed at deepening the single market;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2277(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that in a globalised world the single market has to ensure the best possible business environment for enterprises, and to take the specific nature and diversity of SMEs into account in order to foster job creation, innovation and entrepreneurship in all EU regions, including rural areas; welcomes, therefore, the planned assessment of the ‘Small Business Act’ and the reinforcement of the ‘Think Small First’ principle; draws attention to the importance of local businesses for social ties, employment and dynamism in disadvantaged areas, particularly urban districts facing difficulties or sparsely populated areas; calls for them to receive staunch support under the Union’s regional policy;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2277(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that single market accessibility for all EU regions is a prerequisite for the free movement of people, goods, capital and services, and thus for a strong and dynamic single market; points out, in this connection, the essential role played by the Union's regional policy in terms of developing infrastructure, particularly in the less developed, border and outermost regions; advocates a regional approach making use of the Structural Funds to encourage investment in cross-border energy, transport, communication, health, environmental, research and education infrastructure in order to provide access to essential services for all and to ensure harmonious functioning of the internal market; calls for the development of innovative sources of funding (such as public-private partnerships, project bonds and user charges); calls on the Commission and the Member States jointly to address the complexity of the rules governing revenue- generating projects;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2277(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Underlines that regions situated on the internal borders of the single market are the first to experience the consequences of removing those borders; asks the Commission to take into account concerns regarding the ‘threshold effect’ between border regions that enjoy comparable degrees of development but receive significantly different levels of financial support under the Union's regional policy; calls for a debate on creating a fair and legitimate intermediate category ~~betwe~~to complement the current ‘convergence’ and ‘regional competitiveness and employment’ objectives;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2277(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Stresses that the single market requires an adequately funded regional policy for the period after 2013 and that its budget must on no account be less than that which applies during the current period, 2007-2013;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2277(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Takes the view that territorial cooperation (including European Groupings of Territorial Cooperation (EGTCs) and macro-regional strategies) makes a decisive contribution to removing visible and invisible internal borders within the single market and further developing that market; calls, in this connection, for the post-2013 budget for territorial cooperation to be increased; would like access to European regional cooperation funding to be simplified to facilitate participation, inter alia, by private parties;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2277(INI)

Iosif MATULA, Andrey KOVATCHEV, Joachim ZELLER, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12

12. AWelcomes the role played by the Committee of the Regions in involving local and regional parties in the debate on the Single Market Act; asks the Commission ~~further~~to continue to involve the Committee of the Regions and Parliament, and to work with them in order continuously to monitor the potential and actual consequences for regions of the deepening of the single market; welcomes, therefore, the idea of a single market forum.

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2276(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recognises that Roma ~~continue to be victims of persistent~~population faces discrimination in many Member States and that this situation is exacerbated by the current economic and financial crisis; calls on those Member States ~~which the EU Fundamental Rights Agency identified as having severe problems~~ to fully exploit the EUfinancial resources available under the ~~Structural~~EU Funds, and in particular the ERDF, ESF and E~~SF;~~AFRD.

2010/12/10
Committee: DEVE

2010/2276(INI)

Andrey KOVATCHEV, Iosif MATULA, Petru Constantin LUHAN, Joachim ZELLER, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Encourages the use of EU funds for building of new houses or renovation of existing ones, improving of engineering infrastructure, local utilities, communication systems, education, measurements for access to the job market etc., which should lead to social and economic inclusion marginalised communities

2010/12/10
Committee: DEVE

2010/2276(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Sophie AUCONIE, Andrey KOVATCHEV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Recalls that European programmes and funding are available and can be used for education, housing and employment of Roma people but that the local authorities, civil society and the potential target groups of these programmes are insufficiently informed about them; calls on the Commission and Member States to improve communication and the promotion of financing opportunities available in these fields;

2010/12/10
Committee: DEVE

2010/2276(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Andrey KOVATCHEV, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Calls for better advice to project organisers eligible for European funding for the integration of Roma people, by creating platforms for information, analyses and exchanges of good practices;

2010/12/10
Committee: DEVE

2010/2276(INI)

Andrey KOVATCHEV, Iosif MATULA, Petru Constantin LUHAN, Sabine VERHEYEN, Joachim ZELLER, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Recommends Member States to consider making the allocation of new housing to marginalised communities conditional on social commitments on their part, such as appropriate participation in the process of building the new establishments, obligatory school attendance for children (pre- schooling and for the whole period of schooling), and the acceptance of jobs offered by job mediators, in order to ensure their real, effective and sustainable integration.

2010/12/10
Committee: DEVE

2010/2245(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that innovation can be addressed most effectively at the regional level, where physical proximity fosters partnership between actors such as universities, research organisations and industry; notes that the most dynamic technology industries are not necessarily located in or near capital cities but in the proximity of the most innovative universities;

2011/03/04
Committee: REGI

2010/2245(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Underlines the need to detect sleeping innovators, in particular among SMEs; points to the important role of intermediate organisations in detecting sleeping innovators, providing incentives, giving advice and supporting innovation; takes the view that these organisations should be strengthened and that a programme aimed at improving training, qualifications and expertise should be developed for them;

2011/03/04
Committee: REGI

2010/2245(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses the need to strengthen the links between EU budget instruments and EIB funding; recognises the investment leverage potential of these sources of funding and asks for them to be strengthened, especially as regards JEREMIE and JESSICA; emphasises the need to develop funding instruments that are geared to the specific circumstances and needs of the smallest firms and to considerably simplify the procedures for gaining access to the funding;

2011/03/04
Committee: REGI

2010/2245(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Considers that priority should be given to fostering the development at regional level of an innovation culture, both among entrepreneurs, young people undergoing vocational training and workers and among the partners who have an influence on business activities, such as regional public-decision makers, research centres, clusters and funding bodies, which in many cases are not sufficiently aware of the innovation capacities of the firms in their regions, in particular the SMEs (including micro- enterprises and craft firms);

2011/03/04
Committee: REGI

2010/2211(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Alain CADEC

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Points to the increased importance of cohesion policy following the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, and to the fact that a third pillar – territorial cohesion – has been added to it, and notes that the regions are best placed to implement that policy on an active basis and that sectoralisation iswould therefore be counterproductive;

2010/12/17
Committee: REGI

2010/2211(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Points out that the success of economic and social cohesion policy can be clearly seen in the 271 regions of the 27 Member States and notes that the subsidiarity principle and multilevel governance and partnership are fundamental prerequisites for that success; reaffirms its position on best practice, as set out in its resolution of 24 March 2009 on best practices in the field of regional policy and obstacles to the use of the Structural Funds;

2010/12/17
Committee: REGI

2010/2211(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – indent 1

we need sustainable economic growth which has a positive impact on the labour market in ~~both urban and rural~~urban, rural and extremely remote areas;

2010/12/17
Committee: REGI

2010/2211(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Alain CADEC, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Endorses the view that that the ESF must remain an integral component of cohesion policy and be strengthened; calls for greater coordination with cohesion policy measures and rural development measures under the ERDF so that rural regions can be properly involved and resources used more efficiently;

2010/12/17
Committee: REGI

2010/2211(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Danuta Maria HÜBNER, Seán KELLY, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Alain CADEC

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Insists, in keeping with a spirit of solidarity, on specific support for the EU- 27's mo‘least’ d~~isadvantaged regions~~eveloped regions (Objective 1); stresses, at the same time, the need for a powerful Objective 2 ~~and sound transitional rule~~for the 'most' developed regions and fair provisions for intermediate regions;

2010/12/17
Committee: REGI

2010/2211(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Alain CADEC, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Points out that funds must be spent transparently and efficiently in the regions, on the basis of rules that are as simple as possible and sound management; urges that, in keeping with the proportionality principle, the frequency of checks should be commensurate with the risk of irregularities;

2010/12/17
Committee: REGI

2010/2211(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Alain CADEC, Maurice PONGA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 14

14. Notes that a five-year period is too short, since authorisation procedures would be much too long and would not make it possible to use resources efficiently; points to the fact that a seven-year period has proved its worth in the past and that the programming period should in no circumstances be shorter; underscores the fact that a seven-year period, until 2020, would make the link with the EU 2020 strategy clear; notes that it might make sense thereafter to consider a 10-year model (five years + five years) in such a way as to match the scheduling of financing priorities with the terms of office of Parliament and the Commission, combining this with a vision and a policy strategy stretching over 10 years;

2010/12/17
Committee: REGI

2010/2211(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Alain CADEC, Maurice PONGA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 15

15. Stresses that cofinancing and the n+2 and n+3 rules should be maintained~~, possibly combined with greater flexibility to cover exceptional situations which might be expected to arise within the nex~~ (except for the first programming ~~period~~year); insists that unspent funds should be made available for other regions and not returned to the Member States;

2010/12/17
Committee: REGI

2010/2211(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 18

18. Takes the view that, in addition to assisting the regions, cohesion policy measures also raise the EU's profile in the regions, and points out that better ~~public relations work in the Member States could demonstrate this even more~~communication by all those involved – European institutions, Member States and local authorities - could make the added value of European action even clearlyer;

2010/12/17
Committee: REGI

2010/2206(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Points out that the Treaty of Lisbon grants new powers to the European Union with regard to tourism, particularly with a view to enhancing that sector’s competitiveness and capacity for dynamic and sustainable growthunder Article 195 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the European Union now has powers in the field of tourism, complementing the action taken by the Member States, in order to promote the competitiveness of EU enterprises in this sector;

2011/02/11
Committee: REGI

2010/2206(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Alain CADEC, Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Emphasises that tourism has a tangible impact on the economic, social and territorial cohesion of all the Member States; stresses also that tourism represents the main resource of some EU regions, particularly the outermost regions or regions that are lagging behind economically, and that it has a direct impact on growth in other sectors;

2011/02/11
Committee: REGI

2010/2206(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Considers that social, economic and environmental sustainability are a prerequisite for developing and maintaining all tourism activity; urges the Commission to develop a ‘European label’, along the lines of the European Heritage Label, in order to create a profile for products and services of excellence and at the same time enhance Europe’s image worldwide;

2011/02/11
Committee: REGI

2010/2206(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Emphasises the key role which the ERDF and the EAFRD can play in developing the tourism potential of the rural environment and diversifying its economic activities;

2011/02/11
Committee: REGI

2010/2206(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. C~~alls on the Commissi~~onsiders that the visibility and attractiveness of EU regions are enhanced by the activities of the cultural and creative industries; calls on, the Member States and the local and regional authorities to ~~encourage and support the development of networks and the creation of partnerships for the exchange of good practice~~make appropriate use of the sectoral or structural financial instruments and the financial engineering systems available at European level in order to encourage culture and creativity and to support the industries working in this sector; hopes that concrete initiatives will be undertaken in support of innovation and the development of new information technologies, and that access will be facilitated for stakeholders in the tourist industry, and particularly small– and medium–sized enterprises, to the relevant financial instruments; calls on the Commission, the Member States and the local and regional authorities to encourage and support the development of networks and the creation of partnerships for the exchange of good practice;

2011/02/11
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas citizens must be placed at the centre of the priorities of territorial cooperation, in particular in the context of cross-border cooperation,

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Believes that greater complementarity between the ‘territorial cooperation’ objective, on the one hand, and the ‘convergence’ and ‘competitiveness and employment’ objectives, on the other, is needed; suggests that regional operational programmes should participate in the cross-border and transnational projects that concern them by ~~earmarking funding by territory for~~defining a territorial approach to the allocation of funding, for the benefit of priority projects identified in advance and agreed with ~~their partners in~~ the programme partners, in accordance with the principles of multi-level governance and the partnership;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Encourages the Member States and regions to set up multi-regional operational programmes to address common territorial problems, such as the presence of a mountain range or a river basin which characterises the territory; invites the Commission consider the rule changes which would be needed so that cross- border multi-regional operational programmes could be established along similar lines;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22a. Takes the view that cross-border EGTCs offer an excellent opportunity to build Europe at territorial level with the involvement of EU citizens; calls on cross-border EGTCs to launch and run a ‘cross-border civil society forum’ and to support cross-border citizens’ initiatives;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2142(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Notes that cohesion funds are subject to particularly complex rules and are implemented differently from other EU spending areas, which makes them more vulnerable to errors; draws attention to the fact that the error rate in cohesion spending remains the highest of all EU payments with greater than 5 % in 2009; ~~is aware of the~~highlights, nonetheless, the major decrease in the error rate in comparison to 2008;

2011/02/21
Committee: REGI

2010/2142(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. In the context of the revision of the Financial Regulation, stresses the need to harmonise rules and management schemes for cohesion programmes under shared management, where it is demonstrated that this can bring improvements, while retaining procedures that have proved effective; notes that any governance problem between the Financial Regulation and the cohesion regulations can be avoided by better alignment of eligibility rules across various policies;

2011/02/21
Committee: REGI

2010/2142(DEC)

Maurice PONGA, Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to consider the advisability of developing the 'contract of confidence’ principle so as to be able to scale down checks on systems that have proved their worth in combating errors and fraud;

2011/02/21
Committee: REGI

2010/2139(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Notes that the current framework of cohesion policy has proven to allow a flexible and appropriate response to the rapidly deteriorating socioeconomic environment; underlines that Member States appreciated that the crisis measures could be tailored to their specific needs; calls nonetheless for greater flexibility in the rules to enable crises to be combated;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2139(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Highlights the particular added value of more synergies between ERDF and ESF~~, since~~ and the rural development component of the EARFD; notes that experience clearly proves that successful performance of ESF- financed programmes is essential in order to maximise the effectiveness of ERDF funding for economic actions;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2139(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Believes that simplification of provisions and procedures ~~at EU and national level should continue without creating major difficulties for beneficiaries and~~should continue both at EU and Member State level, primarily through developing improved rules for the future negotiation of regulations applicable to the next programming period; considers that regional policy should be better adapted to the needs of users and that this simplification should contribute to the increased efficiency of this policy; regrets that, due to superfluous bureaucracy, overcomplicated rules and a lack of harmonised procedures, many funds remain unused;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2095(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Alain CADEC

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that the vast majority of our industrial market is made up of small and medium-sized enterprises: any integrated strategy on the future of European industries should therefore focus primarily on an enhanced approach toward SMEs as the key to territorial cohesion; calls for further simplification of the procedures for obtaining EU funding, and for SMEs to be direct beneficiaries of such funding;

2010/11/12
Committee: REGI

2010/2095(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Alain CADEC

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Notes that an integrated strategy for EU industries should focus on overcoming the skill shortages affecting SMEs and industries. In this respect, emphasises the need for coordinated initiatives to improve the teaching of STEM subjects (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) at all levels, whilst promoting additional coordinated and targeted higher qualifications; calls on the Member States to include vocational qualifications for entrepreneurship in university programmes and other higher education courses; ~~highlights the need to revise the European Social Fund in accordance with the revised skills~~emphasises that the European Social Fund must adapt to the changing requirements ~~set by~~of the industrial sector;

2010/11/12
Committee: REGI

2010/2088(INI)

Markus PIEPER, László SURJÁN, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. Emphasises that 'Measuring regional economic performance and prosperity' is clearly an aspect of cohesion and structural policy and thus falls within the sphere of responsibility of the Committee on Regional Development;

2010/10/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2088(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Approves the Commission’s proposal to make ~~a set of~~other indicators – in addition to GDP figures – available for EU policies with a view to improving both the circumstances in which decisions are taken and the response to the concerns of citizens in Europe’s various regions; points out, in that connection, that a number of national and international actors have acknowledged the relevance of indicators which supplement GDP figures; to that end, supports Eurostat’s activities;

2010/10/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2088(INI)

Markus PIEPER, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Takes the view that the environmental and social orientation of the Structural Funds hitherto has been decisive in fostering sustainable regional development; calls for the pro-business, social and environmental aspects of the 2020 Strategy to be made more central to the approach underpinning the Structural Funds as well as from 2014;

2010/10/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2088(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. In the light of the ever closer degree of interdependence between economic, social and environmental issues, takes the view that focusing on GDP alone is likely to provide an incomplete impression that takes no account of the actual situations in the regions~~, and could result in poor choices being made and inappropriate decisions being taken~~;

2010/10/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2088(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Reiterates that the condition of natural environments, environmental sustainability, fairness and social integration are now just as important as the economy among the key issues underpinning the European model for development; states, furthermore, that an overarching approach should be taken with regard to assessing people’s wellbeing and quality of life, as well as regions’ vulnerabilitieseducation, health, protecting the well-being of citizens, social integration and environmental protection are issues underpinning the European model for development, which is based on a social market economy which seeks to guarantee smart, sustainable and inclusive growth;

2010/10/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2088(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission, therefore, to introduce, as a matter of priority ~~and urgency,~~, relevant indicators in addition to GDP for environmental and social issues, with a view to establishing a more comprehensive picture of regional cohesion policies, ~~at the latest~~if possible by the start of the 2014-2020 programming period;

2010/10/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2088(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Alain CADEC

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Proposes that in future the criteria governing regions’ eligibility for EU funding should be considered in the light of the set of relevant indicators that ismay be brought in; calls for environmental and social indicators to be ~~given the same status as~~taken into account alongside GDP when it comes to classifying the regions.

2010/10/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2087(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers the Black Sea region to be a strategically crucial area and ~~deems~~believes that an EU Strategy for the Black Sea will contribute to realising the aims of European integration, as well as being essential to ithe region’s sustainable and coordinated development;

2010/11/10
Committee: REGI

2010/2087(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Alain CADEC, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Believes that in order to launch an effective Strategy for the Black Sea, it is vital to involve fully all the countries concerned, with no distinction between EU and non-EU countries; calls for cooperation between all the relevant regions and stresses the importance of participation by bodies at all levels of governance in order to ensure the success of an integrated approach, through the involvement of existing organisations, such as the BSEC, the PABSEC and the Commission on the Black Sea, but also through the creation of new ones where necessary, with the aim of jointly identifying common challenges and available resources, as well as areas where coordinated action can bring significant added value;

2010/11/10
Committee: REGI

2010/2087(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Alain CADEC, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Encourages the development, in the context of the Strategy, of an integrated approach and the use of the well- established principles of the EU’s Cohesion Policy; in particular, believes that cross-border cooperation between regions should be promoted, in order to tackle common problems through coordinated action; points out that the European Grouping for Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) offers a suitable cooperation framework for structured, multi-level governance; calls on the Commission to explore ways of better coordinating the various European instruments providing for cross-border cooperation on the Union’s external borders;

2010/11/10
Committee: REGI

2010/2087(INI)

Alain CADEC, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. encourages the development of synergies between the various Union policies that come into play in the Strategy, particularly the structural funds, the Research and Development Framework Programme and the Trans- European Transport Networks;

2010/11/10
Committee: REGI

2010/2087(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Alain CADEC

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Having regard to the importance of the Black Sea region for Europe’s energy supply, considers a thorough evaluation of ~~all~~ the benefits and environmental implications of currently planned and future energy projects essential; believes that all possible measures should be taken to facilitate a prompt and effective response to all potential environmental disasters or technical accidents; in this regard, ~~regard~~considers it as crucial that all the countries and regions concerned agree well in advance on how to deal with these events from an environmental, economic and technical point of view;

2010/11/10
Committee: REGI

2010/2072(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 1

1. Calls on the Commission to submit forthwith a report on the use made to date of the Globalisation Adjustment Fund, setting out in particular a detailed account of how the appropriations were used and what proportion of overall funding they accounted for by comparison with other national and company-specific support measures; calls on the Commission to draw initial conclusions from that report and rapidly submitHopes that the annual report and mid- term review will make it possible to gauge the results obtained through EGF co- funded measures and will include proposals for the improvement of the fund;

2010/06/09
Committee: ECON

2010/2072(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 2

2. Calls on the Commission to put forward a proposal forthwith stipulating that firms that are making workers redundant and which recorded profits in past reporting periods must contribute in an appropriate manner to meeting the social costs arising out of plant relocations and job cuts and securing the refinancing of the EGF;deleted

2010/06/09
Committee: ECON

2010/2072(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 3

3. Calls on the Commission to replace the EGF in the medium term with a restructuring fund, financed by means of an EU-wide plant relocation levy and offering support to enterprises in proportion to the level of lasting replacement jobs created by them;deleted

2010/06/09
Committee: ECON

2010/2072(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 4

4. Calls on the Commission to consider the introducetion of criteria by means of which the granting of EGF assistance can be linked as a matter of priority to restructuring measures designed to secure and create employment and ecologically sustainable and socially balanced development in the regions concernedwhich guarantee added value for the EGF over structural funds;

2010/06/09
Committee: ECON

2010/2072(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 5

5. Calls on the Commission~~, when allocating EGF assistance, to give the social partners a formal role in the decision-making proces~~ to ensure that the social partners are closely involved in the application development and assessment phases;

2010/06/09
Committee: ECON

2010/2072(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 6

6. Calls on the Commission to ~~broaden the criteria for mobilisation of the EGF, in keeping wi~~recommend an adjustment to the EGF operating procedures applicable beyond the t~~he above-mentioned conditions, to cover delocalisation within the European Union and to~~emporary provisions, which will cease to apply at the end of 2011, together with a simplif~~y the~~ ied application procedure ~~significantly~~, with a view to making it a more effective crisis response instrument;

2010/06/09
Committee: ECON

2010/2072(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Alain CADEC

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 7

7. Calls on the Commission to increase significantly the financial framework for the EGF, in the light of the current economic and financial crisis and the Fund’s broader remit, and to create a separate title in the budget for the EGFrecommend the continuation of the EGF after 2013, and its endowments with a separate budget line.

2010/06/09
Committee: ECON

2010/2053(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Hopes that the aims of the directive may start to be achieved in the near future and that the whole of the EU and its regions may benefit, thus contributing to real economic, social and territorial cohesion; underlines the role of the structural funds and other funding instruments in providing access to and ensuring the availability of infrastructure such as transport, telecommunications and research and innovation, in granting access to public goods and services in the regions, particularly in areas unless attractive to investors, and in helping to encourage exchanges of good practice in the provision of key services; demands, in this context, greater coherence and coordination between all policies;

2010/11/11
Committee: REGI

2010/0377(COD)

Gaston FRANCO, Amalia SARTORI, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Sophie AUCONIE, Julie GIRLING

Proposal for a directive
Recital 22 a (new)

(22 a) There needs to be a systematic evaluation of the need to adapt the annex to this Directive listing dangerous substances, following the adaptations to the technical progress of Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008. This would enable a functional link to be ensured between the Regulation and this Directive and would also provide for increased protection of human health and the environment.

2011/06/28
Committee: ENVI

2010/0377(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4

4. '‘new establishment'’ means an establishment that ~~is newly constructed or~~ has yet to enter into operation ;

2011/06/28
Committee: ENVI

2010/0377(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7

7. ‘installation’ means a technical unit, within an establishment, in which dangerous substances are produced, used, handled or stored, including underground, and includes all the equipment, structures, pipework, machinery, tools, private railway sidings, docks, unloading quays serving the installation, jetties, warehouses or similar structures, floating or otherwise, necessary for the operation of the installation;

2011/06/28
Committee: ENVI

2010/0377(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall require the operator to draw up a document setting out the major-accident prevention policy (hereinafter: "MAPP") and to ensure that it is properly implemented. The MAPP shall be established in writing. It shall be designed to guarantee a high level of protection for human health and the environment. It shall be proportionate to the major-accident hazards. It shall include the operator's overall aims and principles of action, the role and responsibility of management ~~and shall address safety culture~~ with respect to the control of major-accident hazards.

2011/06/28
Committee: ENVI

2010/0377(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) the authorities designated for that purpose by the Member State draw up an external emergency plan for the measures to be taken outside the establishment within ~~one~~two years following receipt of the information from the operator pursuant to point (b).

2011/06/28
Committee: ENVI

2010/0377(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1

Member States shall ensure that internal and external emergency plans are reviewed~~, tested, and where necessary revised and updated by the operators and designated authorities respectively~~ and tested at suitable intervals of no longer than three years. TWhe review shall take into account changes occurring in the establishments concerned or within the emergency services concerned, new technical knowledge, and knowledge concerning the response to major accident necessary the plans shall be revised and updated by the operators and designated authorities.

2011/06/28
Committee: ENVI

2010/0377(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Sophie AUCONIE, Agnès LE BRUN

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall ensure that the information referred to in Annex V is permanently available to the public, including in an electronic format. The information shall be reviewed and where necessary updated at least once aevery three years.

2011/06/28
Committee: ENVI

2010/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation - amending act
Article 1 - point 5 a (new)

Regulation (EC) No. 1234/2007
Article 118 y - paragraph 3 - point a

5a. Article 118y(3)(a) shall be replaced by the following: "(a) where a traditional expression referred to in Article 118u(1)(a) appears on the label in accordance with the legislation of a Member State or the specifications referred to in Article 118c of this Regulation;”

2011/05/13
Committee: AGRI

2009/2235(INI)

Markus PIEPER, Sabine VERHEYEN, Sophie AUCONIE, Joachim ZELLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Stresses that education, training, research and innovation are key instruments to foster the development of the EU and make it more competitive in the face of global challenges; is of the opinion that there must be regular investment in these fields and that innovation in particular should be measured by its results; calls in this regard for a better coordination of the structural funds and the Framework program to maximise the benefits of the funding for research and innovation in the future;

2010/03/29
Committee: REGI

2009/2234(INI)

Markus PIEPER, Sophie AUCONIE, Sabine VERHEYEN, Joachim ZELLER

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. stressing the fact that, based on the National Strategic Reports for 2009, the Member States appear to have made rather different uses of the instruments, means and methods for facilitating cohesion policy proposed by the Commission to combat the crisis and increase actual expenditure (such as ~~use of 100% financing,~~ changes to the strategic guidelines and the axes and financing for the operational programmes and the response to the simplification of implementing procedures);

2010/03/26
Committee: REGI

2009/2234(INI)

Markus PIEPER, Sophie AUCONIE, Sabine VERHEYEN, Joachim ZELLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Acknowledges the significant problem posed by the reduction in the contribution of national co-financing to programmes, which affects Objective 2, due to the major financial problems of many Member States, and supports Commission policy ~~regarding a ‘100% compensation’ option, following a request by Member States concerning their public expenditure share in co-financed projects~~, and therefore considers it necessary for the amendment of Regulation 1083/2006 in its present form accepted by the Council to be adopted and implemented quickly in Parliament;

2010/03/26
Committee: REGI

2009/2233(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Endorses the views expressed in the Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion con ~~the main factors in territorial cohesion; makes specific reference to respect for region~~cerning competitiveness, which 'depends on building links with other territories to ensure that common assets are used in a cordinated and sustainable way' in order to release the potential inherent in the territorial diversity ~~and~~of the ~~development of regional potential and competitiveness, emphasising the importance of accessibility through public services and suitable~~European Union; in that connection, emphasises the importance for competitiveness and the opening-up of all territories of the coordinated and integrated development of transport and ICTs and the pooling, where appropriate, of energy, healthcare, research, education and environmental protection infrastructure~~, and~~; calls on the Commission to bring forward concrete proposals for implementing the objective of territorial cohesion;

2010/07/01
Committee: REGI

2009/2233(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Takes the view that the Member States must support a place-based approach to framing and implementing cohesion policy; acknowledges that the role of the regions varies between Member States depending on their political and administrative structure; requests that an improvement be sought, by promoting the principle of decentralisation, over the current programming period, in which the regions are administering on average only 30.5% of the overall budget allocated to cohesion policy, with the remainder being administered by central governments;

2010/07/01
Committee: REGI

2009/2233(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Takes the view that if the key indicator in deciding which areas are eligible for EU financial assistance should be the level of GDP ~~and that~~, the introduction of other indicators can ~~only~~ be admitted after studies have been conducted on their relevance and on the way in which that information is collected and processed;

2010/07/01
Committee: REGI

2009/2232(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Markus PIEPER, Maurice PONGA, Nuno TEIXEIRA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to make these Member State databases fully searchable and compatible, so as to facilitate an EU-wide overview of the data presented, while preserving their local relevance; is of the view that, in this respect, dual-language versions (local language(s)-~~English~~one of the Commission’s working languages) should be considered;

2010/03/29
Committee: REGI

2009/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Calls for additional essential information to be provided when publishing the lists of beneficiaries; recommends, therefore, that, besides the current minimum requirements, consideration be given to including location and comprehensive contact details, summaries of approved projects, types of support (e.g. loans, grants, venture capital, etc.) and a description of the project partners (e.g. legal status, size, etc.), summaries of approved projects and possible co-financers as elements of the disclosure of beneficiaries;

2010/03/29
Committee: REGI

2009/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines that full compliance with the ETI requirements could be better ensured by means of ~~stronger regulations~~closer scrutiny and sanctions in cases of non-compliance;

2010/03/29
Committee: REGI

2009/2232(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Stresses the importance of accurate and timely information delivery by the Member States ~~as a preventive measure~~ in the context of the control system, and thus the need to establish a link between the ETI and financial controls and auditing; reiterates its view that the early warning system (EWS) should also ~~cover EU funds managed in partnership with Member States~~work closely with the Central Exclusion Database;

2010/03/29
Committee: REGI

2009/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Reiterates its request for the provision of information regarding recoveries and withdrawals under the ETI; urges the Member States ~~to provide this information in~~and the Commission, when these procedures have been carried out fuoll~~, and the Commission to make it available to the budgetary authority and the public along with information on financial corrections and fraud~~owing a confirmed case of fraud, to make this information available to the budgetary authority and the public;

2010/03/29
Committee: REGI

2009/2232(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Nuno TEIXEIRA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Urges auditors to take a tougher line on communication and information requirements~~, including ‘naming and shaming’ and the use of financial corrections in cases of non-compliance~~;

2010/03/29
Committee: REGI

2009/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Reiterates its view that partnership can contribute to transparency, responsiveness, efficiency and legitimacy in all the phases of cohesion programming and implementation, and can increase commitment to, and public ownership of, programme outputs; calls, therefore, on the Member States and managing authorities to involve partners more closely ~~in all the phas~~at appropriate stages of cohesion programming and implementation ~~at an early stage~~ and to give them ~~full~~ access to ~~all project documen~~documents relevant to the projects, with a view to making better use of their experience and knowledge;

2010/03/29
Committee: REGI

2009/2232(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Sophie AUCONIE, Nuno TEIXEIRA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Calls for more guidance from the Commission on how to put the partnership clause into practice under current programmes, and for sufficiently binding rules on partnership in future regulatory texts;deleted

2010/03/29
Committee: REGI

2009/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Calls for the provision of better- targeted and more regular information to partner organisations, and for enhanced use of technical assistance to support partnership, inter alia by giving partner organisations the opportunity to take part in training events organised for delivery bodies; calls for these training events to be accessible in multimedia versions in order to broaden the target audience and to allow ex-post consultation by partner organisations; emphasises the usefulness of such a measure for the partners of the most distant regions of the Union, such as outermost regions;

2010/03/29
Committee: REGI

2009/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Calls for the timely publication of online information, including direct access to ~~projec~~relevant documentation ~~(application, feasibility study, cost-benefit analysis, environmental impact assessment, etc.) on~~on the European Union’s financial commitments as regards major projects, as soon as possible after the Commission receives an application for funding from a Member State and before it takes any decision on financing; ~~this Commission webpage should allow the submission of comments regarding such projects;~~

2010/03/29
Committee: REGI

2009/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital Ca (new)

Ca. whereas funding application procedures that are too complicated and an excessive number of checks are likely to discourage potential beneficiaries of cohesion policy,

2010/07/15
Committee: REGI

2009/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that multi-level governance allows better exploitation of the potential of territorial cooperation thanks to the relations developed among private and public actors across borders; urges those Member States which have not yet done so to adopt as soon as possible the necessary provisions allowing the setting up of European Groupings ofor Territorial Cooperation; recommends that the Commission promote exchange of information between the EGTCs already created and those in the process of being set up; congratulates the Committee of the Regions on the quality of its work on EGTCs and welcomes the provision of information on them through the EGTC Internet portal;

2010/07/15
Committee: REGI

2009/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Member States also to strengthen, where appropriate, the role of regional and local authorities in programme management and implementation~~, w~~ and to build up the re ~~appropriate~~sources at their disposal; recommends the adoption in the cohesion policy of the local development methodology based on local partnerships, in particular for projects related to urban, rural and cross-border issues;

2010/07/15
Committee: REGI

2009/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Commission to create a training and mobility schysteme for local and regional actors involved in running cohesion policy programmes, in order to raise the standard of proposed projects and meet the cohesion policy’s objective of efficiency;

2010/07/15
Committee: REGI

2009/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Is convinced that compliance with the procedures cannot be at the expense of the quality of interventions; asks the Commission for a more result-oriented policy in the future, focused on quality performance and strategic project development rather than on controls; to this end, urges the Commission to develop objective and measurable indicators which are comparable across the Union and to give further consideration to the need for flexible rules in the event of economic crises;

2010/07/15
Committee: REGI

2009/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Welcomes the ongoing simplification of the Financial Regulation and the Structural Funds regulations; calls for a simpler architecture for the Funds after 2013, not as a consequence of the economic crisis but as a general principle of the future cohesion policy, in order to avoid discouraging potential partners from taking part in projects; recommends that greater transparency in respect of the use of the EU Funds should not lead to a disproportionately increased administrative burden;

2010/07/15
Committee: REGI

2009/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls on the Commission to take on board the principles of differentiation and proportionality in future regulations and to adapt requirements according to the size of programmes and nature of partners, especially when small public authorities are involved; asks for wider use of lump- sums and flat rates for all Funds, in particular for overheads and technical assistance; proposes that provision be made for more flexible evaluation criteria for innovative projects and softer control requirements for pilot projects; encourages the Commission to develop the principle of a ‘bond of trust’ with the Member States undertaking to and succeeding in making good use of the Funds;

2010/07/15
Committee: REGI

2009/2222(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. considering Article 14 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Protocol No 26 annexed to the treaties,

2010/12/15
Committee: ECON

2009/2222(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Given that social services of general interest make a major contribution to the achievement of the EU's goals as enshrined in the Treaties, particularly in terms of promoting economic, social and territorial cohesion, calls on the Commission to use the evaluation and revision of the Monti- Kroes package to strengthen legal security in the field of social services of general interest, using a tailored approach which can easily be applied by organising public authorities and takes into account the specific ways in which social services are organised, their legal status and their strongly local nature, as well as the responsibility of the Member States for organising and financing these services;

2010/12/15
Committee: ECON

2009/2222(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Calls on the Commission to adopt a communication establishing a methodology for organising local authorities setting out guidelines for applying European rules, while enabling local authorities to handle European rules flexibly considering their national and local specificities;

2010/12/15
Committee: ECON

2009/2222(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Calls on the Commission to consider the advisability of putting forward a de minimis regulation specific to social services of general interest or to adjust the de minimis threshold for such services, in order to focus EU checks on State aid on social services likely to have a significant impact on cross-border trade within the EU;

2010/12/15
Committee: ECON

2009/2222(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Urges the Commission to act in response to the ~~lack of regulation curre~~need for legal certaintly ~~affecting SSGI, by creating an unambiguous legislative framework grounded in legal certainty, in line with~~for those operating in the SSGI sector by establishing an unambiguous and functional legal framework, particularly by providing the public authorities which organise them wi~~shes of all interested parti~~th a methodology indicating how to apply European rules;

2011/03/04
Committee: REGI

2009/2222(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission to clarify how the concepts of economic and non- economic activityies and effects on trade are to be applied to social services of general interest and the specific arrangements for applying the concept of the ‘'level of compensation needed (...) on the basis of an analysis of the costs which a typical undertaking, well run and adequately provided with means of transport (...) would have incurred’' (CJUE, C-280/00, Altmark);

2010/12/15
Committee: ECON

2009/2222(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses that wthe~~re an official~~ act of entrustment has been transparently drawn up and made public and includes parameters for calculating compensation based on coverage of the actual cost of providing social services of general interest, systematic monitoring of overcompensation should be replaced by intervention only following a substantiated complaint.is a guarantee of transparency which has to be maintained; asks the Commission to consider whether rules set for entrustment and monitoring of overcompensation are appropriate to the characteristics of social services and to take initiatives if they are not deemed appropriate;

2010/12/15
Committee: ECON

2009/2222(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Considers that experience demonstrat~~Emphasises that quality in SSGI provision should be based around a suitable financing method apt to ensure innovative and efficient services; stresses that the profit maximisation objective ~~of commercial providers of SSGI~~must not conflicts with the principles and objectives of SSGI;

2011/03/28
Committee: EMPL

2009/2222(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Stresses that national and local authorities engaged in providing or mandating SSGI need a clear legal basis for their services and expenditures, and that ~~while~~ the information and clarification service developed by the Commission ~~is essential, it~~ should be flanked with a methodology made available to the organis in~~sufficient and does not protect SSGI providers from legal challenge~~g authorities and containing a grid for the application of the EU rules;

2011/03/28
Committee: EMPL

2009/2222(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Emphasises that SSGI are an indispensable investment for Europe’s future, and are under severe pressure due to the economic and banking crises ~~and government austerity programmes~~, which are resulting in even greater demand for them;

2011/03/28
Committee: EMPL

2009/2222(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Emphasises that the quality of services must be based around regular and integrated consultation of users, who are taxpayers, since services must first and foremost meet their needs;

2011/03/28
Committee: EMPL

2009/2222(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Calls for clarification of basic principles on the control of state aid, and for a review of the criteria for calculating compensation of public service obligations, with an eye to transparency vis-à-vis the taxpayer;

2011/03/28
Committee: EMPL

2009/2222(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Calls for the 2005 Monti-Kroes response to the Altmark case to be broadened so as to simplify the rules, improve flexibility in their application, and expand the derogations. ~~The de minimis threshold should be~~Calls on the Commission to assess whether it is appropriate to raised t~~o at least EUR 500 000 over a three-year cycle~~he de minimis threshold applicable to SSGI;

2011/03/28
Committee: EMPL

2009/2203(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Is alarmed by the ongoing and expected contraction of employment in the European Union despite the exceptional efforts of monetary and fiscal policy;

2009/12/09
Committee: ECON

2009/2203(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the intensified coo~~rdin~~peration between the Council, the ECB and the Eurogroup;

2009/12/09
Committee: ECON

2009/2203(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Points out that the objective of price stability can be achieved effectively only if the root causes of inflation are properly addressed; ~~considers that the definition of price stability should be reviewed facing new increases of energy and food prices;~~

2009/12/09
Committee: ECON

2009/2203(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Warns ~~against focusing essentially on~~of the potential consequences for consumer purchasing power of using wage moderation as a ~~way~~n instrument to achieve price stability and maintain competitiveness; recalls that increased global competition has already contributed to a downward pressure on wages, while higher commodity prices have harmed the purchasing power of EU consumers;

2009/12/09
Committee: ECON

2009/2203(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the ECB to develop a plan on how to avoid new asset price bubbles while bearing in mind that restricting the general offer of credit to enterprises and consumers has high costs for employment and economic development;deleted

2009/12/09
Committee: ECON

2009/2203(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Calls upon countries with current account surpluses to stimulate employment and internal demand inter alia by ~~ending wage moderation,~~ introducing minimum wages and making additional sustainable investments while taking into account the rules of the SGP;

2009/12/09
Committee: ECON

2009/2203(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Calls upon countries with current account deficits to curb the excessive ~~consumption~~growth of these deficits and increase sustainable investment;

2009/12/09
Committee: ECON

2009/2203(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Considers that the European budget is not sufficiently large to limit the imbalances between Member States effectively and suggests re~~examin~~viewing its size upwards;

2009/12/09
Committee: ECON

2009/2203(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Suggests using the excessive deficit procedure of the SGP to ensure that Member States avoid excessive ~~deficits and~~ current account ~~surpluse~~deficits;

2009/12/09
Committee: ECON

2009/2203(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Alain CADEC

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Expresses its deep concern over the unsustainable level of public debt and its predicted rapid increase in 2010 and 2011 which forms an even larger burden, bearing in mind that future generations will inherit the growing ~~ecological and private~~ financial debt;

2009/12/09
Committee: ECON

2009/2151(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that the effects of disasters are not confined within the formal and administrative boundaries of regions and Member States; believes, therefore, that the identification of particularly risk-prone areas, such as the isolated and extremely remote regions and certain other regions or islands in the European Union which have special characteristics and specific needs linked to their geography, their topography and the economic and social conditions under which their inhabitants live, should go hand in hand with establishing priority objectives and cooperation mechanisms in such areas; calls on regions to build on already existing territorial cooperation networks in order to develop cooperation focusing more specifically on disaster prevention; believes that the macro-regions, with their functionally-oriented cooperation independent of administrative boundaries, can become effective platforms for cooperation in the field of disaster prevention;

2010/03/02
Committee: REGI

2009/2151(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Alain CADEC

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that the effects of disasters are not confined within the formal and administrative boundaries of regions and Member States; believes, therefore, that the identification of particularly risk-prone areas should go hand in hand with establishing priority objectives and cooperation mechanisms in such areas; calls on regions to build on already existing territorial cooperation networks in order to develop cooperation focusing more specifically on disaster prevention; believes that transfrontier cooperation structures, such as the macro-regions, with their functionally-oriented cooperation independent of administrative boundaries, can become effective platforms for cooperation in the field of disaster prevention;

2010/03/02
Committee: REGI

2009/2151(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Alain CADEC

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Welcomes the Commission proposal to extend the lessons learnt exercises to disaster prevention; calls for particular attention to be paid to the lessons learnt in parts of Europe, such as the extremely remote regions, which face a combination of risks (flooding, cyclones, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes);

2010/03/02
Committee: REGI

2009/2151(INI)

Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Sophie AUCONIE, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Philippe JUVIN, Cristina GUTIÉRREZ-CORTINES, Catherine SOULLIE, Catherine SOULLIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls on the European Commission to propose a more systematic pooling of existing national resources through the creation of a European civil protection force, in order to strengthen the effectiveness of EU prevention mechanisms.

2010/03/24
Committee: ENVI

2009/0128(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)

(6a) Each institution performing authentication of euro coins may apply a handling fee in accordance with this Regulation in order to cover the institution’s expenses related to the process. The handling fee must not be a burden on private individuals.

2010/05/11
Committee: ECON

2009/0128(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)

(2a) The Commission shall publish guidelines within a reasonable time of this Regulation coming into force in order to ensure the technical applicability of the provisions of paragraph 1.

2010/05/11
Committee: ECON

2009/0128(COD)