4 Amendments of Derek VAUGHAN related to 2010/0048(APP)
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 - point vi
Paragraph 1 - point vi
vi. given the current economic climate, make efforts to consider reprioritisation within the budget through the establishment of positive and negativein order to ensure the adequate funding of priorities, bearing in mind however the European added value of the EU budget;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 - point vii
Paragraph 1 - point vii
vii. recognise that these new needs cannot be met only through redeployment or reprioritisation and use of available flexibility mechanisms, without a revision of the MFFthat a revision of the MFF and the flexibility mechanisms included in the IIA is necessary, contrary to the Council's position as set out in its conclusions of 16 March 2010 on the budget guidelines for 2011 and reaffirmed by the Presidency-in- office in its statements during the 15 June 2010 debate on oral question B7- 0310/2010 O- 0074/2010; and that,recall furthermore that new needs stemming from the entry into force of the Lisbon TreatyTreaty of Lisbon should logically entail savings at national and regional level;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 - point x
Paragraph 1 - point x
x. take all necessary steps for a revision of the MFF providing the extra resources necessary to deliver the European External Action Service and other Lisbon-Treaty- related policy priorities, as well as other initiatives, particularly under Heading 1a "Competitiveness Growth and Employment" and Heading 4 "External Relations", providing EU added value allowing the EU to meet its commitments and its citizens’ expectations;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 - point xiii
Paragraph 1 - point xiii
xiii. recognise the importance of flexibility to create reserves and margins allowing the EU to respond to current and future needs, both within the financial framework, within and between headings (such as was necessary to find the resources for Galileo, the Food Facility and the Economic Recovery Plan for example), and in negotiations over its establishment and revision; take note of the fact that Parliament is not prepared to accept any loss ofincreased flexibility norand enter into negotiations over any proposals that do notwould guarantee at least the current stronger degree of flexibility ove, including increasing the threshold for revisions to the financial framework of up to 0,03% of EU GNI (referred to in Article 8(3) of the proposal for a MFF Regulation), as well as increasing the amount available through the Flexibility Instrument and simplifying the procedure for shifting resources between the different Headings of the MFF;