Activities of Sylvana RAPTI related to 2011/2107(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on the Green Paper: From challenges to opportunities: towards a common strategic framework for EU research and innovation funding
Amendments (16)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls for the Common Strategic Framework to promote coordination between research and innovation programmes and the cohesion funds, without depriving the latter of resources;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. CIs of the opinion that, on research and innovation, the European Union is falling behind larger economies like the USA and Japan, as well as huge emerging ones like China; therefore it is encouraging that the Commission is proposing a Common Strategic Framework which should ensure that EU funds on research and innovation are utilised in an effective manner; considers that a more integrated approach is needed to further develop education, research and innovation and to achieve the objective of investing 3% of GDP in research and development; calls for the Common Strategic Framework to promote coordination between research and innovation programmes and the cohesion funds, though not to the detriment of the resources allocated to the funds;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1α. Regards synergies between national administrations (at all levels), universities and research institutes, companies and SMEs and civil society as essential to the successful alignment of research and society’s needs;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Is convinced that investments in research, innovation and education are key elements towards achieving a highly competitive social market economy in Europe; endorses the fact that the re- launch of the single market should open new horizons in the research and innovation sector with an emphasis on knowledge and technology, which constitute a driving force for the future economic development of a competitive service-based society;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Underlines the role which standardisation might play in the promotion of research and innovation by contributing to competitiveness and offering consumers greater security; therefore calls for the importance given to standardisation to be one of the project assessment criteria;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls for the Common Strategic Framework to proceed to an administrative simplification through the development of a more standardised set of rules covering all participants in EU research and innovation programmes; agrees with the Commission that European standards are an important step towards bringing research results to the market and for the validation of technologies and that they can play this key role only if they keep pace with the development of technologies and ever faster product development cycles;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Believes that, in order to ensure European competitiveness at global level, urgent improvements are needed in order to resolve outstanding issues such as intellectual property rights and in particular the community patent, European standardisation, public procurement and access to private finance, amongst others;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses the importance of promoting the establishment of public-private partnerships; calls for JTIs to be simplified in order to avoid channelling a large amount of financial resources into just a few projects, and calls for the state aid rules to be simplified by means of mechanisms such as ‘consent by silence’ and block exemptionwith complete transparency and by means of effective, unbureaucratic monitoring procedures, so that innovation is not hampered by lengthy processes;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3α. Considers it essential that the rules on public procurement be revised so that they will promote innovative action and SMEs; notes in this context the role that pre- commercial procurement can play in reinforcing innovation;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls for unleashing the public sector’s purchasing power to spur innovation through public procurement including pre-commercial procurement that can enable public authorities to share the risks and benefits with suppliers, without involving state aid;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Considers that financing under the common strategic framework contributes to the development of a ‘value-added Europe’ and calls for innovative financing instruments such as eurobonds to be used for carrying out research projects or innovative projects which will have a positive impact on the real economy, stimulating competitiveness, growth and employment but also economic, social and regional cohesion;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Underlines the need for the intellectual property rights to guarantee a balance between exploitation and technology transfer and access to and rapid dissemination of scientific results;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Is convinced that public spending allocated to research must be subject to qualitative assessment as part of the calculation of public expenditure when the mid-term budgetary objectives are evaluated;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Takes the view that the Commission should allocate part of the research budget to SMEs run by young people and businesswomen, rewarding the establishment of networks or clusters, and that the Member States must ensure that information reaches SMEs by all means possible;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Reiterates that there are still many SMEs which carry out minimal or no research activities, therefore is of the opinion that the European Commission and Member States should recognise the importance of SMEs in boosting innovation in Europe by further simplifying research and innovation programmes, developing more standardised rules and procedures and making research programmes more accessible for all types of small and micro businesses in EU; Takes the view that the Commission should allocate part of the research budget to SMEs run by young people and businesswomen, rewarding the establishment of networks or clusters;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls for new methods of financing to be tested, such as vouchers for EU innovation, which would allow businesses to spend those resources directly at accredited research centres; such vouchers should not be subject to cost reporting because their use would be certified by the centres where the vouchers are spent. The accreditation centres could be set up on a national or regional basis and validated by a European body such as, for example, the JRC;