7 Amendments of Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL related to 2011/0177(APP)
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls that all the macroeconomic financial stabilisation measures taken since 2008 have not yet proved proved to be insufficient to overcome the economic and financial crisis; believes, therefore, that in order to return to growth and generate employment in Europe, a well- targeted and sufficient EU budget is needed to further help coordinate and enhance the national efforts;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal to fix a maximum amount for Galileo in the MFF regulation, thereby ring-fencing the budgetary allocation for this project; believes, likewise, that the maximum amounts for ITER and GMES should also be fixed in the regulation; considers that the financial envelopes for these three projects should be allocated over and above the MFF ceilings, so as to enable the provision of additional funding by Member States;
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal to fix a maximum amount for Galileo in the MFF regulation, thereby ring-fencing the budgetary allocation for this project; believes, likewise, that the maximum amounts for ITER and GMES should also be fixed in the regulation; considers that the financial envelopes for these three projects should be allocated over and above the MFF ceilings, so as to enablfacilitate the provision of additional funding by Member States;
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Reiterates that achieving European added value and ensuring sound financial management - efficiency, effectiveness, economy - should be, now even more than ever, guiding principles of the EU budget; welcomes, in this respect, the Commission’s set of legislative proposals on the new generation of multiannual programmes to be adopted under the ordinary legislative procedure; insists that synergies among EU support programmes and national investments must be maximised;
Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. Supports firmly the continuathe introduction of thea contingency margin, but emphasises that in order to be effective its mobilisation should not entail compulsory offsetting of ceilings, and should be adopted by qualified majority voting in Council;
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55
Paragraph 55
55. Believes that the negotiations on the next MFF, which started more than a year ago, clearly demonstrate the stalemate created by the lack of a genuine own resources system: these negotiations are organised in Council around two opposing camps, led by the net contributor countries to EU budget on the one hand and by the net beneficiary countries of the EU budget on the other, in a system which creates a purely accounting-based vision of ‘fair return’ which, in the end, makes any agreement on the MFF conditional on an agreement on a long list of exceptions and compensations, negotiated behind closed doors and incomprehensible to the European citizen;
Amendment 184 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58
Paragraph 58
58. Reaffirms its basic position, as stated in its resolution of 13 June 2012, that it is not prepared to give its consent to the next MFF regulation without political agreement on reform of the own resources system, in line with the Commission’s proposals of 29 June 2011; believes that such a reform should aim at reducing the share of Member States’ GNI-based contributions to the EU budget to a maximum of 40 % by 2020, thereby contributing to the consolidation efforts of Member States;