BETA

Activities of Lucas HARTONG related to 2011/2019(BUD)

Plenary speeches (1)

2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2011/2019(BUD)

Amendments (42)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Is deeply concerned, against this background, by~~Notes the alarming drop in public investment in the Member States in some of these areas ~~and firmly believes that this trend must be reversed if the EU as a whole is to deliver on the EU 2020 strategy~~; is of the opinion that the EU budget has an role to play as a leverage tool for Member States’ recovery policies by triggering and supporting national investment to reinforce growth and employment; emphasises that this is fully in line with the dynamics of the European Semester, which, as a new mechanism for enhanced European economic governance, aims at increasing consistency, synergies and complementarities between the EU and the national budgets ~~in delivering on the jointly agreed Europe 2020 goals~~;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Acknowledges that if the EU budget is to contribute to the collective effort of Member States in times of austerity this effort should be commensurate with its size, specific features and real economic impact; reminds the Council that under EU Treaty provisions the EU budget cannot run a deficit and that cuts to it, given its limited size, will have no significant long-term impact in addressing the urgent issue of accumulated national public deficit, which amounted in 2009 to EUR 801 billion for the EU as a whole;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Observes that the EU 27 annual inflation rate for 2011 is estimated at 2.7%, meaning that the proposed nominal 2012 increases of 3.7% in CA and 4.9% in PA are, compared to the Budget 2011, in real terms 1% and 2.2%; underlines the fact that several Member States are planning increases in their national budgets greater than the one proposed by the European Commission for the EU budget;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Highlights the fact that the proposed figures in the 2012 EU annual budget are consistent with the profile of EU expenditure set in the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2007-2013; emphasises that any increase (or decrease) compared to Budget 2011 must therefore be assessed bearing in mind its impact on the delivery of the multiannual programmes; stresses that this is a question of institutional credibility and coherence of the EU project when EU responsibilities and commitments keep on growing; deeply regrets from this point of view that the Commission did not propose endowing policies and new competencies established at EU level following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty with meaningful and visible financial capacity;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Observes that according to the DB 2012 there is an overall margin of EUR 1 603 million in CA under the 2012 ceiling agreed in the MFF; is determined to make full use of this available margin as well as – if necessary – of other flexibility mechanisms foreseen by the IIA to support and strengthen certain targeted political objectives; expects Council’s full cooperation as regards the use of these mechanisms;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Takes the view that~~, besides the delivery of the EU 2020 strategy,~~ appropriations in the EU 2012 Budget should be kept at a~~n appropriat~~ wise level to ensure the continuation of by the Member States agreed EU policies and the achievement of EU objectives~~; underlines in particular the need to allow the EU to shoulder its global responsibility, especially in the wake of the Arab Spring and the unrest in the Middle East~~;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. ~~Obser~~Firmly approves that the Commission has made a first endeavour to identify negative priorities and savings in some policy areas as compared with what was initially foreseen in the financial programming, particularly in those characterised by poor performance and low implementation rates in the recent past; asks the Commission to provide additional information supporting its assessments; notes also that, contrary to previous years, the Commission has frequently departed from its indicative financial programming presented in January 2011; is determined to further check and analyse these proposals before endorsing them;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. ~~Notes~~Is deeply concerned by the proposed increase in PA of 4.9% compared to 2011; ~~is convinced that~~doubts whether the Commission is proposing such figures on the basis of a careful and critical analysis of forecasts provided by Member States, which themselves co-manage 80% of the EU budget; notes that the bulk of this increase is linked to legal needs arising in relation to the 7th Research Programme and the Structural and Cohesion Funds; is convinced that the proposed level of payments represents the bare minimum required to honour EU legal commitments made in previous years and that it is the EU’s duty to comply with the legal obligations deriving from these commitments; strongly urges the Council, therefore, to ~~refrain from~~continue cutting the proposed level of payments;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. ~~Welcom~~Deeply deplores the Commission’s proposal in the DB 2012 to increase CA by 12.6% (to EUR 15 223 million) and PA by 8.1% (to EUR 12 566 million) as compared to Budget 2011, since Heading 1a is the key heading of the MFF 2007-2013 in terms of reaching the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy, thanks to its direct or indirect contribution to the financing of all its five headline targets and the seven flagship initiatives;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. ~~Underlin~~Welcomes that, with the DB 2012 and the updated financial programming for 2013, the total amount of funds committed by 2013 for key programmes for the achievement of the EU 2020 strategy, such as the 7th EC Framework Research Program (EC FP7), anti-pollution measures, Marco Polo II, PROGRESS, Galileo and GMES, would be less than the reference amount agreed by Parliament and Council when these programmes were adopted; notes that, on the contrary, these reference amounts would be slightly exceeded in the case of the following key Europe 2020 programmes: the Competiveness and Innovation Framework programme (CIP), Trans-European Transport Network, Trans-European Energy network, Erasmus Mundus and Lifelong Learning; ~~regrets, however~~welcomes, that these proposed increases are well below the 5% legislative flexibility allowed under Point 37 of the IIA;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Regrets that with the limited increase foreseen for the PROGRESS programme in the DB 2012 as compared to Budget 2011, the Commission will not be able to reinstate the amount of EUR 20 million for the period 2011-2013 to which it had committed itself in 2010 in order to compensate partially for the redeployment of PROGRESS in favour of the Microfinance Facility; recalls that the PROGRESS programme is an essential pillar of the Europe 2020 strategy, owing in particular to its contribution to the two flagship initiatives ‘European Platform against Poverty’ and ‘Youth on the Move’;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. ~~Welcom~~Notes the increase (+ EUR 5.7 million) in the overall level of commitment appropriations for the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework programme compared to what was initially foreseen; hopes that this increase will contribute to improving the access of SMEs to this programme and to developing specific programmes and innovative financial mechanisms;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Takes the view that, given its high European added value, support for the Lifelong Learning programme should be continued and increased in 2012, because of its strong contribution to the flagship initiative ‘Youth on the Move’; stresses in particular that, given the growing number of people in adult education in Europe, Grundtvig, which currently represents only 4% of the allocations in the Lifelong Learning Programme, should be reinforced;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Recalls that the bulk of the new EU competences introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon, in the areas of energy, tourism and space, falls within the remit of Heading 1a; expresses its disappointment that no extra funding for these new policies is proposed by the Commission in the third year after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty; underlines that neither Galileo nor GMES – the two main EU space programmes – is to benefit from extra funding by the end of the current MFF and that the Galileo funding is decreasing between 2011 and 2012; reiterates the need to introduce some specific, visible measures in support of tourism, given the economic relevance of this sector, which represents the third industry in Europe in terms of size and revenue, and regrets that the Commission is not proposing a new legal basis to replace the three preparatory actions in this field which cannot be extended in 2012;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. ~~Stresse~~Doubts the decisive contribution of cohesion policy to growth and employment, as well as to social and territorial cohesion between EU regions and Member States; ~~stresse~~doubts that cohesion policy plays an instrumental role in enabling all EU regions to participate in the achievement of Europe 2020 objectives and in supporting regional investments aimed at implementing all flagship initiatives; takes the view accordingly that, while its redistributive nature and its aim to reduce regional disparities should be preserved, cohesion policy must remain EU-wide and visible to EU regions and citizens;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Welcomes the 8.4% increase in PA to EUR 45 134 million proposed for 2012 as compared to 2011, and believes that this increase will allow for programme implementation to catch up quickly following the very slow start-up of programmes at the beginning of the 2007- 13 period; emphasises that this increase should also make it possible to address additional payment needs stemming from the recent legislative changes, the approval of all management and control systems and the closure of the 2000-2006 programmes;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Stresses therefore that this level of payments is a bare minimum and complies fully with realistic budgeting, taking due account of the general payment profile over the period, the Member States’ available forecast in respect of payment claims to be sent to the Commission, and the need to fill the gap between commitments and payments; underlines the fact that these cash flows will also help accelerate the recovery of the European economy and contribute to the Europe 2020 strategy in the regions; will therefore strictly oppose any possible decrease in the level of payments compared to the one proposed by the Commission in its Draft Budget, particularly in view of Council’s early 2011 reluctance to honour its formal commitment of December 2010 to providing fresh appropriations in case of need;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38

38. ~~Endor~~Opposes the continued support for programmes concerning school fruit , as well as for the Aid for Deprived Persons programme; ~~deplore~~accepts, conversely, the reduced budgetary allocation to the school milk scheme and ~~is concerned about~~notes the cuts made to veterinary and phyto-sanitary measures;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39

39. Stresses that part of the spending under Heading 2 is instrumental in realising the Europe 2020 goals; emphasises that the priority goals of this strategy – growth and employment – are also accomplished through the rural development programmes; regards climate action and food security as two of the main challenges for the CAP; calls, therefore, for a further greening of the CAP, which should also contribute to meeting the vast environmental challenges the EU faces, including water pollution; in this context, also welcomes the increase for the LIFE+ programme (+4.3% and +1.9% in commitments and payments respectively);

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40

40. Emphasises that energy efficiency~~, the fight against climate change~~ and the promotion of renewable energy are transversal priorities that can be financed under several headings of the EU budget, and that Parliament will pay specific attention to their funding, by budget line and overall; urges the Commission to further mainstream such priorities in other policies, including EU financial support to developing countries; takes the view that the proper implementation of the existing legislation on these topics is crucial and therefore asks the Commission to carefully analyse whether more resources are required in order to examine seriously the implementation of EU environmental legislation, and to report back to Parliament;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44

44. Very much wonders, therefore, whether the DB presented by the Commission constitutes an appropriate and updated answer to the current challenges facing the EU, not least in the context of the ongoing events in the Southern Mediterranean; recalls its strong call for an appropriate and balanced answer to these challenges, in full respect of internal protection rules and human rights; highlights in particular the role and support of the European Refugee Fund, including emergency measures in the event of mass influxes of refugees, and greatly regrets that the Commission did not propose any increase for this fund beyond what was initially foreseen in the financial programming;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48

48. ~~Deeply regrets~~Accepts however that overall appropriations under this heading are down for a third consecutive year, with CA being reduced by 0.1% (to EUR 683 5 million) and PA by 0.3 % (to EUR 645 7 million) as compared to the 2011 Budget (excluding the EU Solidarity Fund), leaving a margin of EUR 15.5 million;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49

49. Takes the view that programmes and actions under this heading play an important role in achieving headline targets and flagships initiatives of the Europe 2020 strategy; reiterates that education, training and culture carry economic value since they contribute to economic growth and job creation and support the development of active citizenship;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51

51. ~~Welcom~~Deplores the ambitions of the Commission in proposing to increase by EUR 8 million, as compared to the initial financial programming, the 2012 allocations for Youth in Action (EUR 134.6 million foreseen in 2012), stresses that this programme constitutes one of the main tools of the ‘Youth on the Move’ flagship initiative and provides support for non-formal learning experiences and the development of active citizenship for young people;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52

52. Regrets that similar efforts are not being proposed for programmes such as MEDIA and Culture 2007, although they contribute greatly to the richness and diversity of European culture and give support to actions which would not be funded by Member States alone;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53

53. Is astonished that the Commission has not proposed in its Draft Budget 2012 any specific programme in favour of sport, although this is now a fully-fledged competence of the Union deriving from the Treaty of Lisbon; finds this attitude all the more surprising since some funding – though of limited magnitude – was available in Budgets 2009, 2010 and 2011;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54

54. ~~Deplor~~Welcomes the decrease in the Civil Protection Financial Instrument’s funding as compared to the financial programming (EUR -1.8 million )~~, and asks the Commission to provide further explanations for this decrease, given that civil protection is now a new competence of the EU~~;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 57

57. Believes it to be the EU’s duty to respond adequately and comprehensively to recent political developments in Mediterranean neighbouring countries and to provide support and assistance to movements fighting for democratic values and the establishment of the rule of law; reiterates that reinforcement of financial assistance to these countries must not be detrimental to priorities and instruments for the benefit of neighbouring Eastern European countries;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58

58. Is very concerned from this point of view that the proposed margin of EUR 246.7 million for Heading 4, while far above that foreseen by the January 2011 update of the financial programming (EUR 132.2 million), may be insufficient to address the increasing needs under Heading 4, since it seems to be based on cuts to some major EU programmes; is determined to further check and analyse the impact of these cuts;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60

60. Asks the Commission, therefore, not to limit its upcoming amending letter to the budgetary consequences of its review of the European Neighbourhood Policy ~~but~~and also to address~~, if necessary together with the use of all the means provided for by the IIA,~~ all other outstanding issues and needs, including the financing of Palestine and UNRWA, which is very wisely decreased by EUR 100 million as compared to 2011 Budget~~, in order to maximise the impact of EU assistance in the world~~;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61

61. ~~Deplore~~Applauds the reduction of the programmed increase in the funding for the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance from EUR 139 million to only EUR 79 million, as compared to Budget 2011;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 62

62. ~~Not~~Deplores the proposed increase in the funding of environment and sustainable management of natural resources (ENRTP) under the Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI) by EUR 51.8 million as compared to financial programming in order to address the fast-start climate change action; strongly ~~oppos~~welcomes the other decreases, amounting to EUR 78 million overall, made to DCI geographical programmes, which would run counter to the EU effort to contribute to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals and respect the EU commitment, at the highest level, to reaching the 0.7% of GNI target by 2015 for development cooperation;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63

63. Recalls that it will firmly reject any systematic, quasi-automatic and sometimes unconsidered cuts by the other branch of the budgetary authority in administrative expenditure under Heading 4 for the sole sake of decreasing appropriations, since this would deprive the EU of its means to properly and efficiently implement its programmes;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 67

67. ~~Acknowledg~~Welcomes the Commission’s great effort to freeze its own administrative expenditure in nominal terms; notes that this was rendered possible through the offsetting of the increases linked to statutory and contractual obligations against other drastic cuts in other administrative expenditure; ~~is nevertheless concerned about the possible consequences of the latter, for instance those related to training (-11%) and publications (-17% and -2.1% for the Publication Office);~~

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68

68. Stresses that any further cut to 2012 administrative appropriations within Section III, including to the administrative support expenditure lines (former BA-lines), might have an adverse impact on the implementation of programmes, in particular in view of the new EU tasks following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty; insists that the savings resulting from reduced administrative support expenditure remain within the corresponding programmes’ financial envelopes for enhanced delivery on the ground; emphasises, furthermore, that while EU competences keep on increasing, this trend is not sustainable in the long term and will have an adverse impact on the swift, regular and effective implementation of EU actions and programmes;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 71

71. Takes the view that the European Schools should be adequately funded in the interests of addressing the specific situation and needs of the children of agents of the EU institutions; will carefully scrutinise the proposed overall 1.7% increase as compared to 2011, which is below that foreseen in the financial programming, as well as each of the European Schools’ budget lines, and make, during its reading, any modification it considers appropriate in this respecnot be funded by the EU and be taken off the budget;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 72

72. Stresongly opposes that pilot projects (PPs) and preparatory actions (PAs) are key tools for the formulation of political priorities and for paving the way for new initiatives that might turn into EU activities and programmes likely to improve the lives of EU citizens; intends, therefore, to ~~suppor~~reject by all possible means its proposals regarding pilot projects and preparatory actions for the 2012 Budget~~, while stressing the need carefully to study the Commission’s preliminary assessment expected in July 2011 for the definition of a global and balanced final package on this issue~~;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 73

73. Intends to this end to forward to the Commission, as provided for in Annex II, part D of the IIA, a first provisional list of potential pilot projects and preparatory actions for the 2012 Budget; expects the Commission to provide a well-reasoned analysis of Parliament’s indicative proposals; stresses that this first provisional list does not preclude the formal tabling and adoption of amendments concerning pilot projects and preparatory actions during Parliament’s reading of the budget;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 74

74. Takes note of one new pilot project and five preparatory actions – two of them new – proposed by the Commission under different headings; states its firm intention of analysing the content and objectives of the newly proposed initiatives in the course of the upcoming negotiations;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 75

75. ~~Not~~Deeply deplores the overall level of EUR 720.8 million devoted to EU decentralised agencies in DB 2012, an increase in the total EU contribution as compared to the 2011 Budget of EUR 34.6 million, or +4.9%; is aware that this increase mainly stems from the one new5 and seven phasing-in agencies6 , with a view to providing them with adequate funding; ~~underlines the importance of~~strongly opposes additional funding for those 10 agencies7, the tasks of which have been extended, so as not to hinder their performance; notes that the increase in the EU contribution to the agencies at cruising speed is in line with, or even below, inflation correction (2%), with no additional staff;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 76

76. Stresses that EU agencies’ budget allocations are far from consisting in administrative expenditure alone, but instead contribute to achieving the Europe 2020 goals and EU objectives in general, as decided by the legislative authority; endorses therefore, in times of austerity, the Commission’s restrictive approach to determining EU decentralised agencies’ subsidies from the EU budget, but disapproves of the use of assigned revenue to reduce the EU Budget contribution to fee-dependent agencies, which is used by the Commission to increase margins artificially;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 77

77. ~~Not~~Deplores that, among the 213 new establishment plan posts for agencies (out of a total of 4 854), 80 will be allocated to new or starting-up agencies, and the rest to agencies whose tasks are being extended; reiterates its call for a ~~specific approach to the recruitment of specialised scientific staff with professional experience, especially when these posts are financed exclusively from fees and are thus budget- neutral for~~full stop to EU decentralised agencies and for them to be taken off the EU budget;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG