Activities of David BORRELLI related to 2016/2147(INI)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the assessment of Horizon 2020 implementation in view of its interim evaluation and the Framework Programme 9 proposal PDF (808 KB) DOC (370 KB)
Amendments (11)
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Commission to offer a balanced mix of small, medium and large- sized projects; notes that the average budget for projects has increased under H2020 and that larger projects require participants with large financial and staff capabilities; notes that this favours large institutions, creating a problem for smaller Member States and for small participants from larger Member States; regrets that this poses obstacles for newcomers and concentrates funding in elite institutions; calls on the Commission, with a view to promoting a wider and more equitable distribution of resources, to consider the introduction of maximum total funding limits, differentiated by sector and size of company and awarded to individual applicants under a framework programme;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls on the Commission, in the course of the interim Horizon 2020 review, to examine the details relating to cases where projects exceeding the threshold do not receive funding owing to depletion of resources specifically earmarked for calls for proposals; calls also for action to ensure adequate SME funding;
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Calls on the Commission to make the participant portal more readily available and to extend the network of National Contact Points, providing it with more resources, so as to ensure an efficient service for micro and small enterprises in particular during project submission and evaluation;
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Confirms that ‘excellence’ should remain the key criterion across the three pillars, while noting that it is only one of the three evaluation criteria, alongside ‘impact’ and ‘quality and efficiency of the implementation’; calls for the reweighting of these criteria and invites the Commission to set out additional sub- criteria by adding ‘SSH integration and geographical balance’ under ‘impact’ and ‘project size’ under ‘efficiency of the implementation’; calls on the Commission to ensure that direct contact between evaluators consistently takes place at the consensus meeting phase and that they do not remain at a distance, so as to strengthen the transparency of the evaluation process;
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls for better evaluation and quality assurance by the evaluators, introducing more pertinent evaluator selection procedures and criteria; takes note of the complaints made by unsuccessful applicants that the Evaluation Summary Reports lack depth and clarity on what should be done differently in order to succeed; calls for the points awarded to be accompanied by an adequate statement of reasons and for applicants to be given access to individual project evaluations, the evaluators themselves remaining anonymous, with the real possibility of a review, so as to improve transparency;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Calls on the Commission to accord a specific value to the ‘Seal of Excellence’ certificate in view of existing diversity at European and Member State level; asks the Commission also to consider the possibility of according a specific value to it on project resubmission under the call for proposals at the next cut-off;
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Calls on it to put greater stress on the impact criterion, given that the determining factor for innovation must remain the project’s capacity to affect the real economy, generating investment and job creation;
Amendment 220 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Underlines that Horizon 2020 is not focused on the ‘valley of death’ that constitutes the main barrier to converting prototypes into mass production, and that H2020 is the first FP to put research and innovation together; welcomes the creation of an EIC20, but and insists that this should not lead again to the separation of research from innovation but should become a preferential, easy-to-use access point for innovative companies and institutions; _________________ 20 Commission Communication entitled ‘Europe’s next leaders: the Start-up and Scale-up Initiative’ (COM/2016/0733).
Amendment 229 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Calls on the Commission to clarify the instruments and functioning of the EIC; underlines the need to keep and strengthen the SME Instrument and the Fast Track to Innovation, and to facilitate funding for the final stages of research so that laboratory scientific innovations can develop into commercial businesses; asks the Commission to analyse also how KICs can be integrated into the EIC; believes that proper account should be taken of the results and success achieved by the SME Instrument in recent years and that, in order not to spread EU resources too thinly, funding to be used for any new instruments should be included in the SME Instrument budget;
Amendment 262 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Welcomes the success of H2020 and the 1:11 leverage factor; notes the oversubscription and the challenges that lie ahead, and calls for a budgetary increase of EUR 100 billion for FP9; stresses, in particular, the importance of increasing funding for the SME Instrument;
Amendment 298 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Welcomes the current pillar structure of the programme, and calls on the Commission to retain this structure for the sake of continuity and predictability, to improve the interaction among all funding instruments/programmes and to study the possibility of having fewer instruments with harmonised rules; asks the Commission therefore to continue work on the coherence, simplification, transparency and clarity of the programme, on improving the evaluation process and on reducing fragmentation; calls on the Commission to look into the feasibility of introducing simplified selection procedures for the SME Instrument, based on interviews with individual applicants;