BETA

22 Amendments of Harald VILIMSKY related to 2015/2258(INI)

Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas the increasingly volatile security environment calls for a strengthening of the CSDP to make it a more effective policy instrumentEuropean Union has itself brought about the increasingly volatile security environment, such as, for example, the strained and diplomatically one-sided relationship with Russia;
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the EU and its Member States are by far the main funders of peace operations, while CSDP operations and missions represent only a small part of all funding; regrets the very modest nature of CSDP interventions, especially the military ones, consisting mainly of low- profile military training missions instead of substantial European contributions to peace-keeping and peace-enforcement;
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the VP/HR and the Member States to unleash the full potential of the Lisbon Treaty with regard to a faster and more flexible use of the CSDP missions and operations;deleted
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Notes with concern that despite a combined yearly defence budget of some EUR 190 billion, the Member States are still unablefailing to meet the 1999 Helsinki Headline Goals; recalls the ambitioustakes note of the civilian headline goals set by the EU; calls for the EU to be strengthened as an actor in defence, and regrets the lack of a clear military doctrine which operationalises the tasks listed in Article 43 TEU (the expanded ‘Petersberg tasks’); strongly advocates closer defence coordination and cooperation between Member States and at EU level, in particular pooling and sharing of resources, capabilities and assets;
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that the level of funding for civilian CSDP missions under the CFSP chapter of the EU budget has declined over the past years and is expected to stay stable as part of the multiannual financial framework 2014-2020; regret; notes that civilian missions have been affected by the generalised shortfall of payment appropriations, obliging the Commission to delay the payment of EUR 22 million to 2015 as a mitigating measure; welcomes, however, that some EUR 16 million have been identified as possible savings, allowing further missions to be funded should the need arise in the near future;
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the concrete measures and pragmatic solutions introduced recently by the Commission within the existing framework of financial rules in order to shorten financial procedures; deplores, however, the still significant delays in procuring essential equipment and services to the missions under the CSDP, partially due to the often slow process of adopting decisions by the Council, but also to a certain lack of flexibility of the financial rules, and the resulting negative effect on the missions’ functioning; recalls that the Court of Auditors already criticised this in its 2012 Special Report on the EU assistance to Kosovo related to the rule of law;deleted
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Urges the Commission to mitigate these shortfalls, and to propose the necessary adaptations to financial rules for civilian CSDP missions, in order to facilitate the rapid and flexible conduct of missions, while guaranteeing sound financial management of the EU resources and an adequate protection of the Union’s financial interests; takes the view that the budget implementation powers should be delegated to the Civilian Operation Commander, in the same way that has been done for Heads of EU Delegations;deleted
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Strongly encouragesNotes that the setting up of a Shared Services Centre (SSC), together with and the establishment of an Integrated Resource Management System (IRMS), as a way to improve the speed of deployment, and cost-efficiency, of civilian missions; deplores that this initiative has been inre at a stalemate so far; notes that a mission support platform is currently being considered, but calls on the Commission and the EEAS to make further steps towards establishing a genuine SSC;
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Believes that the chronic constraints of the EEAS/Civilian Planning and Conduct Capability’s administrative budget should be alleviated, as the yearly budget allocation remains too small to cater for all planning, conduct and support tasks, notably when more missions are launched almost simultaneously;deleted
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Takes the view that the permanent CSDP Warehouse, which currently only serves new CSDP civilian missions, should quickly be upgraded by enlarging its scope to include existing missions and by improving the availability of stored equipment, and that it should be managed by the future SSC;deleted
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses the need for adequate staffing of missions in line with the various commitments made by Member States in this respect (e.g. the Civilian Headline Goal 2010, the Multi-Annual Civilian Capability Development Plan); deplores, however, the difficulties to recruit – and keep – a sufficient number of qualified personnel for CSDP missions; encourages the widespread use of rapidly deployable Civilian Response Teams (CRTs), which would increase the rapid reaction capacity of the EU, facilitate swift build-up of missions and contribute to the effectiveness of its crisis management response;
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Calls for better military-civilian synergies where appropriate, notably in the areas of logistics, transport and the security of missions, while respecting the different chains of command and the different nature of civilian and military missions;deleted
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the ‘Train & Equip’ initiative that would ensure the capacity building of partners, as part of a transition or exit strategy, by facilitating the financing of equipment for security forces of third countries; supports a systematic use of project cells, in which interested Member States or third countries can contribute; welcomes the fact that the Commission is considering a more permanent financial support for this initiative;deleted
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. AcknowledgesWelcomes the fact that military operations are financed by the Member States outside the EU budget and that their common costs are covered by the Athena mechanism; underlines that Athena is crucial to the fast deployment of those operations and is an instrument of solidarity between; notes that the Athena mechanism is a conflict- financing instrument for Member States, as well as a major incentive, notably fornd third countries, and condemns those lfacking financial resources, to contribute to CSDP operations; regrets, however,t that it provides a major incentive to contribute to conflicts; welcomes the fact that the proportion of the common costs remains very low (around 10-15 % of all costs) and that the ‘costs lie where they fall’ principle further deters Member States from taking an active part; finds that the long-term financing of military missions should be ensuredstill applies;
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. DeploresNotes that, in this context, that the review of the Athena mechanism has not produced tangible results, and calls on the Council to deliver quickly on this issue; supports, in particular, an; resolutely opposes expansion of the costs eligible under Athena, such as the pre-financing of certain costs or the strategic transport of EU battle groups; expects a final decision on these issues at the next European Council on defence;
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Supports initiatives to explore the possibility of attracting and managing financial contributions from third countries or international organisations within Athena, but warns against any contribution by the EU budget which risks having a detrimental effect on the financing of civilian missions; also supports the option of ‘joint financing’, whereby a smaller number of participating countries would finance some operational costs of the missions, under the condition that their contributions are managed by Athena and supplement rather than replace the common costs;deleted
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. RecallsCondemns the fact that the Lisbon Treaty provides the EU with new CSDP provisions which are yet untapped; encourag; advises the Council not to make use of Article 44 TEU, enabling a group of willing Member States to go ahead with the implementation of a CSDP task; takes the view thatcondemns the ad hoc funding mechanisms for a military operation should cover more than the traditional common costs reimbursed by Athenas;
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the Council to initiate the setting-up of the start-up fund (foreseen by Article 41(3) TEU) for the urgent financing of the initial phases of military operations, which could also serve as a strong tool for capacity development; notes that, while civilian missions benefit from a dedicated budget for preparatory measures, the deployment and efficiency of military missions will remain structurally hindered as long as this possibility is not used; strongly encourages Member States to engage in the permanent structured cooperation provided for by Article 46 TEU, which would also considerably strengthen the EU rapid reaction capability;deleted
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. StresseInsists that there be transparency and, comprehensive accountability are essential requirements not only for democratic scrutiny but also for the adequate functioning, and the credibility, ofnd extensive democratic scrutiny in connection with missions carried out under the EU flag; welcomes the reporting mechanisms provided for by the interinstitutional agreement of 2 December 2013, such as the joint consultation meetings on CFSP and the quarterly reports on the CFSP budget; calls on the Commission to make an extensive interpretation of Article 49 (1) (g) of the Financial Regulation and to propose specific lines for each civilian CSDP mission under the CFSP chapternarrowly;
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Looks forward to initiatives which would bring clarity and consistency as to the financing and operating rules applying to civilian missions; welcomes, in the light of the ongoing discussion on flexibility in the financial rules, the commitment by the Commission to prepare a specific template for all CSDP missions, and to adapt the existing guidelines to their needs;
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Encourages the VP/HR to take leadership in CSDP and to play a steering role in breaking down silos by ensuring coordination between the Council, the Commission and the EEAS, and by guaranteeing coherence within the two latter bodies; suggests that EU Special Representatives could be entrusted with the mandate to improve dialogue and cooperation between the various EU players on the ground, in order to increase the coherence of the EU action and turn the multiple sources of funding from a challenge into an asseton responsibility for the CSDP;
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Takes the view that the next European Council on defence should not waste an opportunity to have a deep discussion and produce concrete proposals on reforming the financial arrangements for CSDP missions and operations; urges the Member States to deliver on the commitments undertaken at the European Council of December 2013;
2015/03/03
Committee: AFETBUDG