7 Amendments of Daniel BUDA related to 2016/2147(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Takes the view that excellence and competitiveness should remain the underlying principles of the EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, while the ESI Funds should target regional growth and cohesion; is therefore opposed to any criteria or quotas in the new Framework Programme which aim to influence geographic distribution or cohesion;aking into consideration the objective to widen the participation of researchers from all Member states. The ESI Funds should target regional growth and cohesion; considers important to avoid any discriminatory effect of the Programmes’ implementation and to ensure a balanced development of research activities across the European Union as well as equal opportunities for all EU researchers.
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Takes the view that excellence and competitiveness should remain the underlying principles of the EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, while the ESI Funds should target regional growth and cohesion; is therefore opposed to any criteria or quotas in the new Framework Programme which aim to influence geographic distribution or cohesion; nevertheless the selection of Project should be based on objective criteria and not on subjective criteria related with the perception of the graphical development of a Member State.
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes the divergences in aims and focuneed to enhance synergies between the Framework Programme and the ESI Funds; takes the view, howevrecalls in particular the difficulties due to the different state-aid rules which are applied depending on whether, that efforts must be made to maximise synergies at programme level;e Union funding is centrally managed or not; recommends that the same state-aid controlled rules are applied for all EU funding for RDI, whatever the sources of funding
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Takes the view that effective investments in R&I from the ESI Funds can only take place if Member States have their framework conditions in order; calls, therefore, for a closer linkage between country-specific recommendations for structural reformsconcerning R&I and investments in R&I;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Recognises that the ceilings of the researchers’ salaries are a barrier for Cohesion countries to apply for Horizon 2020 projects and calls on the Commission to eliminate the difference in ceilings of salaries of European researchers and eliminate the current brain drain.
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. For example, there should be identical rules regarding cost reporting/eligibility of costs for the priority area “innovation and research” in ESI funds and for FP9. The approximation of rules regarding the use of ESI funds and of the Framework Programme would lead to considerable simplification. Regarding project implementation, the Participant Portal of the Framework Programme should also be used for R&I projects funded by ESI funds, since the research community is already used to it.
Amendment 75 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Welcomes the simplification initiatives introduced for the implementation measures; however, it points out that Horizon 2020 is still too complex and strongly recommends further improvements to simplify the future FP and to ensure a uniform implementation of it. In the next Framework Programme specific attention should be given to achieve a simple, clear and explainable structure of the FP and of all the initiatives funded by it; it should comprise a clear and easy to comprehend structure and a single set of instruments.