Activities of Notis MARIAS related to 2015/2318(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Cost effectiveness of the 7th Research Programme (short presentation) EL
Amendments (12)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)
Citation 2 a (new)
– having regard to the Protocol (No 1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) on the role of national parliaments in the European Union,
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 b (new)
Citation 2 b (new)
– having regard to the Protocol (No 2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality,
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Highlights the fact that FP7 represented a total voted budget of EUR 55 billion, accounting for an estimated 3% of total RTD expenditure in Europe, or 25% of competitive funding; over the seven- year duration of FP7, more than 139 000 research proposals were submitted, from which 25 000 projects of the highest quality were selected and received funding; the main recipients among the 29 000 organisations participating in FP7 were, inter alia, universities (44% of FP7 funding), research and technology organisations (27%), large private companies (11%) and SMEs (13%), while the public sector (3%) and civil society organisations (2%) played a minor role;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – introductory part
Paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Welcomes the fact thatPoints to the ex-post evaluation of FP7, undertaken by a high- level expert group 8, which considered FP7 to have been a success; the high-level group underlined in particular that FP7: _________________ 8 Commitment and Coherence, ex-post evaluation of the 7th EU Framework Programme, November 2015 https://ec.europa.eu/research/evaluations/p df/fp7_final_evaluation_expert_group_rep ort.pdf
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – indent 5
Paragraph 2 – indent 5
– sought to strengthened the European Research Area by catalysing a culture of cooperation and constructing comprehensive networks fit to address thematic challenges,
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – introductory part
Paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. NotStresses that the public stakeholder consultation in the context of the FP7 evaluation, held between February and May 2015, pointed to the following weaknesses:
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. NotEmphasises that, in 2015, of the 150 transactions that the Court audited, 72 (48 %) were affected by error; on the basis of the 38 errors which the Court had quantified, it estimated the level of error to be 4.4 %; furthermore, in 16 cases of quantifiable errors, the Commission, national authorities or independent auditors had sufficient information to prevent or detect and correct the errors before accepting the expenditure; if all this information had been used to correct errors, the estimated level of error for this chapter would have been 0.6 % lower;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Recalls its position in the 2012 and 2014 Commission discharge: ‘Remains convinced that the Commission mustshould continue to strive for an acceptable balance between the attractiveness of programmes to participants and the legitimate necessity of accountability and financial control; recalls, in this connection, the statement of the Director-General in 2012 that a procedure designed to attain a residual error rate of 2 % under all circumstances is not a viable option’;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Notes with absolute respect the vote of the citizens of the United Kingdom of 23 June 2016, in which they expressed the political will to leave the European Union;