Activities of Notis MARIAS related to 2015/2327(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Implementation of Erasmus + (debate) EL
Amendments (22)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
Citation 1 a (new)
- having regard to 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 1 b (new)
Citation 1 b (new)
- having regard to Protocol (No 2) to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality,
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Points out that Erasmus+ is the EU’s flagship mobility, education and training programme, which has been allocated a 40 % budget increase as compared to the 2007-2013 period, given the positive results and high demand; notes that it is designed to improve career prospects for young people and help participants enrol on social networks;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recognises that investment from the EU budget under Erasmus+ contributes significantly to skills improvement, and employability and should lead to a lower risk of long- term unemployment for young Europeans;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas Erasmus+ is one of the most successful Union programmes and the major tool to support activities in the fields of education, training, youth and sport and is designed to improve the career potential of young people and to offer social links to participants;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes regional imbalances in participation in Erasmus+-funded actions; is concerned that the deplores the fact that the success rates of its actions are relatively low, and divergent across the EU; calls for targeted and timely action to widen participation and improve success rates;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. WelcomNotes the Commission proposal to increase the commitments for Erasmus+ by EUR 200 million for the rest of the current MFF, and to increase the payments by 4.5 % in the 2017 draft budget; notes that 48% of national agencies (NAs) report that programme actions are under-budgeted; calls on the Commission to propose an adequate multiannual payment plan;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that Erasmus+ is one of the key drivers of growth, employment, competitiveness and social cohesion in that it contributes to improving European education and training systems and employability, and will provides Europeans with an opportunity to 15 billion euros by 2020 to four million Europeans so that they acquire transversal and transferable sets of skills and competences via studies, training and work experience abroad;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. NotesDeplores the fact that the greater positive effect of, and higher demand for, Erasmus+ mobility grants in eastern and southern Europe contrast with a limited overall programme budget, which leads to a high proportion of rejected applications;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that a large majority of national agencies expecte need for the Erasmus+ programme’s objectives in the fields of education, training and youth to be reached;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises that although the overall programme is more visible than its predecessor but that the different sectoral programmes still lack visibility; recalls in this context that the specific features and characteristics of the different sectors have to be taken into account during the implementation of the programme;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Points outStresses that the goal of simpler, more user-friendly and more flexible implementation has not yet been reached; underlindeplores, in this context, the continuing lack of clarity and uneven level of detail in the programme guide;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights the fact that vocational education and training (VET) and VET mobility plays a vital economic and social role in Europe as a mechanism leading to equal opportunities for all citizens, including those from socially disadvantaged groups, unemployed young people, migrants and women, who are all under-represented in VET; calls on the Commission and the Member States to position VET as a choice which leads to a promising career, make it accessible to all, ensure gender balance and non- discrimination, and guarantee that it is adequately funded;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls that despite the programme’s significant overall budget increase, the budgetary profile in the MFF indicates a limited increase for the first half of the programme period, which has led, unfortunately, to the rejection of many high quality projects and hence a low success rate;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that the 12.7 % increase in the total budget in 2017 compared to 2016 and further annual increases in the remaining programme years will result in higher success rates and greater satisfaction among applicants; welcomesexpects the implementation of the Commission’s intention to allocate an additional EUR 200 million for the remaining programme period;
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to work with the Members States on stronger cooperation between education establishments and key stakeholders (businesses, VET facilities, research organisations, social partners, local/regional authorities and the youth sector) in order to enhance the responsiveness of the education and VET systems to labour market needs,improve career prospects, enable participants to acquire social connections and to guarantee that this cooperation is reflected in Erasmus+; believes that active involvement of beneficiaries in the design and implementation of the programme increases its success and added value;
Amendment 86 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. StressesDeplores the fact that, despite clear improvements in recognition and validation systems in education and VET, problems still persist; calls for specific targets such as the implementation of a fully operational credit transfer system and recognition, and for validation of competences acquired through non-formal and informal learning.
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. EncouragesCalls on the Commission to continue its efforts towards an open, consultative and transparent way of working and to further improve its cooperation with partners at all levels of implementation;
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. WelcomesNotes that the introduction of two types of strategic partnerships as a first and important positive step towards increasing the chances forshould encourage small-sized organisations to participate in the programme; calls on the Commission to make further improvements in order to include more small-sized organisations in programme activities;
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the Commission to recognise the special nature of projects and mobilities involving people with special needs and people from disadvantaged backgrounds; encourages stronger promotion ofstresses that the possibilities for people with special needs and for people from disadvantaged backgrounds to engage in the programme should be promoted more strongly and asks that their access thereto be facilitated;
Amendment 211 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Suggests that the priority should be to refrain from further harmonisation and major changes in the structure of the programme, and instead to safeguard and consolidate achievements and make incremental improvements where necessary;
Amendment 219 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. SuggestAsks that a clear definition of cross- sectoral projects be developed in order to avoid confusion resulting from the mislabelling of projects;