Activities of James ELLES
Plenary speeches (108)
Enlarged Europe and its neighbours
Transatlantic relations (continuation)
Policy challenges and budgetary means of the enlarged Union 2007-2013
Progress towards accession by Turkey
Broad political framework for the next financial perspective: Making Europe prosper – policy agenda and budgetary means for an enlarged Union 2007-2013
Draft 2004 budget as amended by the Council and Letters of Amendment 1,2,[amp] 3/2004
Legislative and work programme for 2004 – Eurostat
Order of business
2004 budget procedure
Presentation by the Council of draft general budget - 2004
Transatlantic relations
One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
Commission policy strategy for 2004/2004 budget guidelines
Budget 2003 (as modified by the Council)
Resumption of the session
Progress report on enlargement
Outcome of the European Council (Brussels, 24 and 25 October 2002)
2003 budgetary procedure
Vote
General debate on the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2003
Budgets 2002 and 2003
Transatlantic Relationship
Transatlantic Relationship
Vote (continuation)
European Parliament estimates for 2003
Annual political strategy of the Commission for 2003
Transatlantic relations including steel import tariffs
2003 budget guidelines
Vote
Spanish Presidency programme
European Council/Belgian Presidency
Presentation by Mr Prodi of the Commission work for the 2002 programme and the communication on the future of the European Union and strengthening the Community method
VOTE
Exposure of workers to risks arising from physical agents
2002 budget
Preparation for European Council (Göteborg 15/16 June 2001)
State of the transatlantic dialogue
2002 budget guidelines/ Financial perspective
Follow-up to Nice
Follow-up to Nice
EU/US summit
2001 budget
Preparation of Nice European Council and trade policy
2001 budget procedure
1998 discharge
2001 Budget – Parliament’s estimates
Vote
1998 discharge, budgetary control
Agenda
Human rights
Annual legislative programme (continuation)
Commission's strategic objectives and legislative programme
VOTE
VOTE
Response to Second Report of Committee of Independent Experts
WTO Millennium Round
Nuclear testing
EC and ECSC budgets for 2000
Agenda
Opening of the Millennium Round (continued)
Statement by Mr Prodi (continued)
Second Report of the Independent Experts
Dioxin
Position of Mr Bangemann
The state of transatlantic relations in the aftermath of the US elections (debate)
2010 budget - Section III, Commission: 'Guidelines for Budget 2010' - Guidelines for the 2010 budget procedure - Sections I, II, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII and IX (debate)
EU-United States summit
Explanations of vote
2008 draft general budget: Section III – 2008 draft general budget: Sections I, II, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII and IX (debate)
Forest fires in Greece, their consequences and conclusions to be drawn for prevention and preparedness measures (debate)
Kashmir: present situation and future prospects (debate)
Discharge for the financial year 2005 (debate)
Explanations of vote
2007, amended by the Council (vote)
Draft general budget for 2007, amended by the Council (all sections) – Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities – Draft amending budget No 6/2006 (debate)
Draft general budget for the European Union - Financial year 2007 (vote)
Explanations of vote
Draft general budget for 2007 (Section III) – Draft general budget for 2007 (Sections I, II, IV, V, VI, VII and VIII)
Financial year 2007
Commission's Annual Policy Strategy for 2007 (debate)
Explanations of vote
Access to humanitarian aid in Kashmir
Access to humanitarian aid in Kashmir
Access to humanitarian aid in Kashmir
Access to humanitarian aid in Kashmir
Access to humanitarian aid in Kashmir
European Council/Luxembourg Presidency
Transatlantic relations
Policy challenges and budgetary means
Budgetary discharge
Explanations of vote
Transatlantic relations
Annual report of the Court of Auditors – 2003
2005 budget procedure
Forward policy planning: budgetary implications for capacity-building (short presentation)
EU-US summit of 28 November 2011 (debate)
Parliament's position on the 2012 draft budget as modified by the Council - Mobilisation of the flexibility instrument (debate)
Financial rules applicable to the annual budget (continuation of debate)
2012 draft budget trilogue (debate)
A new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for a competitive, sustainable and inclusive Europe (continuation of debate)
EIB annual report for 2009 (debate)
Preparation of 2012 budget (debate)
Guidelines for the 2012 budget - other sections (debate)
2010 progress report on Turkey (debate)
Industrial policy for the globalised era (debate)
Parliament's position on the 2011 draft budget as modified by the Council - all sections - Draft amending budget No 3/2010: Section III - Commission - BAM (Banana Accompanying Measures) (debate)
Preparation of the TEC meeting and the EU/USA Summit (2 and 3 November 2009) - Transatlantic judicial and police cooperation (debate)
Draft general budget 2010 (Sections I, II, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX) - Draft general budget 2010 (Section III) (debate)
Reports (15)
Report on the accounts of the European Communities in respect of the 1996 financial year - Committee on Budgetary Control PDF (23 KB)
Report on giving discharge to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Communities for the 1996 financial year - Committee on Budgetary Control PDF (29 KB)
Report on the postponement of the discharge to be given to the Decision on the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the General Budget of the European Communities for the Financial Year 1996 - Committee on Budgetary Control PDF (57 KB)
Report on the Commission Communication to the Council on Reinforcing the Transatlantic Relationship: Focusing on Strategy and Delivering Results (Hughes Procedure) - Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy PDF (187 KB) DOC (122 KB)
REPORT Report on Draft amending budget No 7/2007 of the European Union for the financial year 2007 PDF (118 KB) DOC (65 KB)
REPORT Report on Draft amending budget No 6/2007 of the European Union for the financial year 2007 PDF (122 KB) DOC (76 KB)
REPORT Report on Draft amending budget No 5/2007 of the European Union for the financial year 2007, Section III - Commission PDF (136 KB) DOC (132 KB)
REPORT Report on draft amending budget no 4/2007 of the European Union for the financial year 2007 PDF (119 KB) DOC (67 KB)
REPORT Report on Draft amending budget No 3/2007 of the European Union for the financial year 2007 PDF (133 KB) DOC (111 KB)
REPORT Report on the draft amending budget No 2/2007 of the European Union for the financial year 2007 PDF (168 KB) DOC (99 KB)
REPORT Report on Draft amending budget No 1/2007 of the European Union for the financial year 2007 - Section III - Commission PDF (131 KB) DOC (74 KB)
PDF (357 KB) DOC (284 KB)
REPORT Report on the draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2007, Section III - Commission, and Letter of amendment No 1/0000 to the draft gneral budget of the European Union for the financial year 2007 PDF (3 MB) DOC (10 MB)
REPORT Report on the 2007 budget: the Commission's Annual Policy Strategy report (APS) PDF (223 KB) DOC (185 KB)
REPORT on forward policy planning and long-term trends: budgetary implications for capacity-building PDF (224 KB) DOC (125 KB)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the role of the EU in promoting a broader Transatlantic Partnership PDF (179 KB) DOC (99 KB)
Amendments (57)
Amendment 1 #
2013/0255(APP)
Recital B
B. whereas the Member States have the primary responsibility for implementing some 80 % of the Union budget, as well as for the collection of own resources, inter alia in the form of VAT and customs duties as established in Council Decision 2007/436 EC, Euratom, shortly to be replaced by a Council Decision on amended Commission proposal COM(2011) 739 final;
Amendment 2 #
2013/0255(APP)
Recital D (new)
D. whereas fourteen chambers of national Parliaments from eleven Member States have sent reasoned opinions concerning the compliance of the proposal with the principle of subsidiarity, as laid down in Article 5(3) TEU, to the Commission, triggering the subsidiarity mechanism as established in Article 7(2) of Protocol 2 TFEU;
Amendment 3 #
2013/0255(APP)
Recital E (new)
E. whereas following receipt of these reasoned opinions the Commission issued a review of its proposal which concluded that its proposal complied with Article 5(3) TEU and that a withdrawal or an amendment of the proposal was not required, deciding therefore to maintain its proposal as originally drafted;
Amendment 12 #
2013/0255(APP)
Paragraph 4b (new)
4 b. Notes with concern the proposed structure of the EPPO which may give rise to overlapping and competing structures, multiplication and diffusion of tasks as well as problems with specific accountability, which could possibly undermine its legal credibility;
Amendment 13 #
2013/0255(APP)
Paragraph 4c (new)
4 c. Requests therefore that the lead committee consider delaying its reading of the proposal until after the European elections with a view to ensuring that the proposal adequately reflects not only the principle of subsidiarity but also the legal suitability of the proposed legal framework;
Amendment 14 #
2013/0255(APP)
Paragraph 4d (new)
4 d. Considers that, in light of the number of national parliaments opposing this measure, the Commission should withdraw its proposal until the new European Parliament considers what action it might take on the EPPO;
Amendment 1 #
2011/2042(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Title before paragraph 1
Title before paragraph 1
Amendment 4 #
2011/2042(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Notes with interest the approach taken in the Fernandes report setting out the framework for the budget for 2012, other sections, believes that the Commission should follow a similar approach in preparing its 2012 budget, which should include the priority principles of good management, including: - economy, efficiency and effectiveness - transparency, accountability and accuracy as well as - investments in technology which would result in long term savings - the need for cost cutting plans;
Amendment 8 #
2011/2042(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Acknowledges the Council’s concern about economic and budgetary constraints at national level, but recalls, first and foremost, that under Treaty provisions the EU budget can not run a public deficit; recalls that, in 2009, the accumulated public deficit in the EU as a whole amounted to EUR 801 billion,elieves that Europe should show budgetary responsibility and restraint in times of ongoing national budgetary consolidation efforts but recalls that under Treaty provisions the EU budget can not run a public deficit; and that the EU budget represents a mere 2% of total public spending in the EU;
Amendment 10 #
2011/2042(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Is of the opinion that the EU budget can brings added value to national public expenditure bywhen initiating, supporting and complementing investments in those policiey areas which are at the core of Europe 2020; believes, moreover, that the EU budget has an instrumental role to play in helping the EU to exit the current economic and financial crisis through its capacity as a catalyst to boost investment, growth and jobs in Europe; takes the view that the EU budget could at least mitigate the effects of current restrictive national budgetary policies; stresses also that, given its redistributive nature, any attempt to limit the level of the EU budget will be detrimental to European solidarity and to the pace of economic development in most Member States; takes the view that the ‘net contributor’/’net beneficiary’ approach has no economic rationale, since it disregards spill-over effects between EU countries and therefore undermines common EU policy goals;
Amendment 18 #
2011/2042(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls that delivering on the Europe 2020 strategy’s seven flagship initiatives will require a huge amount of future-oriented investment in the short, medium and longer term; stresses that the main objective of the Europe 2020 strategy – namely, to promote growth, jobs and high-quality employment for all Europeans – will be achieved only if the necessary investments in education, research and development, innovation, SMEs and green technologies are made now and not delayed any longer; calls for a renewed political compromise combining the reduction of public deficits and debt with the promotion of such investments; expresses its willingness to explore improveing and widening existing instruments to enhancinge the synergy between the EU budget and EIB actions, in order to support long-term investments;
Amendment 21 #
2011/2042(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Strongly opposBelieves, therefore, any attempt to limit budget appropriations in those sectors linked to the delivery ofat advancing the Europe 2020 sStrategy’s headline targets and seven flagship initiatives; notes that such an attempt would be counter- productive, most likely resulting requires judicious selection of policy instruments and objectives, such as promoting trade, strengthening the failure of Europe 2020, as was the case for the Lisbon Strategy;single market and providing a supportive framework for innovation, takes the view that the Europe 2020 strategy can be credible only if adequately funded, and recalls that the EP has on numerous occasions raised this serious political concern;
Amendment 28 #
2011/2042(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Takes the view, moreover, that 2012 budget appropriations, including in those areas not directly linked to the achievement of the Europe 2020 strategy, need to be kept at an appropriate level to ensure the continuation of EU policies and the achievement of EU objectives well beyond the duration of the current economic crisis should be based on a careful analysis of recent payment appropriation outturn with a view to savings on lines where problems have arisen in implementation;
Amendment 31 #
2011/2042(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Recognises that there is an acute shortage of funds in the EU, both at member state and European Union levels, stresses that through attaching real importance to the concept of value for money that all programmes and expenditure should be carefully analysed for viability, efficiency and effectiveness;
Amendment 38 #
2011/2042(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. DeplorNotes the absence of any parliamentary dimension to the first European Semester exercise, despite the role that the European Parliament and the 27 national parliaments play in their respective budgetary procedures; is, instead, firmly convinced that stronger parliamentary involvement would significantly improve the democratic nature and transparency of such an exercise; supports the initiative of its Committee on Budgets to organise, as a first step, a meeting with national parliaments in order to discuss the general outline of the 2012 budgets of the Member States and of the EU;
Amendment 40 #
2011/2042(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Title after paragraph 10
Title after paragraph 10
2012 EU BUDGET: budget responsibility should not automatically entaildiscipline and responsibility leads to an approach of budgetary austerity
Amendment 47 #
2011/2042(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Points out that the 2012 budget is the sixth of seven under the current MFF; believes that the two arms of the budgetary authority now have, therefore, a clearer view of the shortfalls and positive developments associated with existing multiannual programmes; emphasises in this connection that the EP is determinprepared – should it prove necessary in order to support EU political priorities, and in close cooperation with its specialised committees – to make full use of, inter alia, Point 37 of the IIA (allowing a 5% margin of legislative flexibility);
Amendment 50 #
2011/2042(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Does not shareNotes the Council’s view that leaving sufficient margins below all MFF headings is a proper solution in order to address unforeseen circumstances; points out the recurrent under-financing of certain headings of the MFF as compared to the needs and EU political priorities endorsed by the Member States; is worried by the short-term approach underpinning the Council’s budget guidelines for 2012, which would jeopardise existing actions and programmes should unforeseen events or new political priorities arise;
Amendment 57 #
2011/2042(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Stresses, in this connection, that keeping commitment appropriations under strict control would require not only significant redeployments and reprioritisation, but also the joint identification of possible negative priorities by the institutions; highlights, however, Parliament's willingness to identify such priorities, however, also highlights the fact that, to this end, greater budgetary flexibility (mainly between the headings of the current MFF) wouldmay be needed in order to align budgetary resources with evolving circumstances and priorities;
Amendment 63 #
2011/2042(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Underlines that the strengthening of a number of policies at EU level following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty shcould logically imply additional financial capacity for the EU, which was hardly the case for 2011, the first year after its entry into force; reminds the Council and the Commission of the political declaration annexed to the 2011 budget, whereby the Commission undertakes to consider ways to strengthen the Lisbon Treaty priority areas and thoroughly to assess the needs when preparing the draft budget for 2012; expects the Commission to follow suit by, for example, proposing to transform successful Lisbon-related pilot projects or preparatory actions into multiannual programmes;
Amendment 67 #
2011/2042(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Considers the Commission’s approach to determining EU decentralised agencies’ subsidies from the EU budget to be reliable and to provide the right incentives; stresses that EU agencies’ budget allocations are far from being confined to administrative expenditure alone, but instead contribute to achieving the Europe 2020 goals and EU objectives in general, as decided by the legislative authority; takes the view, therefore, that their budget allocations should be preserved; reaffirms the need to examine requests for new posts carefully in relation to newly assigned tasks; calls for a specific approach in respect of the recruitment of specialised scientific staff with professional experience, especially when these posts are financed exclusively by fees and are thus budget-neutral for the EU budget; supports the work carried out by the interinstitutional working group on the future of agencies, which was set up in early 2009, and looks forward to its conclusions, notably on the above mentioned points;
Amendment 69 #
2011/2042(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
Amendment 70 #
2011/2042(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Emphasises the urgent need to address the issue of the growing level of outstanding commitments (RAL) at the end of 2010 (EUR 194 billion, see table in annex); highlights that the level of RAL is particularly high under Heading 1b; does not consider the Council’s option of reducing EU budget commitments in order to decrease the level of RAL to be a sustainable solution, since this would be detrimental to the achievement of previously agreed EU objectives and priorities;
Amendment 72 #
2011/2042(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Shares the Council’s view that realistic budgeting should be promoted; calls on the Commission to ensure that its draft budget is based on this principle, notes, however, that past implementation, which has improved in recent years, doesin some cases may not constitute a very accurate indicator of 2012 needs, since for some programmes implementation shcould accelerate in 2012 and payment needs increase accordingly; endorses the Council’s call for the Member States to provide better implementation forecasts, notably with a view to avoiding under- implementation, and takes the view that the bulk of the effort in this respect should be undertaken by the Member States themselves, since the level of the Commission’s draft budget is determined mainly by their own forecasts (particularly under Heading 2) and their implementation capacity; recalls that the Member States co-manage, together with the Commission, more than 80% of EU funding; reminds the Member States of their legal responsibility in defining and enforcing financial rules applicable to the recipients of EU funding;
Amendment 73 #
2011/2042(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Is aware that the level of payments finally implemented every year sometimes entails a significant so-called ‘surplus’ compared to the level of payments originally agreed by the budget authority, meaning that Member States’ national contributions to the EU budget are therefore decreased accordingly and their fiscal positions improved; does not consider the Council’s concerns as to the level and timing of this ‘return’ relevant in addressing the sensitive underlying political issue of the financing of the EU budget; strongly urges the Commission, therefore, to make proposals for the establishment of new and genuine own resources so as to provide the EU with real and autonomous financial resources;
Amendment 79 #
2011/2042(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26 a. Notes that no major reform of the staff regulations has been carried out over the past decade, requests the Commission to assess whether last reforms achieved their objectives, thinks that new impetus should be given to updating the regulations for the 21st Century, in particular concerning pensions, requests that the Commission submit a detailed report to the European Parliament by 31st July 2011;
Amendment 25 #
2011/2020(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Recalls that, in order to finance ITER, it will be necessary for the budget authority to agree on a revision of the MFF 2007- 2013; takes note of Commission's proposal of 20 April 2011 for financing the missing EUR 1 300 million for ITER in 2012 and 2013 but, in line with Council's exclusion of ITER additional funding from its Budget reading, insists that the negotiations on ITER's additional costs are disconnected from 2012 budgetary procedure; it is nevertheless essential that the question of ITER should be resolved by 2011 to ensure that existing EU structures for fusion do not weaken as a result of no decision being taken;
Amendment 2 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
Citation 7 a (new)
– having regard to its resolution of 10 May 2011 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2009, Section III1, __________________ 1 Texts adopted, P7_TA(2011)0194
Amendment 3 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital -A (new)
Recital -A (new)
-A. whereas in the international arena countries in Asia have double digit growth rates and are accumulating huge reserves of capital and the USA is in the throws of a huge political discussion on how to raise the ceiling for the national debt which at this time stands at around $13 trillion (€9.8 trillion) and is growing,
Amendment 5 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Amendment 6 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Db. whereas at the same time it is essential that the implementation of EU programmes and actions, including the financing of actions aiming at tackling the effects of the crisis and promoting growth, continue at EU level,
Amendment 7 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Notes with concern the current economic situation in Member States, many of which are saddled with unsustainable levels of debt and interest payments, notes also that some Western economies, owing to past fiscal indiscipline, have put themselves in a particularly perilous position; observes with alarm that countries such as China are now active in the Eurozone bond markets, as they have been with US debt for some time;
Amendment 8 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 a (new)
Paragraph -1 a (new)
-1a. Stresses that with some European economies beginning to show signs of recovery from recession that efforts to reduce levels of accumulated debt would, in the long term, prove advantageous and should, where possible, begin without delay as a matter of urgency;
Amendment 26 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Acknowledges that if the EU budget is to contribute to the collective effort of Member States in times of austerity this effort should be commensurate with its size, specific features and real economic impact; reminds the Councilbelieves that Europe should show budgetary responsibility and restraint in times of ongoing national budgetary consolidation efforts but recalls that under EU Treaty provisions the EU budget cannot run a deficit and that cuts to it, given its limited size, will have no significant long-term impact in addressing the urgent issue of accumulated national public deficit, which amounted in 2009 to EUR 801 billion for the EU as a wholethe EU budget represents 2% of total public spending in the EU;
Amendment 30 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Observes that the EU 27 annual inflation rate for 2011 is estimated at 2.7%, meaning that the proposed nominal 2012 increases of 3.7% in CA and 4.9% in PA are, compared to the Budget 2011, in real terms 1% and 2.2%; underlines the fact that several Member States are planning increases in their national budgets greater than the one proposed by the European Commission for the EU budget; notes also some Member States’ efforts to reduce budget deficits and slow the growth of sovereign debt, bringing it to a more sustainable level;
Amendment 32 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Highlights the fact that the proposed figures in the 2012 EU annual budget are consistent with the profile of EU expenditure set in the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2007-2013; emphasises that any increase (or decrease) compared to Budget 2011 must therefore be assessed bearing in mind its impact on the delivery of the multiannual programmes; stresses that this is a question of institutional credibility and coherence of the EU project when EU responsibilities and commitments keep on growing; deeply regrets from this point of view that the Commission did not propose endowing policies and new competencies established at EU level following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty with meaningful and visible financial capacityhave increased since the Lisbon Treaty came into force;
Amendment 42 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Observes that according to the DB 2012 there is an overall margin of EUR 1 603 million in CA under the 2012 ceiling agreed in the MFF; is determined, should it prove necessary, to make full use of this available margin as well as – if necessary – of other flexibility mechanisms foreseen by the IIA to support and strengthen certain targeted political objectives; expects Council’s full cooperation as regards the use of these mechanisms;
Amendment 44 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Notes that in its resolution of 24 March 2011 the EP stressed that keeping commitment appropriations under control would require not only significant redeployments and reprioritisation, but also the joint identification of possible negative priorities and savings by the institutions; urges its specialised committees to begin the process of determining clear political and budgetary priorities in their policy fields; maintains the view however that the Europe 2020 strategy can be credible only if adequately funded, and recalls that the EP has on numerous occasions raised this serious political concern; reiterates its strong request for the Commission to clarify in detail the budgetary dimension of the flagship initiatives, and to inform Parliament of the budgetary means needed for the implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy;
Amendment 45 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that a first round of discussions on budgetary priorities has already taken place in Parliament in the form of the extensive consultation of its specialised committees by its general rapporteur for the Budget 2012; emphasises that the process must now be fine-tuned in each committee for its respective field of competence so as to identify the positive and negative priorities for the Budget 2012; urges the Rapporteur to produce working documents clarifying this process for the Committee on Budgets;
Amendment 52 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. ObservTakes the view, however, that the difficult economic situation across the Union makes it more important than ever to ensure proper implementation of the EU budget, quality of spending and optimal use of existing Community financing; notes that a thorough review of those lines which have a history of low outturn or where problems have arisen in implementation was requested by the EP in its resolution of 24 March 2011; welcomes that the Commission has made a first endeavour to identify negative priorities and savings in some policy areas as compared with what was initially foreseen in the financial programming, particularly in those characterised by poor performance and low implementation rates in the recent past; asks the Commission to provide additional information supporting its assessments; notes also that, contrary to previous years, the Commission has frequently departed from its indicative financial programming presented in January 2011; is determined to further check and analyse these proposals before endorsing them;
Amendment 54 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Recalls in this regard its resolution on the discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2009, Section III calling for the Commission to undertake urgently during 2011 a comprehensive spending review of all areas of activity to ensure all expenditure is delivering value for money in order to identify possible savings which would reduce the pressure on the budget in this period of austerity;
Amendment 63 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Believes that all demands for increased expenditure in key priority areas can be met by savings from existing programmes and that greater scrutiny should therefore be made of outdated or ineffectual programmes to allow funds to be reallocated as stated in its resolution on the discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2009, Section III;
Amendment 4 #
2011/2017(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M a (new)
Recital M a (new)
Ma. whereas the problems of assuring security within the institutions has been highlighted in recent weeks (for example, in the European Parliament), action urgently being needed to ensure a proper balance between personal security on the one hand and the right of the ease of access on the other,
Amendment 13 #
2011/2017(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Reiterates that interinstitutional cooperation, whenever possible and appropriate, is essential in order to exchange best practices that favour effectiveness and allow for savings; considers that interinstitutional cooperation should be improved as regards translation, interpretation, recruitment (EPSO) and EMAS and should be extended to other areas; requests that there should be a thorough review of the freelancing for translation and the role of the translation centre;
Amendment 33 #
2011/2017(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Amendment 176 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23 a (new)
Recital 23 a (new)
(23 a) Most research available clearly illustrates the substantial increased benefits that accrue from investments in ICT infrastructure to generate jobs and growth in both the long and short term, not just from the construction of the infrastructure itself but also from the immediate, strong and durable multiplier effect of enhanced digital capability throughout the economy, especially for small businesses; urges that every effort should be made not only to clarify amounts available in the Union Budget but to do everything to ensure that existing funds be shaped towards ICT take up;
Amendment 329 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c – point i
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c – point i
(i) accelerating the deployment of fast and ultrafast broadband networks and their uptake, including by small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs), to be measured by the level of broadband and ultrafast broadband coverage and the number of houseto generate jobs and growth and their uptake, in particular connecting small and medium sized enterprises to make them more competitive; in so doing the indicator for the level of broadband and ultrafast coverage to be attained shoulds having subscribed for broadband connections for above 100 Mbps be above 100mbps with a view to ensuring the full attainment of the Digital Agenda for Europe's objectives as soon as possible;
Amendment 78 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20a (new)
Paragraph 20a (new)
20a. Notes that most research available illustrates the substantial increased benefits that accrue from investments in ICT infrastructure to generate jobs and growth in both the long and short term, not just from the construction of the infrastructure itself but also from the immediate, strong and durable multiplier effect of enhanced digital capability throughout the economy, especially for small businesses; urges that every effort should be made not only to clarify amounts available in the EU Budget but to do everything to ensure that existing funds be shaped towards ICT take up;
Amendment 44 #
2008/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is convinced that EU-US coordinated action is very beneficial for the international communityNotes that the concept of "strategic partnership" has been developed in many instances by the EU vis-à-vis those it regards as its privileged partners; given the size and scope of the EU-US relationship, believes that this relationship is the most important strategic partnership for the EU in its external relations; urges the Czech Presidency of the Council and the Commission to work with the new US administration on a common agenda of close cooperation with regard to both bilateral matters and global and regional issues and conflicts, so as to strengthen and deepen this partnership;
Amendment 71 #
2008/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Reaffirms that the new agreement should transform the current Transatlantic Legislators' Dialogue (TLD) into a Joint Parliamentary Committeede facto transatlantic assembly (as envisaged in the conclusions of the EU-US delegation meeting in Austin, Texas on 28 June 1998), serving as a forum for parliamentary dialogue and scrutiny of the implementation of the agreement; considers that this Committee should meet in plenary twice a year and that it should be comprised of both Members of the European Parliament and Members of the US Congress; reiterates that a legislative early-warning system should be created within this Committee;
Amendment 76 #
2008/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that the Joint Parliamentary Committeede facto transatlantic assembly (as envisaged in the conclusions of the EU-US delegation meeting in Austin, Texas on 28 June 1998) should be kept informed by the TEC and the TPC about the work done by them, and that it should be able to submit proposals to those Councils and to the EU- US summit; is of the view that both co- chairs of the Committee should be involved in the opening of meetings of both Councils;
Amendment 78 #
2008/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Underlines that this transatlantic partnership must be backed up by a deep understanding of the parties' civil societies; insists on the need to increase exchanges among students from both sides so as to ensure that present and future generations remain committed to this partnership; considers that back up support for this initiative should be provided from the 2010 EU budget so as to ensure its effective development;
Amendment 97 #
2008/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Draws attention to the National Intelligence Council (NIC) report entitled "Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World", and, given the need for long-term strategic thinking on policy issues within the EU institutions, urges the Czech and Swedish Presidencies to strive to establish a system of analysis similar to that used by the NIC, in order to identify long-term trends from an EU perspective, working in close cooperation with the EU Institute for Security Studies (EUISS); believes that this step will facilitate dialogue on the main strategic issues facing the transatlantic partnership in the long term;
Amendment 114 #
2008/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls on the EU and the US to develop a joint strategy towards Pakistan, aimed at strengthening its democratic institutions, the rule of law and its ability to fight terrorism, while encouraging Pakistan's involvement in responsibility for stability in the region, including the security of the Afghan border; welcomes the recently expressed intention of the new US President Barack Obama to resolve the Kashmir conflict; urges the EU and US to work towards this goal;
Amendment 163 #
2008/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Urges the partners to use the full potential of the TEC in order to overcome the existing obstacles to economic integration and to achieve a unified transatlantic market by 2015; requests the European Commission, on the basis of the study authorised and financed by the European Parliament in its 2007 Budget, to draw up a detailed road map of existing obstacles which need to be removed with the aim of achieving that target date;
Amendment 165 #
2008/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34a. Warmly welcomes the growing presence of organisations of American parentage in Brussels and in particular their commitment to the European Union, its institutions and a strengthened EU-US partnership; stresses that European organisations need to give a similar commitment to operate in Washington DC in order to raise the profile of the EU and that of European perspectives on transatlantic and global issues in the US political community; is aware that European institutions are often unable to match the resources available to their American counterparts; therefore suggests that funding be made available and prioritised for projects organised by European organisations which are aimed at enhancing the awareness and understanding of European issues and perspectives in the United States;
Amendment 35 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29a. Draws the Commission's attention to the former Amicus preparatory action, which has now been integrated into the "Youth in Action Programme"; requests the Commission to ensure a close follow- up of its implementation and to report to Parliament's relevant committees by 30 June 2009";