10 Amendments of Michael GAHLER related to 2015/2258(INI)
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Considers that the CSDP should be viewed as part of the broader CFSP frameworkexternal CFSP dimension and of EU external action as a whole as well as part of the internal dimension of the common market, industry, space, research and development policies; strongly believes that coherence and complementarity should be ensured between the various instruments to achieve economies of scale and maximise the impact of EU spending; is convinced that the EU has more tools and leverage potential than any other supranational institution, given that its security and defence policy can be reinforced by a comprehensive approach with other types of EU instruments and financing mechanisms; believes, therefore, that CFSP resources should be used in a smarter way by tying CSDP in with the different programmes managed by the Commission;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Calls on the Commission to set up permanent financial procedures for the cooperation between the Commission, the EEAS, the EDA, the ESA and member states in the fields of CSDP and common market, industry, space, research and development policies; regrets in this regard the failure of the past HR/VP to put forward the necessary proposal on how to assure the financing of EDA's staffing and running costs from the Union budget as required in the European Parliament's resolution of 12 September 2012 (2012/2050(INI)); calls therefore on the current VP/HR to remedy urgently this failure before the European Council on defence in June 2015; calls on the Commission and the Council to establish permanent financial rules to link EU actors form the areas of internal security (e.g. Frontex, Europol, ENISA) with external defence (e.g. EDA, EEAS);
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Welcomes the implementation of a pilot project on CSDP research done jointly by the European Commission and EDA as proposed by the Parliament in the budget 2015 in view of the Agency implementing Union objectives and Union budget; regrets in this context that the Commission did not provide the Parliament with an assessment of the potential of art. 185 TFEU as requested in its resolution of 21 November 2013 on the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base (2013/2125(INI));
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 c (new)
Paragraph 13 c (new)
13c. Welcomes the Commission's Implementation Roadmap for Communication on European Defence and Security Sector adopted on 24 June 2014; calls on the Commission in this regard to outline in a stake-holder assessment in which way the potential beneficiaries as well as national and regional administrations are ready to use the described measures of the ESIF, ERDF, ESF or Interreg V; regrets in this regard that the Commission's proposals might come too late in order to influence the ongoing resource allocation of national and regional administrations and re-channel EU funds serving a stronger European Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB) ;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 d (new)
Paragraph 13 d (new)
13d. Calls on the European Commission in view of her tasks to strengthen the EDTIB to put forward a proposal clarifying in which form a negative impact of restrictive measures set into force by the Council based on article 215 TFEU on exporting European defence and security industries can be compensated from the EU budget or relieved by non-distorting market activities;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
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 countri strengthening crisis prevention through better training, advice, and equipment; calls on the Council to establish a procedure for the assessment where any commonly agreed delivery of military equipment and arms serves the common European interest; 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;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Acknowledges 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 Member States, as well as a major incentive, notably for those lacking financial resources, to contribute to CSDP operations; regrets, however, that the actual use of operational common costs borne by Athena enumerated in Annex III of the Council decision 2011/871/CFSP remains very limited and 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 ensured;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Deplores, 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; calls on the United Kingdom to stop blocking the reform process; calls on the Council in the meantime to come back to the past practice to generally activate annually the financing of transport costs and the deployment costs for multinational task force headquarters borne by Athena (Annex III-B of the Council decision 2011/871/CFSP); supports, in particular, an expansion of the common costs eligible under Athena, such as the pre-financing of certain costs or the strategic transport of EU battle groups, thus to enable more Member States to contribute with their resources to military CSDP operations; expects a final decision on these issues at the next European Council on defence;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Deplores, 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 expansion of the costs eligible under Athena, such as the pre-financing of certain costs, the automatic financing of expenditure on CSDP operational and mission deployment (infrastructure for the accommodation of forces, expenses relating to the establishment of points of entry for troops into theatres of operations and security stocks of food and fuel where necessary), or the strategic transport of EU battle groups ; expects a final decision on these issues at the next European Council on defence;
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
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; calls on the Council to put forward a proposal on how in a crisis situation the consultation of the European Parliament can be done quickly; 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; regrets in this regard the lack of substance in the Council's Policy Framework for Systematic and Long-Term Defence Cooperation adopted on 18 November 2014 because the paper just describes current practices; calls therefore on the Commission to put forward the necessary proposal to clarify how the EU budget can facilitate the establishment of the permanent structure cooperation (PESCO) and the work of military peacetime cooperation within the PESCO framework;