2016/2037(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Takes note of the solution proposed by the Commission as a matter of urgency; notes that, following the setting-up of two Trust Funds and of a Facility for Refugees in Turkey, a new ad hoc mechanism has been put in place without an overall strategy to address the refugee crisis and without ensuring the full observance of Parliament's prerogatives as co-legislator; points to the problem that the new instrument is not founded on a Commission proposal for a regulation under the ordinary legislative procedure; stresses that Parliament has always acted constructively and swiftly in support of all initiatives in connection with the refugee crisis, and is still doing so with the rapid adoption of this amending budget; considers that the increasing use of 'off- budget' items raises a number of questions regarding the transparency of spending on humanitarian aid; believes, nevertheless, that the ordinary legislative procedure is not always capable of dealing with such unforeseen circumstances with necessary urgency;

2016/04/06
Committee: BUDG

2016/2037(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

3. Considers that ~~a more su~~the existain~~able~~g legal and budgetary framework ~~should be envisaged in order to~~ allows for humanitarian aid within the Union to be mobilised ~~in the future,~~ when circumstances so require; notes ~~that such emergency funding, meant at responding to crises and unforeseen situations, should by its very nature be covered by special instruments and be counte~~in this regard, the use of Article 122(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, as the legal basis for this Regulation; furthermore, recognises the considerable contributions from Member States towards humanitarian aid both within and outside the ~~MFF ceilings~~Union budget;

2016/04/06
Committee: BUDG

Ingeborg GRÄSSLE, Richard ASHWORTH

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 34

34. ‘loan’ means an agreement which obliges the lender to make available to the borrower an agreed sum of money for an agreed period of time and under which the borrower is obliged to repay that amount within the agreed time; such loans may take the form of a repayable advance;

2017/04/18
Committee: BUDG CONT

Ingeborg GRÄSSLE, Richard ASHWORTH

3. As regards contributions from funds under shared implementation to financial instruments established under this Section, the sector specific rules shall apply. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Managing Authorities may rely on an existing ~~ex-ante evaluation~~impact assessment, carried out in accordance with point (h) of Article 202(1), prior to contributing to an existing financial instrument.

2017/04/18
Committee: BUDG CONT

2016/0282(COD)

Ingeborg GRÄSSLE, Richard ASHWORTH

Proposal for a regulation
Article 215 – paragraph 3

3. Contributions shall not be used to directly or indirectly grant any personal advantage, in cash or in kind, to any individual member or member of staff of a European political party. Contributions shall not be used to directly or indirectly finance activities of third parties, in particular national political parties or political foundations at European or national level, whether in the form of grants, donations, loans or any other similar agreements. For the purposes of this Article, associated entities of European political parties at European level, such as youth and women organisations of these parties, shall not be regarded as third parties. Contributions shall not be used for any of the purposes excluded by Article 22 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014.

2017/04/18
Committee: BUDG CONT

2016/0282(COD)

Ingeborg GRÄSSLE, Richard ASHWORTH

Proposal for a regulation
Article 215 – paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. European political parties are allowed to build up reserves with the amount of their own resources exceeding 15% of their annual reimbursable expenditure.

2017/04/18
Committee: BUDG CONT

2016/0282(COD)

Ingeborg GRÄSSLE, Richard ASHWORTH

Proposal for a regulation
Article 215 – paragraph 7

7. If a European political foundation within the meaning of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014 realises a surplus of income over expenditure at the end of a financial year in which it received an operating grant, the part of that surplus corresponding to up to 25 % of the total income for that year may be carried over to the following year provided that it is used before the end of the first quarter of that following year.deleted

2017/04/18
Committee: BUDG CONT

2016/0282(COD)

Ingeborg GRÄSSLE, Richard ASHWORTH

Proposal for a regulation
Article 227 – paragraph 3 – point a

(a) it has been established by an impact assessment that there is added value to the Union intervention: trust funds shall only be created and implemented at Union level where their objectives, in particular by reason of their scale or potential effects, may be better achieved at Union level than at national level;

2017/04/18
Committee: BUDG CONT

2016/0282(COD)

Ingeborg GRÄSSLE, Richard ASHWORTH

Proposal for a regulation
Article 227 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)

(ba) the objectives of Union trust funds for external action shall be aligned with the objectives of the Union instrument or budgetary item from which they are funded.

2017/04/18
Committee: BUDG CONT

2016/0282(COD)

Ingeborg GRÄSSLE, Richard ASHWORTH

Proposal for a regulation
Article 242 – paragraph 1

The Commission shall report annually to the European Parliament and to the Council on financial instruments, budgetary guarantees, financial assistance, contingent liabilities and the common provisioning fund as of 30 June of the year of publication in accordance with paragraphs 4 and 5 of Article 39 and with point (d) of Article 50(1). That information shall be made available to the Court of Auditors at the same time.

2017/04/18
Committee: BUDG CONT

2016/0282(COD)

Ingeborg GRÄSSLE, Richard ASHWORTH

Proposal for a regulation
Article 250 – paragraph 1

1. The Court of Auditors shall transmit to the Commission and the institutions concerned, by 1530 June, any observations which are, in its opinion, such that they should appear in the annual report~~. Those observations shall remain confidential and shall be subject to an adversarial procedure~~ to enable the institutions concerned to comment upon them. Those observations shall remain confidential. Each institution shall address its reply to the Court of Auditors by 15 ~~October~~July. The replies of institutions other than the Commission shall be sent to the Commission at the same time.

2017/04/18
Committee: BUDG CONT

2016/0282(COD)

Ingeborg GRÄSSLE, Richard ASHWORTH

Proposal for a regulation
Article 256 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

The administrative appropriations covered by this Title shall be those set out in Article 45(3) and those of the other institutions.

2017/04/18
Committee: BUDG CONT

2016/0282(COD)

Ingeborg GRÄSSLE, Richard ASHWORTH

Proposal for a regulation
Article 278 – paragraph 2

Such review shall cover, inter alia, the implementation of the provisions of Title ~~VIII~~X of Part One and the deadlines set out in Article 251.

2017/04/18
Committee: BUDG CONT

2016/0282(COD)

Ingeborg GRÄSSLE, Richard ASHWORTH

Proposal for a regulation
Article 279 – paragraph 1

Regulation (EC,U, Euratom) No 966/2012 ~~and Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1268/2012 are~~is repealed with effect from 1 January 20XX.

2017/04/18
Committee: BUDG CONT

2016/0282(COD)

Ingeborg GRÄSSLE, Richard ASHWORTH

Proposal for a regulation
Article 280 – paragraph 5 a (new)

By derogation from the second paragraph of this Article, point -a of Article 121(1) shall apply from the date of entry into force of the post-2020 multiannual financial framework, except where otherwise provided in the basic act.

2017/04/18
Committee: BUDG CONT

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the agreement on the MFF 2014-2020 was the outcome of a long and strenuous process of negotiations which took place in a very difficult social, economic and financial context; whereas as a consequence the overall level of the MFF was effectively reduced compared to the previous programming period; considers that the first ever real-terms cut of the EU's multiannual budget was an important signal of solidarity with Member States facing difficult choices with regard to their national budgets;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Believes that a clear distinction between a mid-term review and a revision of the MFF is an important determinant of the future direction of the current MFF; considers that any legislative proposal for the revision of the MFF Regulation must be on the basis of the mid-term review, and only if the conclusions of this review deem a legislative proposal to be appropriate;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Recalls that Article 311 TFEU states that the Union shall provide itself with the means necessary to attain its objectives and carry through its policies; considers, therefore, that should the review arrive at the conclusions that the current ceilings weare too low, it ~~would be a primary law requirement to~~is imperative that all possible means of reallocating expenditure between programmes and within the existing ceilings must be explored, before an increase in the ceilings is considered;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – introductory part

5. Considers that a review of the MFF in 2016 should take stock of a number of serious crises and new political initiatives, together with their respective budgetary consequences, which were not anticipated at the time of the MFF’s adoption; notes, inter alia, the migration and refugee crisis, external emergencies, internal security issues, the crisis in agriculture, the funding of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI), the persistent high level of unemployment, especially among young people, and the payment crisis in the EU budget; observes that, in order to finance the additional pressing needs, an unprecedented recourse to the MFF’s flexibility mechanisms and special instruments was deemed necessary~~, as the MFF ceilings proved to be too tight in some headings~~; considers that, over the past two years, the MFF has ~~essentially been~~been unnecessarily pushed to its limits; due to a lack of sufficient reprioritisation within the budget to meet these new challenges;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Considers that the mid-term review of the MFF should also take stock of the performance of funds allocated, in order to ascertain whether they are achieving their objectives and whether appropriations are being under-utilised; suggests that the review should evaluate whether the EU has an optimum number of objectives and consider prioritisation in this regard;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses that the conflicts in Syria, the Middle East and several regions in Africa have had humanitarian, security and migratory consequences on an unprecedented scale; recalls that the EU has been directly impacted, with more than one million refugees reaching Europe in 2015 alone and more expected in the coming years; recalls that this crisis has led to a major financial response on both the EU’s part and ~~hence had~~that of the Member States, with the former's contribution having a significant impact on the EU budget, notably on headings 3 (Security and Citizenship) and 4 (Global Europe);

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Notes also with great concern that that the success rate for Horizon 2020 has dropped to a level of 13 % from the 20-22 % enjoyed by its predecessor (FP7) in the previous programming period; regrets the fact that as a result fewer high-quality projects in the field of research and innovation are receiving EU funding; notes, similarly, the rejection of many high-quality applications relating to the CEF owing to insufficient budget funds; regrets that the portion of the EU budget dedicated to research and innovation has often been the first to be adversely affected by any rationalisation of the budget; notes that research and innovation programmes have the potential to generate EU added value, and therefore considers that necessary savings ought to be made elsewhere;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Is particularly concerned, however, at the lack of new commitment appropriations for the YEI as of 2016, given that its entire original envelope was frontloaded in 2014-2015 (Article 15 of the MFF Regulation); stresses that in supporting this frontloading Parliament never intended that the initiative should be terminated after only two years of funding and that other MFF mechanisms, such as the Global Margin for Commitments, were put in place with the purpose of ensuring its continuation; also notes the frontloading of appropriations, on the basis of the same article, for Erasmus + (EUR 150 million), this being another EU programme that makes a major contribution to improving the employability of young people, which was fully implemented Notes that the YEI's entire original envelope was frontloaded in 2014-2015 (Article 15 of the MFF Regulation) and that other MFF mechanisms, such as the Global Margin for Commitments (Article 14), allow for unused margins in the years 2014 to 2017 to be used from 2016 to 2020 for policy objectives related to growth and employment, in particular youth employment; also notes the frontloading of appropriations, on the basis of the same article, for Erasmus + (EUR 150 million); highlights that a report on the implementation of the Youth Guarantee and the operation of the YEI is due later this year, following a request from the European Council in June 20131a ; considers it necessary to await the outcome of this report in order to determine the ~~first two years of this period;~~ appropriate level of funding for the YEI in the years ahead; __________________ 1a http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/c ms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/137634.pdf

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Recalls the recent terrorist attacks in France and Belgium and the increased threat levels in other Member States, which call for more coordinated and reinforced action at EU level; underlines that the Union already has the Internal Security Fund as an appropriate instrument and has several agencies operating in this field; considers that ~~more European action, and therefore funding,~~increased coordination between Member States is necessary to address the current security situation in the EU, and therefore, adequate resources will be needed in this area in order to provide an adequate response to this threat;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 – subparagraph 1 (new)

Member States' fiscal positions

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Welcomes the fact that a number of the programme countries have exited their relief programmes; notes, however, that Bulgaria, Croatia, France, Italy and Portugal remain in the excessive imbalances category without triggering the Excessive Imbalances Procedure and Finland, Germany, Ireland, The Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and Slovenia are found to experience imbalances1b; __________________ 1b http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/eco nomic_governance/macroeconomic_imba lance_procedure/index_en.htm

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)

20b. Notes that the United Kingdom, Spain, Slovenia, Ireland, Croatia, Cyprus, France, Portugal and Greece are in Excessive Deficit Procedure1c ; __________________ 1c http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/eco nomic_governance/macroeconomic_imba lance_procedure/index_en.htm

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 c (new)

20c. Notes that approximately 70% of the EU budget is made up of Own Resources based on GNI; underlines that Member States who are struggling to reduce their deficits are prioritising spending on essential services, such as welfare, healthcare and defence; believes that all institutions must take this into account during the mid-term review, particularly before considering any increase the MFF ceilings from the amounts agreed in 2013;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 7 a (new)

Public Opinion

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 d (new)

20d. Believes it to be essential that the views of EU citizens are taken into account during the mid-term review, and possible revision of the MFF; highlights that a plurality of EU citizens are both opposed to an increase in the Union's budget, and believe the budget gives poor value for money1d ; notes that in the Czech Republic, Sweden, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Denmark, Lithuania, Latvia, Slovakia, the United Kingdom, France, Finland, Italy, Spain, Slovenia, Belgium, and Austria more people are opposed to increasing the size of the Union's budget than are in favour; __________________ 1dEurobarometer, Spring 2015: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archiv es/eb/eb83/eb83_budget_en.pdf

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22a. Underlines that reprioritising funds from poorly performing programmes to better performing programmes, or to areas where there is a genuine need, should be the first consideration when identifying new areas of spending;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23a. Highlights Point 8 of the 2013 Interinstitutional Agreement1f , which emphasises that the institutions should ensure sufficient margins are left available beneath the ceilings for the purposes of sound financial management; considers maintaining suitable margins under the budget headings to be the most fiscally responsible means of ingraining flexibility within the budget, enabling the EU to better react to unforeseen circumstances; __________________ 1f OJ C 373, 20.12.2013, p. 2.

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Anticipates that ~~any~~ further needs ~~that~~could arise ~~with~~in relation to the migration and refugee crisis in 2016, including the tranche of EUR 200 million for the new instrument to provide emergency support within the Union~~, should result in the mobilisation of the Contingency Margin as soon as necessary; recall~~; considers the mobilisation of the Contingency Margin to be an instrument of last resort, and that its mobilisation should be fully offset against the margins in one or more headings for the current or future financial years in accordance with Article 13(3) of the MFF Regulation1g ; furthermore, considers its mobilisation should only be considered after all other avenues or reallocation and redeployment from existing budget lines have been explored; regrets that no more margins are available under Heading 3, while the Flexibility Instrument has already been used up in its entirety for this year; __________________ 1g OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 884.

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Recalls that the legislative flexibility, as enshrined in Point 17 of the Interinstitutional Agreement (IIA), allows for an ~~increase~~adjustment in the overall envelope of programmes adopted by the ordinary legislative procedure of up to 10 % over the seven-year period; notes that ‘new, objective, long-term circumstances’ allow the budgetary authority to depart even further from the original envelope; welcomes the fact that this provision has already been used to allow the Union to respond to unforeseen events by considerably increasing the original annual allocations of programmes such as AMIF; , with account being taken of the results obtained from implementing the programme, in particular on the basis of assessments1h, allow the budgetary authority to depart even further from the original envelope; welcomes the fact that this provision stipulates that any increase resulting from such variation shall remain beneath the existing ceiling for the heading concerned; __________________ 1h OJ C 373, 20.12.2013, p. 3.

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Subheading II

II. Mid-term revision of the MFF ~~– an imperative requirement~~

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Is convinced, on the basis of the above analysis, that the review of the functioning of the current MFF entails the conclusion that a genuine mid-term revision of the MFF as provided for in the MFF Regulation is absolutely indispensable if the Union is to effectively confront a number of challenges while fulfillingBelieves that the mid-term review of the functioning of the current MFF will provide the basis for deciding whether a legislative proposal on a revision of the MFF its ~~political objectives~~appropriate; recalls that delivering on the Europe 2020 strategy remains the main priority to be supported by the EU budget;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Urges the Commission, ~~when preparing its~~if it decides that a legislative proposal on revision is appropriate, to take into consideration the ~~following~~ demands of ~~Parliament regarding changes to the MFF Regulation, with respect both to the figures and to several provisions relating to the functioning of the MFF which need to be applicabl~~both Council and Parliament as the budgetary authority regarding changes to the MFF Regulation, in particular, the need to respect the ceilings which were algre~~ady for the current MFF~~ed to in 2013;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Is convinced that, while fully confirming the notion of large-scale political and financial support for EFSI, the EU budget should not be financing new initiatives to the detriment of existing Union programmes and policies, except in cases where such programmes and policies have a demonstrably poor rate of implementation or performance; intends to deliver on its commitment to fully offset the EFSI-related cuts affecting Horizon 2020 and CEF, in order to allow them to accomplish their objectives as agreed only two years ago;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. ~~Strongly supports the continuation of~~Notes the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI), as a ~~mean~~complementary means to national policies of ensuring an urgent response in the fight against youth unemployment~~, following the necessary adjustments brought about by the ongoing evaluation; considers that this can only be achieved through the provision of an adequate level of commitment appropriations~~; considers it necessary to await the outcome of the report on the implementation of the Youth Guarantee and the operation of the YEI in order to determine the appropriate level of funding for the YEI ~~for~~in the ~~remaining years of the current MFF; notes that this should entail an upwards revision of the ceilings of~~years ahead; believes that due consideration should also be given to the restricted room for manoeuvre in Subheading 1b, as no margins are available;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Considers that the magnitude of the migration and refugee crisis goes to show that additional needs with significant budgetary consequences may be expected to arise in the coming years; underlines, moreover, that the need for internal security in the EU and the fight against terrorism are expected also to necessitate additional funding to back up reinforced action at EU level; is of the firm opinion that, even with the mobilisation of the small margins available under Heading 3 (Security and Citizenship) and existing flexibility provisions, the resources available will not be sufficient to tackle the increased needs under this heading; calls, therefore, for significant reinforcements for the AMIF and the Internal Security Fund, as well as for the Union agencies ~~operating in the field, as well as other initiatives that can be undertaken; considers that an upward revision of the ceilings under Heading 3 is required~~who have undertaken new responsibilities; considers that the severity of the current situation may require an upward revision of the ceilings under Heading 3, provided that the raising of this ceiling is offset by the lowering of another ceiling, in accordance with Article 17(4) of the MFF Regulation;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Expects, therefore, that new reinforcements in commitment appropriations will be accompanied by a corresponding increase in payment appropriations~~, including an upward revision of the annual payments ceiling if necessary~~; believes that a thorough evaluation of existing commitment appropriations should take place before new commitments are entered into; considers, moreover, that the mid-term review~~/revision~~ of the MFF provides an excellent opportunity to take stock of payment implementation and updated forecasts for the expected evolution of payments up to the end of the current MFF; believes that a joint payment plan for 2016-2020 should be developed and agreed between the three institutions;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35

35. Is determined to settle in an unequivocal way the issue of budgeting the payments of the MFF special instruments; recalls the unresolved conflict of interpretation between the Commission and Parliament on the one hand, and the Council on the other, which has been in the forefront of the budgetary negotiations in recent years; ~~reiterates its long-standing position that payment appropriations resulting from the mobilisation of special instruments in commitment appropriations should als~~believes that the mid-term review of the MFF provides an opportunity to examine institutional differences and for a resolution to be cfoun~~ted over and above the annual MFF payment ceilings~~d in the interests of budgetary stability and predictability;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38

38. Believes, ~~therefore,~~ that the mid- term revision of the MFF Regulation should provide for the lifting of a number of constraints and limitations that were imposed by the Council on the flexibility provisions at the time of adoption of the MFF; considers, in particular, that any restrictions on the carry-over of unused appropriations and margins, either by setting annual ceilings (Global Margin for Payments) or by imposing time-limits (Global Margin for Commitments) should be revokedan opportunity to evaluate the flexibility provisions included in the current MFF, including the constraints and limitations of these provisions; considers that constraints and limitations on flexibility provisions are entirely consistent with the principles of budgetary discipline and sound financial management, ensuring that the EU budget lives within its means;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39

39. Stresses, in particular, the mobilisation of the full amount of the Flexibility Instrument in 2016; notes that this instrument allows for financing clearly identified expenditure that cannot be financed within the ceiling of one or more headings and is not linked to a specific EU policy; considers, therefore, that it provides genuine flexibility in the EU budget, especially in the event of a major crisis; recalls~~, accordingly, for a substantial increase in its financial envelope up to an annual allocation of EUR 2 billion, pointing out~~ that the Flexibility Instrument is not linked to a special policy field and can be mobilised for any purpose that this amount is budgeted only in the event of a decision of the budgetary authority for mobilisation of this instrument; recalls that the Flexibility Instrument is not linked to a special policy field and candeemed necessary; highlights both an increase in the annual appropriations available and an increased carry-over possibility of unused appropriations from the previous MFF; notes that over EUR 3.7 billion is available in the current MFF, of which EUR 1.53 billion has been mobilised ~~for any purpose that is deemed necess~~thus fary;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40

40. Points to the role of the Emergency Aid Reserve in providing a rapid response to specific aid requirements for third countries for unforeseen events, and stresses its particular importance in the current context; ~~calls for a substantial increase in its financial envelope up to an annual allocation of EUR 1 bill~~highlights an increase in the annual appropriations available from the previous MFF, with the additional possibility of carry-over of unused appropriations;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41

41. Notes the different rules in force as regards the time-span for carrying over unspent appropriations for the MFF special instruments, namely the Flexibility Instrument, the Emergency Aid Reserve, the EU Solidarity Fund and the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund; ~~calls for the harmonisation of these rules so as to enable a general N+3 rule to apply to these instruments;~~

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42

42. Attaches particular importance to the Contingency Margin, as a last-resort instrument for reacting to unforeseen circumstances; stresses that, according to the Commission, this is the only special instrument that can be mobilised only for payment appropriations and thus to prevent a payment crisis in the EU budget as in 2014; ~~deplor~~recognises the fact that, contrary to the previous period, a compulsory offsetting of the appropriations is stipulated in the MFF Regulation; is of the firm opinion that this requirement creates an unsustainable situation with regard to the MFF ceilings of the last years of the period; stresses that the Contingency Margin is in any event a last-resort instrument, whose mobilisation is jointly agreed by the two arms of the budgetary authority; calls, therefore, for the rule of compulsory offsetting to be lifted immediately with retroactive effectinstils a sense of budgetary discipline;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42 a (new)

42a. Believes that the Commission should consider creating a mechanism based on the principle of Article 17(4) of the MFF Regulation; suggests that in order to increase flexibility, funding could be re-allocated between headings by offsetting any increase of the ceiling in one heading by an equivalent decrease in the ceiling of another heading, on agreement from both arms of the budgetary authority; underlines that this tool should be limited to a relatively small percentage of the headings in question order to achieve budgetary stability;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44

44. Acknowledges the increased role of financial instruments in the Union budget as a complementary form of funding as compared to subsidies and grants; recognises the potential of these instruments in terms of increasing the financial, and therefore the political, impact of the Union budget; underlines, however, that a shift from traditional financing to more innovative instruments is not advisable in all policy areas, as not all policies are entirely market-driven; ~~underlines that increasing use of financial instruments should not lead to a reduction in the Union budget;~~ recalls Parliament’s repeated calls for greater transparency and democratic scrutiny regarding the implementation of financial instruments supported by the Union budget;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a (new)

45a. Considers that the key priority to be addressed should be the future needs of the Union; suggests that the Union carefully consider the merits of every cent spent and prioritise spending on the most value generating areas or areas with proven EU added value;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46

46. Considers that ~~the key prioriti~~further issues to be addressed must include adjustments to the duration of the MFF, ~~a thorough reform of the own resources system,~~ a greater emphasis on the unity of the budget, and more budgetary flexibility; ~~is furthermore convinced that the modalities of the decision-making process need to be reviewed in order to ensure democratic legitimacy and comply with the provisions of the Treaty;~~

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48

48. Underlines that an essential element of the difficulties in agreeing on a multiannual financial framework between Member States is the~~ir primary~~ focus on net balances, which is understandable given that national contributions from the Member States constitutes the vast majority of the EU's budget; reiterates its position that the Union budget is not a simple zero-sum game but, rather, the expression of common policies which can create collective added value; urges the Member States, therefore, to change their perception of and approach to the Union budget in order to ensure that the outcome is not another stalemate that will only further disconnect the Union from its citizensbelieves it is incumbent on all participants in future MFF negotiations to act on the basis of sound financial management and budgetary discipline;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52

52. ~~Underlines the need for a fully- fledged reform of the o~~Notes that the High Level Group on Own rResources ~~system, with simplicity, fairness and transparency as guiding principles; is therefore expect~~is due to report by the end of 2016; remains open to proposals on own resources; nevertheless, believes that a convincing can ~~ambitious final report from the High Level Group on O~~didate for possible new own Rresources ~~by the end of 2016, as well as an equally ambitious legislative package on own resources as of 2021 from the Commission by the end of 2017~~has yet to be formalised; in addition, is strongly opposed to any new measure that would increase the overall tax burden on EU citizens or disproportionately affect a minority of Member States;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53

53. Stresses the need to reduce the share of the GNI contributions to the Union budget in order to exit the ‘juste retour’ approach of Member States; underlines that this would reduce the burden on national treasuries and thus make the resources concerned available for Member States’ national budgets; recalls that the current VAT own resource is over-complex and is in essence a second GNI contribution, and therefore calls for this own resource either to be substantially reformed or to be scrapped altogether; considers it necessary, however, to keep the GNI contributions as an element of the budget, given the need for its function as a balancing contribution;deleted

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54

54. Calls for the introduction of one or several new own resources, ideally with a clear link to European policies that create added value; notes that a large number of possible new own resources have already been discussed by the High Level Group, and eagerly awaits its recommendations;deleted

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56

56. Underlines that according to the Treaty, Parliament and the Council establish the Union budget on an equal footing as the two arms of the budgetary authority; considers, moreover, that ~~full~~ parliamentary ~~control over all~~scrutiny of expenditure is an essential element of all EU spending; calls on the Commission to preserve the unity of the budget and to consider it a guiding principle when proposing new policy initiatives;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58

58. Stresses that the rigid structure of the Union budget deprives the budgetary authority of the possibility of reacting adequately to changing circumstances; ~~calls, therefore,~~notes that an extensive array of flexibility provisions were built in to the current MFF; believes, however, that there is scope for greater flexibility in the next MFF, in particular through more flexibility between headings and years with the aim of fully exploiting the MFF ceilings; believes that the Commission should further consider creating a mechanism to allow funding to be re-allocated between headings, provided any increase of the ceiling in one heading is offset by an equivalent decrease in the ceiling of another heading;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59

59. Underlines that in addition to the ability to react flexibly to changing circumstances without prejudice to the agreed programming, there is also a necessity for the Union to be able to react quickly to developing crises; calls, therefore, for ~~the establishment~~an evaluation of the added value and utility of a permanent EU crisis reserve within the Union budget over and above the MFF ceilings, in order to ~~avoid~~minimize the use of ad hoc solutions like the setting-up of trust funds;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2284(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. Recalls that responsibility for employment and social policy primarily lies with Member States; notes, nevertheless, that EU funding can be used to support or compliment Member States’ actions in this field;

2016/04/01
Committee: BUDG

2015/2284(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 a (new)

-1a. Underlines that the Member States should aim to have Public Employment Services that are capable of dealing with redundancies and that the EGF does not absolve Member States of their responsibilities;

2016/04/01
Committee: BUDG

2015/2284(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. BRecalls commitments by the European Parliament to ensure that the EU budget focuses on European added value, delivers value for money for citizens and the renewed focus on outcomes based budgeting; believes that the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF) iscould be a valuable instrument through which the EU could expresses its solidarity with workers and ~~which should continue to operate outside the MFF~~help unemployed persons get back to work; suggests, however, that there is considerable room for improvement with the EGF; considers, in particular, that the EGF could deliver better value for money and be better focused on outcomes;

2016/04/01
Committee: BUDG

2015/2284(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that, between 2007 and 2014, 1341 funding applications for a total amount of EUR 5~~61.1~~42.4 million were submitted by 20 Member States to provide support to 12~~2 121~~1 380 workers;

2016/04/01
Committee: BUDG

2015/2284(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Notes that the EGF is a supposed to be a mechanism that delivers short term assistance where a quick response is needed; regrets that the average approval period for EGF assistance between 2007 and 2013 was 303 days; welcomes efforts by the Commission to streamline the application process; suggests that reducing the number of official languages a draft decision needs to be translated into could save at least two weeks in time; underlines that should further translations be requested that the Commission could do these at a later date;

2016/04/01
Committee: BUDG

2015/2284(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Questions how a mechanism designed to deliver short term assistance to prevent long-term unemployment allows for measures to last up to 30 months for some training courses; suggests that this could exacerbate long-term unemployment by keeping workers out of work for so long;

2016/04/01
Committee: BUDG

2015/2284(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to use the scope for implementing the EGF budget more flexibly, and therefore more effectively; notes that EGF expenditure in some Member States consistently performs better than others; suggests that the Commission provides guidance and enables Member States to share best practice in the application of EGF funds and their use in order to ensure the maximum re-employment rate per euro spent;

2016/04/01
Committee: BUDG

2015/2284(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Notes that, according to the European Parliamentary Research Service, the EGF delivers the best EU Added Value when used to co-finance services for redundant workers not ordinarily existing under Member States Public Employment Services, and, when these are focused on training and re-training activities and not allowances;

2016/04/01
Committee: BUDG

2015/2284(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the fact that nearly 50% of workers who received financial assistance under applications dealt with in 2013-2014 are now back in employment; ~~emphasises, however,~~suggests that the EGF should ~~provide fund~~focus more on re- integration and ensure that any re- training effor ~~sectors likely to face problems in the future~~ts actually help people to re- integrate rather than delay re-integration;

2016/04/01
Committee: BUDG

2015/2284(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses the need for greater coordination with the ESF and the ERDF~~, and proposes that applications for EGF funding should be submitted by the authorities that manage the Structural Funds in each Member State~~;

2016/04/01
Committee: BUDG

2015/2284(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

~~8. Takes the view that the derogation relating to persons who are neither in employment nor in education or training (NEET) should be extended beyond 2017;~~deleted

2016/04/01
Committee: BUDG

2015/2284(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Recalls the Commission’s commitment to outcomes based-budgeting; suggests that following the adoption of the Communication on outcomes based budgeting that the Commission examine the EGF to improve its focus on outcomes; believes that in order to do this the Commission should compare the EGF with cases where the EGF has not been used and where the ESF/ERDF has been used but where the EGF criteria were met; highlights the need for greater availability of data for the Commission to do this; highlights in particular the need for an informed analysis of the efficient use of EGF funds, the monitoring of national costs for the activities supported by the EGF and the need for a breakdown of eligible actions;

2016/04/01
Committee: BUDG

2015/2284(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9b. Believes there is further scope for improvement on the use of the EGF for projects to support entrepreneurship and start-up activity; calls on the Commission to examine this further;

2016/04/01
Committee: BUDG

2015/2284(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 c (new)

9c. Notes the European Parliamentary Research Service’s concerns with regards the methodology for calculating the benefit of the EGF; underlines the need for additional requirements on performance indicators;

2016/04/01
Committee: BUDG

2015/2269(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2a (new)

2a. Emphasises that the subsequent reallocation of any reduction in Member States' GNI-based contributions to the Union budget is an exclusive competence of the Member States, in accordance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality in Article 5 of the Treaty on the European Union;

2015/11/18
Committee: BUDG

2015/2269(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

~~3. Underlines that substantial additional financial means are necessary to address the current refugee crisis;~~deleted

2015/11/18
Committee: BUDG

2015/2269(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Notes that Member States' financial pledges for the Africa Trust Fund, the Syria Trust Fund and to UN agencies supporting refugees, reconfirmed at the informal meeting of EU Heads of State or Government on migration of 23 September 2015, at the European Council of 15 October 2015, and at Valletta Summit of 11-12 November 2015 have not yet been met; deplores that according to Commission data Member States were lagging behind by EUR 2,3 billion at the beginning of November 2015;deleted

2015/11/18
Committee: BUDG

2015/2269(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that further financial efforts will be needed to provide humanitarian assistance along the transit routes and to manage the challenges posed by the reception of unprecedented numbers of refugees in Europe's cities and regions;deleted

2015/11/18
Committee: BUDG

2015/2269(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

~~6. Deeply regrets that no firm compromise could be reached in conciliation to use the reflow from Draft amending budget No 8/2015 to address the refugee crisis;~~deleted

2015/11/18
Committee: BUDG

2015/2269(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6a (new)

6a. Considers it imperative that the revision of the forecast of Traditional Own Resources (customs duties) and the budgeting of VAT and GNI balances remains free from political interference, and based solely on the latest economic data, thereby providing a greater degree of certainty for both Member States and the Commission alike in the forward planning of both national and Union budgets;

2015/11/18
Committee: BUDG

2015/2264(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Reiterates that the mobilisation of this instrument, as provided for in Article 11 of the MFF Regulation, shows, once more, th~~e crucial need for the Union budget t~~at the Union budget can be flexible but that it must also be more ~~flexible~~targeted; notes that these additional appropriations are only made possible thanks to the carry- over of unused amounts from the Flexibility Instruments of the financial years 2014 and 2015; ~~underline~~regrets that no amount will be carried over to the financial year 2017, thus limiting any mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument to its annual ceiling of EUR 471 million (2011 prices);

2015/11/18
Committee: BUDG

2015/2264(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Calls, therefore, on the Commission to present a draft budget in 2017 that decreases commitment appropriations for actions under headings 3 and 4 which are no longer considered priorities in order to provide an adequate margin should the need to respond to unforeseen circumstances arise;

2015/11/18
Committee: BUDG

2015/2264(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Reiterates its long-standing view that, without prejudice to the possibility for payment appropriations to be mobilised for specific budget lines through the Flexibility Instrument without prior mobilisations in commitments, the payments stemming from commitments previously mobilised through the Flexibility Instrument can only be counted over and above the ceilings;deleted

2015/11/18
Committee: BUDG

2015/2253(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas ~~after~~the Commission, having examined all possibilities for re-allocating commitment appropriations under heading 3, ~~it appear~~argues it is necessary to mobilise the Flexibility Instrument for commitment appropriations;

2015/10/08
Committee: BUDG

2015/2253(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Notes that the 2015 ceiling for heading 3 does ~~not~~ allow for an adequate financing of important and urgent political priorities of the Union;

2015/10/08
Committee: BUDG

2015/2253(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Emphasises that not all funds appropriated under heading 3 are targeted at urgent political priorities of the Union, namely tackling the migration and refugee crisis and boosting competitiveness through employment, enterprises and entrepreneurship ;

2015/10/08
Committee: BUDG

2015/2253(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Reiterates that the mobilisation of this instrument, as provided for in Article 11 of the MFF Regulation, shows~~, once more, the crucial need for~~ that the Union budget tocan be ~~more~~adequately flexible;

2015/10/08
Committee: BUDG

2015/2253(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Reiterates its long-standing view that, without prejudice to the possibility for payment appropriations to be mobilised for specific budget lines through the Flexibility Instrument without prior mobilisations in commitments, the payments stemming from commitments previously mobilised through the Flexibility Instrument can only be counted over and above the ceilings;deleted

2015/10/08
Committee: BUDG

2015/2252(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)

F a. whereas the Multiannual Financial Framework, that was unanimously adopted by the Member States in Council, sets the maximum amount of commitment appropriations in the Union budget for each year for headings and fixes an overall annual ceiling on payment and commitment appropriations in Union law;

2015/10/08
Committee: BUDG

2015/2252(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas the increase of the number of refugees and migrants was not foreseeable when adopting the current Multiannual Financial Framework 2014-2020, and it cannot be considered a temporary phenomenon and therefore requires longer term solutions which need to be addressed in the upcoming annual budgetary procedures and considered as part of the revi~~sion~~ew of the Multiannual Financial Framework;

2015/10/08
Committee: BUDG

2015/2252(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Is convinced that the Union needs to do more to address the current migration and refugee crisis and to help stabilise countries of origin and assist countries of transit ~~as the proposed measures will certainly not be sufficient~~, given the overall number of persons seeking protection in the Union; calls on the Commission to present a long-term financial plan to respond to the migration and refugee crisis, including the search and rescue operations, and to ~~propose a~~consider these issues as part of the revi~~sion~~ew of the Multiannual Financial Framework ~~accordingly~~;

2015/10/08
Committee: BUDG

2015/2252(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Reminds the Commission and the Council of the recent agreement for a payment plan aimed at putting the Union budget back on a sustainable track; ~~notes~~welcomes the fact that the Commission did not propose any additional overall payment appropriations in the 2015 budget but reverts to the redeployment of already existing resources; stresses that this could increase the burden on the payment appropriations in 2016 ~~which may not be sufficient to~~ if financial programmes across all headings are not sufficiently rationalised to ensure paymeent ~~the actual needs of financial programmes across heading~~appropriations are targeted in the highest priority areas;

2015/10/08
Committee: BUDG

2015/2212(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Considers that the competitive pressure in the international air transport market is not exclusive to Alitalia; notes that the majority of European airlines have adapted to changing market conditions; stresses that the EGF should not be used as a vehicle for transferring costs of commercial decisions to European taxpayers;

2015/09/24
Committee: BUDG

2015/2210(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Recital C

C. whereas these measures demonstrate the added value which the EU budget can provides, ~~but also highlight~~nevertheless emphasises the prestrictions on EU political action imposed by a budget which does not consist of genuine own resources, which amounts to less than 1 % of EU GDP and which is constrained by a seven-year multiannual framework- eminent role of Member State actions in the implementation of these measures;

2015/09/10
Committee: BUDG

2015/2210(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the presentation of the five presidents' report, ‘Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union', but criticises the fact that the timetable for its implementation is out of step with the severity of the Greek crisis;deleted

2015/09/10
Committee: BUDG

2015/2210(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Notes that the annual cycle of economic and budgetary policy coordination is linked to the Budget Committee's responsibility to monitor the implementation of the EU budget; considers the European Semester an additional means of increasing budgetary rigour in EU spending;

2015/09/10
Committee: BUDG

2015/2210(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Welcomes the ideas~~Notes the proposedal to ~~help~~ strengthen ~~parliamentary oversight, in particular~~the scrutiny role of both the pEurop~~osal to adapt Parliament's structures to the specific nature of the single currency~~ean Parliament in advance of the publication of the Annual Growth Survey and of the national Parliaments more generally in relation to the European Semester;

2015/09/10
Committee: BUDG

2015/2210(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Highlights the Commission's understanding of the crucial role national and regional authorities play in promoting necessary structural reforms, exercising fiscal responsibility and boosting investment in support of jobs and growth;

2015/09/10
Committee: BUDG

2015/2210(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

~~4. Welcomes the call to give intergovernmental solutions such as the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance full democratic legitimacy by incorporating them into EU primary law;~~deleted

2015/09/10
Committee: BUDG

2015/2210(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Welcomes the ideas put forward for a eurozone budgetary stability mechanism, which would be the first step towards establishing a European treasury; points out that the publication of a white paper in spring 2017 will coincide with the mid- term review of the MFF; reiterates, in that connection, its call that any additional funding or instrument should fall within the scope of Parliamentʼs budgetary oversight and should be financed over and above the MFF ceiling for 2014-2020; reiterates the need for a new own-resources system, which would pave the way for a genuine overhaul of the EU financing arrangements without requiring EU citizens to pay more tax;deleted

2015/09/10
Committee: BUDG

2015/2210(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Welcomes the adoption of the regulation on the European Fund for Strategic Investments as a means to boost private investment, and emphasises the role Parliament has played in minimising redeployment from Horizon 2020 and the Connecting Europe Facility;

2015/09/10
Committee: BUDG

2015/2210(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Notes that the European Fund for Strategic Investments has only just begun to fund projects and will therefore reserve judgment on the efficacy of these investments;

2015/09/10
Committee: BUDG

2015/2210(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Welcomes the contributions of Member States to the Investment Plan for Europe;

2015/09/10
Committee: BUDG

2015/2210(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Recognises the importance of fiscal responsibility following the crisis in Europe, and emphasises the importance of showing restraint in the EU budget in order to maintain the agreed ceilings in commitments and payment appropriations under the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014-2020;

2015/09/10
Committee: BUDG

2015/2155(DEC)

Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Pina PICIERNO, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Anneliese DODDS, Margrete AUKEN, Dennis de JONG, Monika VANA, Josu JUARISTI ABAUNZ, Benedek JÁVOR, Kateřina KONEČNÁ, Anja HAZEKAMP, Elly SCHLEIN, Marietje SCHAAKE, Anneleen VAN BOSSUYT, Morten MESSERSCHMIDT, Josep-Maria TERRICABRAS, Jeroen LENAERS, Frédérique RIES, Beatriz BECERRA BASTERRECHEA, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Lynn BOYLAN, Matt CARTHY, Luke Ming FLANAGAN, Liadh NÍ RIADA, Igor ŠOLTES, Bas EICKHOUT, Jan Philipp ALBRECHT, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Luigi MORGANO, Ashley FOX, Estefanía TORRES MARTÍNEZ, Xabier BENITO ZILUAGA, Lola SÁNCHEZ CALDENTEY, Miguel URBÁN CRESPO, Tania GONZÁLEZ PEÑAS, Ruža TOMAŠIĆ, Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Ulrike LUNACEK, Kostadinka KUNEVA, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Richard SULÍK, Diane DODDS, Lara COMI, Bart STAES, Nicola CAPUTO, Judith SARGENTINI, Ivo BELET, Remo SERNAGIOTTO, Merja KYLLÖNEN, Richard ASHWORTH, Alessia Maria MOSCA, Ernest URTASUN, Pascal ARIMONT, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Salvatore Domenico POGLIESE, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO, Romana TOMC, Jan ZAHRADIL, Bodil VALERO, Daniel DALTON, Angelika MLINAR

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Stresses that the Court of Auditors report adopted on 11.07.2014 states that the potential saving for the EU budget would be about 114 million EUR per year if the European Parliament centralised its activities; reiterates the call on Parliament and the Council to address, in order to create long term savings, the need for a roadmap to a single seat, as stated by Parliament in several previous resolutions;

2016/03/14
Committee: CONT

2015/2132(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that Parliament's reading of the 2016 budget fully reflects the political priorities adopted by an overwhelming majority in its abovementioned resolutions of 11 March 2015 on general guidelines and of 8 July 2015 on a mandate for the trilogue; recalls that those consist in observing common treaties and agreements by all Member States, in internal and external solidarity, in particular an effective tackling of the migration and refugee crisis, as well as in boosting competitiveness through employment, enterprises and entrepreneurship (the “three Es”), while fully adhering to the need for budgetary restraint and to respect the payments plan as agreed by the Commission, Council and Parliament;

2015/10/06
Committee: BUDG

2015/2132(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights that the Union is currently facing a number of serious emergencies, notably the unprecedented migration and refugee crisis, the extent of which could not have been foreseen in the aforementioned resolution or mandate for rilogue; understands that this crisis cannot be solved by financial resources alone; is convinced nevertheless that the necessary financial resources need to be deployed in the Union budget and will probably have to be substantially increased in 2016, in order to match the political challenges and allow the Union to deliver and effectively respond to th~~ose~~is criseis, as a matter of utmost urgency and priority; considers that extraordinary times require extraordinary measures and that a strong political commitment ~~is needed to secure fresh approp~~to reprioriati~~ons~~se and refocus the 2016 budget for this purpose is needed;

2015/10/06
Committee: BUDG

2015/2132(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that Parliament has, from the outset, placed a particular focus on migration and refugees in the 2016 budget; recalls its earlier statements that the handling of migration flows lies at the crossroads of observing common treaties and agreements such as the Schengen Acquis and the Dublin Regulation as well as internal and external solidarity and that external financing instruments should also be mobilised, in an integrated approach, in order to address the root causes of the problems the Union is faced with;

2015/10/06
Committee: BUDG

2015/2132(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Underlines, however, that those amendments should be considered alongside the Commission’s Letter of Amendment 2/2016, which is expected to include, in addition to the second relocation package, the additional measures set out in the Commission communication of 23 September 2015; ~~stresse~~regrets that the Parliament ~~fully endorses th~~as part of the budgetary authority doese n~~ew measures and intends to defend their financing through fresh appropriations even to a higher extent than the level proposed in its own position of the 2016 budget~~ot have more time to examine the suitability of the Letter of Amendment 2/2016 in alleviating problems at home and abroad; nevertheless understands the considerable time pressure that the Commission is under and, in principle, supports the Commission´s suggestions as set out in that communication and intends to support financing through fresh appropriations;

2015/10/06
Committee: BUDG

2015/2132(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Acknowledges that a lot more effort needs to be undertaken to address the shortcomings in the Union economy by boosting competitiveness, growth and jobs; emphasises the key role played by small and medium-sized enterprises in this regard; reinforces therefore the COSME programme by EUR 16,5 million; decides also to propose new commitments in 2016 for the continuation of the Youth Employment Initiativand recognises the role that the Union budget can play alongside measures taken at the Member State level and private sector financing by boosting competitiveness, growth and jobs; emphasises the key role played by small and medium-sized enterprises in this regard; recognises also the contribution of the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI) as a complementary measure to Member State programmes in the fight against unemployment; notes the (YEI~~), whose~~´s entire financial envelope was frontloaded in the years 2014-2015; ~~acknowledges the significant contribution of this programme to the fight against unemployment and is determined to ensure that the necess~~believes that this political agreement should be adhered to, particularly appropriations are made available in order to prevent a funding gap in its implementation; adopts, therefore, a EUR 473,2 million increase for 2016, corresponding to the original instalment that was foreseen for the YEI on a yearly basisin light of the need to refocus the 2016 budget on areas of urgent priority, especially under Headings 3 and 4;

2015/10/06
Committee: BUDG

2015/2132(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Reiterates its conviction that the Union budget should not finance new initiatives to the detriment of existing Union programmes and policies and disregard political commitments already made~~; whil~~ unless those programmes prove ineffectual or more effective uses of financing become available; therefore fully confirm~~ing~~s its political and financial support to the launching of European Fund for Strategic Investment (EFSI), and intends to deliver on the commitment that it made during the EFSI negotiations, namely to minimise ~~to the maximum~~ the impact on Horizon 2020 and the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) in ~~the frame of the annual budgetary procedure; proposes, therefore, to fully offset the cuts of these~~subsequent budgetary years, taking into account the need both two ~~programmes - due to the provisioning of the EFSI Guarantee Fund - in 2016 (EUR 1 326 million), in order to allow them to fully accomplish the objec~~respect prior political agreements and meet urgent prioritives ~~agreed only two years ago with the adoption of their respective legal bases~~elsewhere in the 2016 budget;

2015/10/06
Committee: BUDG

2015/2132(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Stresses the importance of fully respecting the joint statement on a payment plan 2015-2016 agreed between Parliament, Council and Commission, following the shared commitment to reduce the backlog of outstanding payment claims for the 2007-2013 cohesion programmes to around EUR 2 billion by the end of 2016 and to avoid any future build-up of such an unsustainable backlog; considers, for this reason, that the frontloading of EUR 1 billion in 2016 for Greece ~~should~~can be financed by ~~additional~~ appropriations ~~within the MFF payments' ceiling; stresses its long-standing position that payments deriving from commitments mobilised under the Flexibility Instrument are counted over and above that ceiling~~requested for the 2007- 2013 cohesion policy programmes without the need to increase payment appropriations in 2016;

2015/10/06
Committee: BUDG

2015/2132(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. ~~Restores all~~Notes cuts proposed by Council to the DB (EUR 563,6 million in commitments and EUR 1 421,8 million in payments); ~~fails to understand~~acknowledges the reasoning behind the proposed cuts, for example those to Horizon 2020 and CEF~~, two programmes already affected by redeploy~~ with respect to the political agreements to ~~EFSI, and to development and neighbourhood policies~~finance the EFSI Guarantee Fund; considers that a revision of these cuts may be required in certain budget lines under Headings 3 and 4, especially in light of recent events; ~~contest~~approves, in any event, Council’s declared intention to target budget lines with a low execution rate or absorption capacity, as this is ~~not substantiated by the actual implementation figures and ignores the varying implementation patterns of certain programmes~~a significant step towards ensuring that the Union budget provides value for money;

2015/10/06
Committee: BUDG

2015/2132(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Concludes that, for the purpose of adequately financing these pressing needs, with migratory pressures a priority and considering the very tight MFF margins in 2016, all budget lines with low implementation rates or with little Union added value must contribute in the significant levels of redeployment needed to meet these needs and means available in the MFF Regulation in terms of flexibility, including the full mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument, ~~will need to be deploy~~should only be deployed when these budget lines have been exhausted; expects that the Council will share this approach and that an agreement will easily be reached in conciliation, allowing the Union to rise to the occasion and effectively respond to the challenges ahead;

2015/10/06
Committee: BUDG

2015/2132(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. In line with its priorities for 2016, Employment, Enterprises, Entrepreneurship, and after careful assessment of their absorption capacity so far, decides to propose, in addition to the full compensation of the EFSI-related cuts forDespite the need to refocus priorities for 2016, emphasises the importance of Employment, Enterprises, Entrepreneurship in contributing to the jobs and growth objective; therefore welcomes the roll-out of EFSI in the next budgetary year, whilst acknowledging the adverse impact to Horizon 2020, and CEF~~, some selective increases abo~~ budget lines in the short-term; neve rthe le~~vel of the DB for COSME, Horizon 2020, EaSI and Erasmus+ programme~~ss wishes to see a continued emphasis on job-creating and growth- promoting budget lines in subsequent Union budgets;

2015/10/06
Committee: BUDG

2015/2132(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Decides, in light of the current, exceptional flows of migrants and refugees to concentrate its reinforcements on strengthening the AMIF; str~~ongly support~~esses the importance of supporting refugees close to their home countries, of helping Member States to implement the Schengen Acquis and the Dublin Regulation and of facilitating asylum procedures in the EU Member States; looks in this context critically at the second EUR 780 million package on the relocation of 120 000 persons; nevertheless decides to incorporate it in its reading, and to align the first relocation package with the second one by adding EUR 20 million to finance transport costs (EUR 500 per migrant to Italy and Greece); approves an additional increase of EUR 79 million for general reinforcements of the AMIF; finally decides to reinforce the agencies with migration-related tasks for a total of EUR 26 million;

2015/10/06
Committee: BUDG

2015/2132(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. ~~Deplor~~Acknowledges that the ~~Council de~~DB for 2016 under Heading 3 increases commitment appropriations by over EUR 2~~5,1~~00 million and payment appropriations by EUR 3~~3,6~~00 million compared to the DB; believes that these reductions jeopardise the proper implementation of programmes and actions under Heading 3; recalls in this context that though some of the proposed cuts may seem minor, one needs to keep in mind the relatively small size of several important and valuable programmes, making them particularly vulnerable to cuts; decides therefore to restore the level of the DB; notes that the Council decreased commitment appropriations by EUR 25,1 million and payment appropriations by EUR 33,6 million compared to the DB; believes that any reductions under Heading 3 must target programmes with poor absorption and implementation rates, and particularly those which are not related to the current migrant and refugee crisis;

2015/10/06
Committee: BUDG

2015/2132(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35

35. ~~Points to the fact that, of all headings,~~Acknowledges that Heading 4 bears the biggest cuts by the Council both in commitments (- EUR 163,4 million) and in payments (- EUR 450,4 million); n~~otes with surprise~~evertheless notes that commitments remain over EUR 300 million higher than in 2015 and payments remain over EUR 1,5 billion higher than in 2015; notes that the European Neighbourhood Instrument (notably poverty and security in the Mediterranean countries), the Development Cooperation Instrument (including the migration and asylum thematic objective) and the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (despite candidate countries hosting a considerable number of migrants and refugees or being located on major migration routes) are among the most affected; underlines that this approach ~~is in blatant contradiction to the statements of the Council and the European Council~~may be subject to change given recent developments and the unprecedented scale onf the migration a~~genda, on the~~nd refugee crisis ~~and on cooperation with countries of origin and transit~~;

2015/10/06
Committee: BUDG

2015/2132(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46

46. Considers, therefore, that any further cuts proposed by the Council wcould endanger the proper functioning of the agencies and would not allow them to fulfil the tasks they have been assigned by the legislative authority;

2015/10/06
Committee: BUDG

2015/2132(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48

48. Decides furthermore to increase the 2016 budget appropriations for the three financial supervisory agencies due to their additional tasks and increased workload; invites the Commission to submit by 2017 a proposal for a fee-based financing concept replacing completely the current contributions from member states, as a means of securing the European authorities’ independence from their national member authorities;

2015/10/06
Committee: BUDG

2015/2132(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 94

94. IRemains convinced that the Union budget ~~can contribute to addressing effectively not only the consequences but also the root causes of the crises that the Union is currently fac~~should focus on areas where the most added value can be gained from supranational action, while respecting the rights and responsibilities of Member States; calls upon all parties to deliver a budget based on Union added value and budgetary restraingt; takes the view, ~~however,~~ that unforeseen events with an Union- wide dimension should be tackled by pooling efforts and putting additional means at Union level rather than by calling past commitments into question or reverting to the illusion of purely national solutions; stresses, therefore, that flexibility provisions are there to enable such a joint and speedy response and should be used to the full in order to make up for the tight constraints of the MFF ceilingsrioritising areas of urgent need;

2015/10/06
Committee: BUDG

2015/2074(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. WBel~~comes the fact that~~ieves the Commission Draft General Budget of the European Union for the financial year 2016 ~~reinforces those priorities and p~~is a welcome step towards helping Member States tackle structural challenges, especially the loss of competitiveness; Proposes to step up EU support for investment, knowledge, jobs and growth-orientated programmes~~, and in particular for an emblematic mobility programme such as Erasmus+~~; iIs satisfied that, in addition to duly expected increases throughout Heading 3 (Security and Citizenship) and Heading 4 (Global Europe), the Commission is taking up the challenge of responding to new developments such as the crises in Ukraine, Syria and the Mediterranean by responding to the EU's and Member States' needs in the area of security and migration and by demonstrating strong political will in the field of external action;

2015/06/11
Committee: BUDG

2015/2074(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Believes that Draft General Budget 2016 is a first step towards achieving real focus, budget discipline and a concrete example of how the Commission is fulfilling its commitment to be 'big on big things and small on small things';

2015/06/11
Committee: BUDG

2015/2074(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Reminds the Commission of its Budget Review 2010 which identified 'EU added value' as one of its core principles; Insists that this principle must represent the cornerstone of all expenditures, which must also be guided by efficiency, effectiveness and value for money, while respecting the principle of subsidiarity as defined by Article 5 TEU and anchored in Protocol 1 on the role of national parliaments in the European Union;

2015/06/11
Committee: BUDG

2015/2074(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Reiterates its concerns about the funding of the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI) as a key tool for the fight against youth unemployment in the Union, which is a top priority for all European decision-makers; notes that, owing to the frontloading of the YEI top-up allocation in 2014 and 2015, no new commitments are proposed in 2016; recalls that the MFF has provided for a global margin for commitments to be made available over and above the ceilings as of 2016 for policy objectives related to growth and employment, in particular youth employment; recalls that, consequently, the Regulation on the European Social Fund has provided that the resources for the YEI may be revised upwards for the years 2016 to 2020 in the framework of the budgetary procedure; ~~calls, ther~~strongly believes, however, that in the interest of strong public and budget accountability, all concerns raised by the ECA in their special report No3/2015 must be taken into account before, f~~or the Youth Employment Initiative to be continued by making use of any flexibility provision contained in the MFF~~urther appropriations are allocated to the Youth Employment Initiative ; stresses in this regard the importance of results based policy making;

2015/06/11
Committee: BUDG

2015/2074(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Recalls that payment shortages, largely due to ~~insufficient payment ceilings and under-budgeting,~~a shortage of authorised payment appropriations and developments in the legislative framework applicable to 2007 - 2013 cohesion programmes which amplified the build-up of unpaid bills reacheding unprecedented and unacceptable heights in 2014 ~~and~~which remain acute in 2015; ~~fear~~notes that this continues to penalise the beneficiaries and to jeopardise the proper implementation of the new 2014-2020 MFF programmes; while supporting active management of payments by the Commission, is concerned at the postponement of calls for proposals, at the reduction of pre-financing and at late paymentse existing constraints on payment appropriations have arisen despite several mitigating measures put in place by the Commission during 2014;

2015/06/11
Committee: BUDG

2015/2074(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Underlines that ~~past under-budgeting of pay~~in the past the continuous inflation of commitment appropriations ~~has~~ widened the gap between commitments and payments in several programmes under Heading 1a and 1b, thereby contributing to the sharp increase in the RALs as compared to the other headings; ~~is concerned~~notes that the Commission has ~~had to~~introduced a number of mitigating measures including lowering the amount of pre-financing and, ~~more worryingly,~~had to postpone new calls for proposals and delay the signing of contracts; notes for instance that under Horizon 2020 the Commission estimates that ‘in a normal implementation scenario without limits on payment appropriations, by the end of 2014, around 1 billion more would have been spent'; while welcoming the Commission's efforts to keep the payments situation under control, reiterates that it will under no circumstances tolerate a slowing down of the 2014-2020 programmes being seen as a way to deal with the payment shortagstrongly supports the Commission's efforts to keep the payments situation under control, and calls for the Commission to continue to prioritise programmes that contribute to real growth, competitiveness and job creation and to identify areas within the EU budget where savings and efficiencies can be made in order to reinforce these priorities;

2015/06/11
Committee: BUDG

2015/2074(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Highlights the fact that 44% of the proposed 2016 payment appropriations cover outstanding payment claims for previous programming periods, leaving only EUR 26.8 billion in payments for the start-up of the new 2014-2020 cohesion programmes; considers the proposed payment appropriations, therefore, to be ~~the bare minimum needed~~ sufficient to help phase out the end - 2015 backlog, and meet new payment claims relating t~~his subheading~~o 2007-2013 cohesion programmes expected in 2016;

2015/06/11
Committee: BUDG

2015/2074(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. ~~In addition to its~~Highlights the Special Report from the ECA No 3/2015 and calls for ~~a continuation of the Youth Employment Initiative, stresses that an acceleration of its~~the ECA recommendations to be fully implemented before further commitments are made with regard to the YEI; Stresses that efficient and effective implementation in the Member States ~~has now become urgent~~is crucial; encourages the Member States and the Commission to take all necessary measures to put the national Youth Guarantee schemes into operation as a matter of priority; reiterates that the recently approved increase in the pre- financing rate to 30%, strongly supported by the EP, is dependent on the speedy submission of interim payment claims by the Member States within one year, which should materialise in 2016; insists that the increased YEI pre-financing should not negatively affect the implementation of other components of the European Social Fund (ESF) or result in requests for additional unexpected payment requests in future years;

2015/06/11
Committee: BUDG

2015/2074(BUD)

Bernd KÖLMEL, Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39

39. Underlines the crucial role decentralised agencies play in EU policy- making and is determined to evaluate the budgetary and staffing needs of all the agencies on a case-by-case basis, in order to ensure adequate appropriations and staff for all the agencies and particularly for those that have recently been assigned new tasks or face a higher workload for political-priority-setting or other reasons; is particularly determined to provide the agencies in the area of justice and home affairs with the necessary resources to tackle the current migratory challenges; ~~highlights once more its opposition to the redeployment pool and expects to find a solution during the budgetary procedure to stop the additional staff cuts in~~believes that decentralised agencies cannot be exempt from sound budgetary management and in this context welcomes the Commissioners commitment to review the function and relevance of a number of decentralised agencies; reiterates, furthermore, its intention to use the Interinstitutional Working Group on decentralised agencies to find common ground between the institutions on the treatment of agencies in budgetary terms, also with a view to the conciliation on the 2016 budget;

2015/06/11
Committee: BUDG

2015/2065(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Highlights the important role the consumer, as the driver of demand, holds in the supply chain and stresses that in an open and competitive market producers and processers must innovate and add value to their products to meet ever changing and growing demands;

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/2065(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Stresses the importance of supply-side cooperation through groupings, such as Producer Organisations (POs), in strengthening the position and bargaining power of producers in the supply chain;

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/2065(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1c. Urges producers, along with processors, to work together to invest in innovation and to increase the added value of their products;

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/2065(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Points to~~Acknowledges the limitations of the Supply Chain Initiative (SCI), and specifically the absence of farmers' organisations owing to lack of trust, restriction of anonymous complaints, absence of meaningful mechanisms to adequately combat well- documented unfair trading practices (UTPs), and, in particular, the lack of enforcement measures and sanctions;

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/2065(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Agrees with the Commission's position that a single "one size fits all" solution to address the issue of UTPs is not the best way forward for a competitive and fair supply chain;

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/2065(INI)

Mairead McGUINNESS, Paolo DE CASTRO, Richard ASHWORTH, James NICHOLSON, Albert DESS, Marijana PETIR, Angélique DELAHAYE, Michel DANTIN, Herbert DORFMANN, Paul BRANNEN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Reminds the Commission that the European Parliament's own initiative report adopted in December 2013 called on the Commission to examine the need and possibility of independent enforcement to address the so-called 'fear factor' among primary producers in the supply chain; urges the Commission to consider this in its own report;

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/2065(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Doubts whether voluntary initiatives are adequate~~Believes that a common understanding of rules and a common set of principles of best practice, combined with light touch action in national law by Member States, offers the best model within an open and competitive market for addressing UTPs and the acknowledged ‘fear factor’ in the supply chain arising from the imbalance of power between farmers and retailers;

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/2065(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Stresses that where legislation is required, a light-touch approach should be implemented, with preference given for an approach based on commonly agreed best practice, and notes that the practice of "forum shopping" must be prevented through greater cooperation between the Member State enforcement authorities;

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/2065(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Question~~Acknowledges the Commission’s ~~unwavering~~ support for the SCI~~, given the reluctance of farm~~ and notes that commonly unders to ~~participate; regrets the pre-emptive conclusion that regulatory action at EU level is not foreseen~~od best practice combined with light touch legislation to ensure a consistent approach across the Internal Market offers the best model for farmers and for the sector overall;

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/2065(INI)

Mairead McGUINNESS, Richard ASHWORTH, Paolo DE CASTRO, James NICHOLSON, Albert DESS, Marijana PETIR, Michel DANTIN, Angélique DELAHAYE, Herbert DORFMANN, Paul BRANNEN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Calls on the Commission to assess the SCI in terms of effectiveness, taking into account concerns cited by the farming community; cautions the Commission to avoid assessing the voluntary initiative based solely on the number of registered participants;

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/2065(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that several Member States have initiated actions in national law to address the concerns of primary producers regarding the negative impact of UTPs; asks the Commission to assess these national efforts with a view to ~~select~~identifying best practices for ~~application at EU level; notes in particular the Groceries Code Adjudicator in the UK as a potential model for adapta~~other Member States to adapt, taking into consideration their national market conditions a~~t EU level~~nd specifities;

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/2065(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Notes in particular the UK Groceries Code, which imposes on retailers the principle of fair dealing with suppliers, supported by an independent Adjudicator with powers of enforcement and tools such as "naming and shaming," as a potential model for best practice and adaptation by other Member States;

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/2065(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Stresses that enforcement powers implemented at national level must be proportionate and factor in the impact on the market and on consumer interests;

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/2065(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Believ~~Notes that framework legislation at EU level ~~is essential~~, which ensures consistency of approach across the Member States, would be an option to tackle UTPs and to address their negative consequences for farmers; urges the Commission to consider this when assessing the SCI;

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/2065(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Argues that ~~such legislation~~where essential, light touch legislation, at the appropriate level, coupled with a common understanding on the principles of best practice, would complement the SCI and protect stakeholders who are fully engaged with the Initiative, while ensuring that UTPs are eradicated from the food supply chain and providing primary producers with the necessary legal certainty to address their concerns.

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/2065(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)

7c. Urges all parties in the food supply chain to consider standard contracts and also new generation contracts where risks and benefits are shared;

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/2065(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 e (new)

7e. Underlines the importance of market information tools, such as the European Price Monitoring tool and the Milk Market Observatory, to improve transparency across supply chain to increase market intelligence regarding pricing practices and distribution of profit margins;

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/2065(INI)

Richard ASHWORTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 f (new)

7f. Stresses that cooperation between national authorities is essential to ensure coherent enforcement and cross border fairness to benefit the producer and the consumer;

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/2012(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Believes that the Union budget should reflect the current economic situation experienced by citizens across the Union, as the well as the fiscal constraints faced by many Member States, some of whom are engaged in serious efforts to bring their budgets onto a more sustainable long-term footing;

2015/03/20
Committee: BUDG

2015/2012(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Believes, therefore, that the Parliament should freeze its budget, with greater efforts being made to optimise existing resources;

2015/03/20
Committee: BUDG

2015/2008(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH, Bernd KÖLMEL

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the EU budget is predominantly an investment budget with a strong leverage effect and a catalyst for growth, competitiveness and jobs across the Union; whereas it facilitates the implementation of programmes and projects that would otherwise be difficult or impossible and ensures strategic investment in actions with European added value by pooling resources and allowing for economies of scale; whereas ~~the EU budget has a tangible~~properly targeted investment at the EU level can help to boost Member State economies and have a positive impact on citizens’' lives ;

2015/02/12
Committee: BUDG

2015/2008(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH, Bernd KÖLMEL

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the EU budget ~~cannot accomplish its mission if its soundness and credibility are put~~is currently lacking a degree of sound financial management and its credibility has been called into question; whereas it is imperative that all commitments forming part of the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014- 2020 are respected in full, and that a number of problems that have accumulated over the past years, ~~such as~~particularly the situation of unpaid invoices at year-end, are resolved without any delay;

2015/02/12
Committee: BUDG

2015/2008(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH, Bernd KÖLMEL

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas 2016 will be the year when the new EU programmes of the MFF 2014- 2020 will be operational and in full swing, and when the MFF mid-term revi~~sion~~ew will be launched;

2015/02/12
Committee: BUDG

2015/2008(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH, Bernd KÖLMEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights the ~~indisputable~~ potential and added value of the EU budget in the creation of employment ~~and~~through the development of enterprises and entrepreneurship across the Union; acknowledges that a wide range of EU programmes, including Horizon 2020, COSME and Erasmus+, contribute directly to the attainment of these objectives; expects that the Commission will place such growth-orientated programmes and instruments at the heart of the Draft Budget 2016, in order to ensure that they are endowed with the necessary resources;

2015/02/12
Committee: BUDG

2015/2008(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH, Bernd KÖLMEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Recalls that many Member States remain engaged in long term fiscal rebalancing and believes that Europe must continue to show not only solidarity, but budgetary responsibility and restraint in light of these ongoing national budgetary consolidation efforts;

2015/02/12
Committee: BUDG

2015/2008(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH, Bernd KÖLMEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Recognises that there is an acute shortage of funds in the EU, both at member state and European Union levels and the problems this may cause in the implementation of some programmes, stresses therefore the need to attach real importance to the concept of value for money and that all programmes and expenditure should be carefully scrutinised for viability, efficiency and effectiveness;

2015/02/12
Committee: BUDG

2015/2008(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH, Bernd KÖLMEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Notes with concern that Europe~~, despite being one of the safest places in the world,~~ is faced with new types of risks to its internal security which require ~~ensuring closer police and judicial cooperation and coordination and at the same time~~s closer cooperation between police and judicial authorities, while at the same time there is a need to promot~~ing~~e stability and peace in conflict areas; ~~invites~~calls on the Commission, if there is a need to propose targeted reinforcements of the relevant programmes and instruments, t~~hus demonstrating the EU’s pledge to tackle these threats~~o find savings from other budget lines were financing is less urgent;

2015/02/12
Committee: BUDG

2015/2008(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH, Bernd KÖLMEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Calls for the full implementation of the joint statements on payment appropriations and on a payment plan agreed between Parliament, the Council and the Commission at the end of the 2015 budgetary procedure and considers that such action would indicate that all three institutions are serious about working towards a lasting solution to the problem of unpaid bills; recalls the commitment to hold, in the course of this year, at least three interinstitutional meetings on payments, in order to take stock of payment implementation and revised forecasts; expects the first of these meetings, in March 2015, to provide a first overview of the level of unpaid bills at the end of 2014 for the main policy areas; regrets that, as anticipated, this level reached at the end of 2014 the unprecedented amount of EUR 24.7 billion for 2007-2013 Cohesion programmes;

2015/02/12
Committee: BUDG

2015/2008(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH, Bernd KÖLMEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Re~~iterates its long-standing position that~~grets that Parliament and Council hold divergent interpretation of the relevant MFF provision with regard to the payments of special instruments (Flexibility Instruments, the EU Solidarity Fund, the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund and the Emergency Aid Reserve) should be counted over and above the MFF ceilings, as is the case for commitments; regrets that no agreement was made possible during last year’s budgetary procedure due to the Council’s interpretation of the relevant MFF provision; expects the matter to be settled with the 2015 technical adjustment of the Global Margin for Payments by the Commission;

2015/02/12
Committee: BUDG

2015/2008(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH, Bernd KÖLMEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Calls on the Council, in its consideration of next year’s budget, to ~~live up to the expectations raised by~~remain true to its own statements and decisions, whether they relate to the MFF, the Europe 2020 strategy or the relaunch of investment; considers that such political declarations and commitments are void unless coupled with ~~sufficient budgetary resources to allow their implementa~~concrete proposals for action;

2015/02/12
Committee: BUDG

2015/2008(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH, Bernd KÖLMEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Undertakes, within the MFF ceilings and with due consideration to the acute shortage of payments, to play its role as one arm of the budgetary authority with dedication and responsibility by promoting well-targeted increases in those budgetary areas with high absorption capacity that correspond to its political priorities and guarantee successful delivery; in this light, intends to examine, with the support of its specialised committees, the specific programmes and budget lines that can better achieve this objectivescrutinise with the support of its specialised committees, the specific programmes and budget lines that best deliver on budgetary priorities and objectives while also routing out those budget lines which do not deliver satisfactory results;

2015/02/12
Committee: BUDG

2015/2008(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16a. Welcomes comments made by the Commissioner and the Court of Auditors, calling for a culture change in how the EU institutions deal with the EU Budget - in particular, the need for an increased emphasis on accountability and a focus on performance and spending outcomes; to this end highlights the need for Parliament to play a greater role in scrutinising expenditure and performance;

2015/02/12
Committee: BUDG

2015/2008(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH, Bernd KÖLMEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Underlines that the 2016 budget will be crucial as it should serve as a benchmark ofor the post-electoral MFF review ~~/ revision~~, to be launched before the end of 2016; stresses the need to establish political priorities and identify in good time areas of proven added value of EU spending ~~for which further investments will be deemed necessary~~as investment in these areas will be targeted in the second half of the MFF 2014-2020; stresses, in this context, the importance of closely monitoring and scrutinising the implementation and performance of key EU programmes already during the current budgetary procedure;

2015/02/12
Committee: BUDG

2015/2008(BUD)

Richard ASHWORTH, Bernd KÖLMEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Reaffirms its position in favour of an in-depth re~~form~~view of the system of EU own resources~~, whose current shortcomings are causing severe impasses in budgetary negotiations; attaches, therefore~~; attaches, the highest political importance to the work of the High Level Group on Own Resources, under the chairmanship of Mario Monti; eagerly anticipates the results and proposals of the work of this High-Level Group that are due to be presented in an interinstitutional conference, with the participation of national parliaments, during 2016, and considered in the context of the MFF review ~~/ revision~~;

2015/02/12
Committee: BUDG

2015/0204(NLE)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Underlin~~Welcomes that the proposed modifications to the methods applicable to adjustments of contributions a~~im at avoiding that a similar incident as the one which occurred in 2014 could happen again~~re aimed at allowing more time to scrutinise the relevant data and calculations, in order to avoid Member States facing exceptionally large adjustments as occurred in 2014;

2015/11/24
Committee: BUDG

2015/0204(NLE)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses that ~~these~~all adjustments of contributions should be dealt with as automatically as possible to avoid political interference with the agreed ways of financing the Union budget ~~and to limit the discretion left to~~by reducing the divergence in timings of additional contributions from Member States, a~~s to the timing of their additional contributions resulting from~~nd also limiting the European Parliament's discretion in delaying the return of funds to Member States, which may arise as a result of GNI adjustments to the Union budget ~~to a minimum~~;

2015/11/24
Committee: BUDG

2015/0204(NLE)

Richard ASHWORTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Underlines the ~~fact that~~continued complexity of the own resources system remains too complex and needs to be fundamentally reformed with the next Multiannual Financial Framework; stresses, against this background, the crucial role of the High Level Group on Own Resources in delivering proposals for overcoming the deficiencies of the current system; notes the ongoing work of the High Level Group on Own Resources in this regard and will consider the recommendations when they are produced next year;

2015/11/24
Committee: BUDG

2015/0009(COD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36 a (new)

(36a) Since Guarantee Fund will be composed of significant reallocations from the EU budget, Parliament shall have the right to call the EU Budget Commissioner before Parliament in order to exercise scrutiny over the use of the EU budget, especially with regard to performance and spending outcomes.

2015/03/24
Committee: CONT

2015/0009(COD)

Sander LOONES, Richard ASHWORTH, Stanisław OŻÓG, Zbigniew KUŹMIUK

Proposal for a regulation
Title 1

Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on the European ~~Fund~~Guarantee for Strategic Investments ~~and amending Regulations (EU) No 1291/2013 and (EU) No 1316/2013~~, the European Investment Advisory Hub and the European Investment Project Directory and amending Regulations (EU) No 1291/2013 and (EU) No 1316/2013 (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)

2015/03/19
Committee: BUDG ECON

2015/0009(COD)

Sander LOONES, Richard ASHWORTH

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1

(1) The economic and financial crisis has led to a lowering of the level of investments within the Union. Investment has fallen by approximately 15% since its peak in 2007. The Union suffers in particular from a lack of ~~investment as a consequence of market uncertainty regarding the economic future and the fiscal constraints on Member State~~competitiveness. This lack of ~~investment~~competitiveness slows economic recovery and negatively affects ~~job creation~~investment, long-term growth prospects and ~~competitiveness~~job creation.

2015/03/19
Committee: BUDG ECON

2015/0009(COD)

Sander LOONES, Richard ASHWORTH

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2

(2) Comprehensive action is required to reverse the vicious circle created by a lack of competitiveness and thus investment. Structural reforms and fiscal responsibility are necessary preconditions for stimulating ~~investment~~competitiveness. Along with a renewed impetus towards investment financing, these necessary preconditions can contribute to establishing a virtuous circle, where investment projects help support employment and demand and lead to a sustained increase in growth potential.

2015/03/19
Committee: BUDG ECON

2015/0009(COD)

Sander LOONES, Bernd LUCKE, Richard ASHWORTH, Stanisław OŻÓG, Zbigniew KUŹMIUK

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4

(4) Throughout the economic and financial crisis, the Union has made efforts to promote growth, in particular through the focus on the necessity of structural reforms and through initiatives set out in the Europe 2020 strategy that put in place an approach for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. The European Investment Bank ('EIB') has also strengthened its role in instigating and promoting investment within the Union, partly by way of an increase in capital in January 2013. ~~Further~~Alongside structural reforms, further specific and temporary action is required to ensure that the investment needs of the Union are addressed and that the liquidity available on the market is used efficiently and channelled towards the funding of viable investment projects.

2015/03/19
Committee: BUDG ECON

2015/0009(COD)

Sander LOONES, Richard ASHWORTH

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

(6) On 26 November 2014, the Commission presented a communication entitled ‘An Investment Plan for Europe’1 that envisaged the creation of a European Fund for Strategic Investments ('EFSI'), a transparent pipeline of investment projects at European level, the creation of an advisory hub (European Investment Advisory Hub – 'EIAH') and emphasised an ambitious agenda to remove obstacles to investment and complete the Single Market. __________________ 1 Communication to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Central Bank, the European Economic and Social Committee, the Committee of the Regions and European Investment Bank entitled ‘An Investment Plan for Europe’. COM(2014) 903 final

2015/03/19
Committee: BUDG ECON

2015/0009(COD)

Sander LOONES, Richard ASHWORTH

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8

(8) The EFSI is part of a comprehensive ~~approach to address uncertainty~~strategy designed to address competitiveness. Issues surrounding public and private investments. The strategy has three pillars: mobilising finance for investment in close to market projects, making investment reach the real economy and most importantly by improving the investment environment in the Union by focusing structural reforms.

2015/03/19
Committee: BUDG ECON

2015/0009(COD)

Richard ASHWORTH

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. At the request of the European Parliament, the EU Budget Commissioner shall take part in a hearing at the European Parliament on the use of EU funds in the guarantee fund.

2015/03/24
Committee: CONT

2015/0009(COD)

Sander LOONES, Stanisław OŻÓG, Richard ASHWORTH, Zbigniew KUŹMIUK

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9

(9) The investment environment within the Union should be improved by carrying out necessary structural reforms, removing barriers to investment, ~~reinforc~~completing the Single Market, actively pursuing the Commission's better regulation agenda and by enhancing regulatory predictability and reducing regulatory red tape. The work of the EFSI, and investments across Europe generally, should benefit from this accompanying work.

2015/03/19
Committee: BUDG ECON

2015/0009(COD)

Sander LOONES, Richard ASHWORTH, Beatrix von STORCH

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)

(9a) The EFSI should be in accordance with Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union which states that the following should be prohibited as incompatible with the single market: all agreements between undertakings, decisions by associations of undertakings and concerted practices which may affect trade between Member States and which have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within the single market.

2015/03/19
Committee: BUDG ECON

2015/0009(COD)

Sander LOONES, Richard ASHWORTH, Stanisław OŻÓG, Zbigniew KUŹMIUK

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 b (new)

(9b) The EFSI is meant to tackle the investment gap and is therefore by nature a temporary instrument.

2015/03/19
Committee: BUDG ECON

2015/0009(COD)

Sander LOONES, Richard ASHWORTH, Bernd LUCKE

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10

(10) The purpose of the EFSI should be to help resolve the difficulties in financing and implementing productive investments in the Union and to ensure increased access to financing. It is intended that increased access to financing of profitable investment projects should be of particular benefit to small and medium enterprises. It is in the same degree also appropriate to extend the benefit of such increased access to financing to mid- cap companies, which are companies ~~having~~as well as other entities with up to 3000 employees. Overcoming Europe's current investment difficulties should contribute to strengthening the Union's competitiveness, growth potential and economic, social and territorial cohesion.

2015/03/19
Committee: BUDG ECON

2015/0009(COD)

Sander LOONES, Richard ASHWORTH, Stanisław OŻÓG, Zbigniew KUŹMIUK

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11

(11) The EFSI should support strategic investments with high economic value added contributing to achieving Union policy objectives, such as the criteria mentioned in the Amsterdam Special Action Programme of 1997 and the development of infrastructure; research, development and innovation; health; information and communications technology; developing and modernising the energy sector; improving access to finance for SMEs and mid-cap companies.

2015/03/19
Committee: BUDG ECON

2015/0009(COD)

Sander LOONES, Richard ASHWORTH

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14

(14) The EFSI should target projects delivering ~~high societal and~~ economic value. In particular, the EFSI should target projects that promote ~~job creation,~~ long- term growth ~~and~~, competitiveness and thus job creation,. The EFSI should support a wide range of financial products, including equity, debt or guarantees, to best accommodate the needs of the individual project. This wide range of products should allow the EFSI to adapt to market needs whilst encouraging private investment in the projects. The EFSI should not be a substitute for or crowd out private market finance but should instead catalyse private finance by addressing market failures so as to ensure the most effective and strategic use of public money. The requirement for consistency with State aid principles should contribute to such effective and strategic use.

2015/03/19
Committee: BUDG ECON

2015/0009(COD)

Sander LOONES, Richard ASHWORTH

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) The EFSI should target projects with a higher risk-return profile than existing EIB and Union instruments to ensure additionality over existing operations. The EFSI should ~~finance projects across the Union, including in the countries most affected by the financial crisis~~guarantee the financing of projects across the Union. The EFSI should only be used where financing is not available from other sources on reasonable terms.

2015/03/19
Committee: BUDG ECON

2015/0009(COD)

Sander LOONES, Richard ASHWORTH, Zbigniew KUŹMIUK, Stanisław OŻÓG

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) The EFSI should only target investments that are expected to be economically and technically viable~~, which~~ and are thus are expected to repay creditors in order to avoid the socialisation of losses and the privatisation of gains. Such investments may entail a degree of appropriate risk, whilst still meeting the particular requirements for EFSI financing.

2015/03/19
Committee: BUDG ECON

2015/0009(COD)

Sander LOONES, Richard ASHWORTH

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18

(18) In order to enable the EFSI to support investments, the Union should grant a temporary guarantee of ~~an amount equal to~~no more than EUR 16 000 000 000 at any point in time. When provided on a portfolio basis, the guarantee coverage should be capped depending upon the type of instrument, such as debt, equity or guarantees, as a percentage of the volume of the portfolio of outstanding commitments. It is expected that when the guarantee is combined with EUR 5 000 000 000 to be provided by the EIB, that the EFSI support should generate ~~EUR 60 800 000 000~~significant additional investment by the EIB and EIF. This ~~EUR 60 800 000 000~~lending, supported by the EFSI is expected by the Commission to generate a total of EUR 315 000 000 000 in additional investment in the Union within the period ~~2015 to 2017~~of three years from the entry into force of this regulation.. Guarantees that are attached to projects which are completed without a call on a guarantee are available for supporting new operations.