1137 Amendments of Richard ASHWORTH
Amendment 84 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas over the years the CAP has undergone regular re-programming in line with new challenges, but another step in this continuous process of modernisation and simplification, building on previous reforms whilst ensuring policy certainty and financial security for the sector, is now necessary ;
Amendment 228 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas while the focus on research and development for both product and process innovation is to be welcomed, more must be done to firstly translate the results of research into farming practice, facilitated by EU-wide agricultural extension services; especially into finding viable alternatives for some methods, facilitated by EU-wide agricultural extension services and secondly, into improving the currently low public opinion of new technologies and methods;
Amendment 242 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Recital J a (new)
Ja. whereas digitisation, ICT, satellite and remote sensing technology will propel farm efficiency and reduce costs and climate-related impacts, more must be done to encourage farms to diversify and bridge the current investment gap in agriculture given the relatively low uptake of new technologies in farming which are spread unevenly across EU;
Amendment 250 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J b (new)
Recital J b (new)
Jb. whereas most bio-technology research is now located outside the EU where it typically focuses on agro economic issues not relevant to the EU sector, resulting in potential losses in investment and focus;
Amendment 94 #
2018/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 110 #
2018/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Recognises that when agricultural food items and their quality are called into question, it reflects negatively on farmers and the food processing system, highlighting the significant role played by the Geographical Indicators and Protected Destination of Origin labels as well as the importance of traceability and thorough labelling of food items.
Amendment 2 #
2017/2225(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas following the creation of the first PEACE programme in 1995, more than EUR 1,5 billion has been spent with the dual aim of promoting cohesion between communities involved in the conflict in Northern Ireland and the border counties of Ireland, as well as economic and social stability;
Amendment 4 #
2017/2225(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the fact that management and control systems in the regions are functioning properly and that EU financial assistance is therefore being spent effectively; stresses nevertheless that in addition to compliance, the underlying objectives of the PEACE programme must always be taken into account when assessing the performance of this programme;
Amendment 8 #
2017/2225(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Welcomes the UK government’s proposal in August 2017 to explore a potential successor to PEACE IV for the post-2020 period with the Northern Ireland Executive and the Irish Government1a; highlights the positive response set out in the Joint Report of December 2017, in which both the negotiators of the European Union and the UK government agreed to examine possibilities for future support of the PEACE and INTERREG funding programmes1b; notes moreover, the Commission’s intention to propose the continuation of these programmes in its proposal for the next Multiannual Financial Framework1c; _________________ 1aNorthern Ireland and Ireland: position paper, Paragraph 17, August 2017. 1bJoint report from the negotiators of the European Union and the United Kingdom Government on progress during phase 1 of negotiations under Article 50 TEU on the United Kingdom’s orderly withdrawal from the European Union, paragraph 55, December 2017. 1cCommission Communication on the state of progress of the negotiations with the United Kingdom under Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union, Page 9, December 2017.
Amendment 3 #
2017/2022(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas almost 68% of the budget is index bound expenditure which relates mainly to remunerations and allowances for Members and staff, as well as to buildings, which is adjusted according to the Staff Regulations and contractual obligations, on the basis of sector specific indexation that is usually higher than the standard, to sector specific indexation or to the inflation rate;
Amendment 3 #
2016/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes the increased demand and use of palm oil in processed food, with some 50 % of packaged goods now containing palm oil, and as a biofuel; recalls for clear and transparent labelling of palm oil in processed goodthat Regulation 1169/2011 on the provision of food information to consumers includes vegetable oils;
Amendment 26 #
2016/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes the alarming scale of deforestation driven by palm oil; notes that palm oil is an important driver of deforestation for commercial agriculture, where extremely biodiversand devastating consequences deforestation is having in some countries; notes that a number of factors are causing deforestation including non- sustainable palm oil production, clearing land for cattle and arable tcropical forest is being converted to monocultural palm oil plantationss, making land available for housing and urbanization, for timber production and other intensive agricultural activity;
Amendment 56 #
2016/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes with concern the occurrence ofat illegal logging, land grabbing and illegal acquisition of plantation land; notes further that land acquisition may lie outside the law, as local communities’ customary t is happening and calls on the Commission to work with third countries in implementing their national laws to ensure rights are often not respthat forest areas are protected;
Amendment 71 #
2016/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recognises the role of oil palm as part of diverse intercropping systems in ensuring food security and, employment, and valuable income for smallholders and their families;
Amendment 89 #
2016/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Is concerned that theWelcomes certification schemes do not guarantewhich ensure the genuinelyness of sustainable palm oil, notably certified sustainable palm oil (CSPO) certification, which is not effective in ensuring relevant standards and compliance therewith and calls on the Commission to do more to give recognition;
Amendment 124 #
2016/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to establish a regulatory framework of strong and enforceable measures to guarantee that all actors throughout the entire supply chain, including EU financial institutions and the investments and loans they provide, are not involved in deforestation;
Amendment 137 #
2016/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 3 #
2016/2051(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Observes that the adoption of Draft amending budget No 2/2016 will reduce the share of GNI contributions from Member States to the Union budget in 2016 by EUR 1 349 million; conce again urgessiders that it is for the Member States to use the opportunity of such a reflow to honour their pledges in relation to the refugee crisis and to match the Union contribution to the two dedicated Union Trust Funds; notes with concern that in spring 2016 Member States have only contributed EUR 82 million to the Africa Trust Fund and EUR 60 million to the Madad Trust Fund on the Syrian crisis, while the Union's contributions stand at EUR 1,8 billion and more than EUR 500 million respectivelydetermine how this reflow should be spent; resists, therefore, any attempt to politicise this technical exercise;
Amendment 8 #
2016/2051(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Insists that, instead the practice of adjusting theMember States' GNI contribution, the Union budget should be enabled tos is maintained in accordance with Article 18 of the Financial Regulation; considers that the reuse of any surplus resulting from under-implementation of appropriations or from fines imposed on companies for breaching Union competition law in order to deal with its financing needs, especially in the context of payment shorshould be subject to agreement by the Member Stagtes; expects this matter to be settled as part of the revision of the MFF, and should occur only in duly justified cases;
Amendment 173 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Maintains unchangedBelieves further efficiency savings could be made in the overall level of its budget for 2017, as adopted by the plenary on 14 April 2016 at EUR 1 900 873 000, by focusing on Parliament's core function as a co-legislator; incorporates the budgetary neutral technical adjustments to reflect into the budget its recent decisions and; regrets the need to releases the reserve on the transport of Members, persons and goods budget line, and continues to question the added value and added expense of the internalisation of the chauffeur service;
Amendment 183 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 57
Paragraph 57
57. Encourages the Secretary-General to propose detailed arrangements for the full sharing of back office functions and services between Parliament, the Committee of the Regions and the European Economic and Social Committee; calls on the Secretary- General to also undertake a study on whether synergies in back office functions and services can also be made between the Parliament, the Commission and the Council;
Amendment 190 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60 a (new)
Paragraph 60 a (new)
60 a. Recalls the 2013 Fox-Häfner report1a , which estimated the costs of the geographic dispersion of the Parliament to be between EUR 156 million and EUR 204 million and equivalent to 10% of the Parliament's budget; notes the finding that 78% of all missions by Parliament statutory staff arise as a direct result of the Parliament's geographic dispersion; emphasises that the report also estimates the environmental impact of the geographic dispersion to be between 11,000 to 19,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions; reiterates the negative public perception caused by this dispersion and calls therefore for a roadmap to a single seat and a reduction in the relevant budget lines; __________________ 1a Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0498.
Amendment 193 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60 d (new)
Paragraph 60 d (new)
60 d. Notes that the Discharge 2014: EU general budget - European Parliament report1a called for a clearer segregation between the roles of President and 'Spitzenkandidat' during the 2014 European Election campaign; believes that questions remain regarding the role of Parliament staff and international missions taken by the President during this campaign; calls for a portion of the relevant budget lines to be placed in reserve until these issues have been addressed satisfactorily; __________________ 1a Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0150.
Amendment 197 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61
Paragraph 61
Amendment 4 #
2016/2037(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
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;
Amendment 5 #
2016/2037(BUD)
3. Considers that a more suthe existainableg 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 countein 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 ceilingsUnion budget;
Amendment 7 #
2016/2037(BUD)
4. Welcomes the Commission’s commitment not to divert appropriations from the external humanitarian aid budget; notes that the Commission proposes to finance the first instalment under this new instrument by redeploying appropriations from the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) appropriations, which were already meant at ensuring burden-sharing between Member States in dealing with refugees; believes that the entire amount cannot be covered through redeployments without affecting the delivery of the AMIF, which is bound to come under pressure this year and might need further reinforcements if the relocation scheme is to reach full speed; considers, therefore, this EUR 100 million to be a frontloading of appropriations which will need to be compensated at a later stage; notes that there is no margin left under heading 3 and that the Flexibility Instrument has already been used in its entirety for 2016; supports, therefore, the mobilisation of the Contingency Margin for the remaining amount for this year as soon as necessary and invites the Commission to presregrets that there is no margin left under heading 3 and that the Flexibility Instrument has already been used in its entirety for 2016; agrees with the Commission's assessment that the Contingency Margin is a last resort instrument, and that any request to mobilise this instrument ais proposal in this respect; anticipates that an upward revision of the MFF ceiling for heading 3 will prove to be inevitable in order to address all needs linked to the refugee and migration crisisemature; calls therefore, for further redeployments to be sought under heading 3, taking into account the implementation, foreseeable needs and necessity of funding the programmes under this heading;
Amendment 10 #
2016/2037(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Urges the Commission to consider exclude alling agencies dealing in the broader sensewhich have had their responsibilities increased to deal with migration and security challenges from the 5% staff reduction target as theyre are all number of agencies which are currently understaffed given the tremendous increase in workload and tasks over the past two years; calls on the Commission to ensure a balance between the JHA agencies respecting their workload and tasks;
Amendment 2 #
2016/2034(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the recent bouts of extreme price volatility in global agricultural markets portend rising and more frequent threats to world food security; undermines investment and modernization, as well as discouraging new entrants and generational renewal in the agricultural sector;
Amendment 19 #
2016/2034(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notes that direct payments continue to provide a degree of financial stability for farmers, particularly during protracted periods of low prices; considers that direct payments have demonstrated better value for money than the previous practice of direct market intervention;
Amendment 28 #
2016/2034(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls foron the creation of a system to protection farmers’ incomes through the useCommission to work closely with national authorities and farming groups to raise awareness and understanding of ‘'risk management’' tools, changing the efforts undertaken so far in available within Pillar II of the 2014-2020 CAP reform;
Amendment 38 #
2016/2034(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Urges the Commission and the Member States to monitor the significant price volatility of agricultural products by improving the European Food Prices Monitoring Tool (FPMT).; believes that timely market information can improve farmers' ability to react to market volatility and plan accordingly;
Amendment 44 #
2016/2034(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Considers that funding from the Rural Development Programme should be targeted towards ensuring farmers receive the training and education required to make adequate use of risk management tools; believes this would allow farmers to better anticipate and manage price volatility;
Amendment 3 #
2016/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas a budget of EUR 1 910 073 000 has been proposed by the Secretary- General for Parliament's preliminary draft estimates for 2017, representing an overall increase of 3,9% on the 2016 budget, from which 1,7% is considered to be ordinary expenditure, and would constitute 19,26% of heading V of the 2014-2020 MFF;
Amendment 21 #
2016/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines that Parliament should be provided with sufficient resources needed to comply with all its powers and ensure a proper functioning of the institution, althoughits core function as a co- legislative body; stresses that in the current economic context those resources should be managed with rigour and efficiency;
Amendment 25 #
2016/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that while the overall spending level is appropriate for the exercise of European democracy,should be readjusted in order to focus spending on the Parliament's core function as a co-legislator; efforts to look for savings and to strive for further enhancing the efficiency of the use of public money are strongly encouraged;
Amendment 32 #
2016/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Underlines the need for precision and transparency in the evolution of the budget from one year to the other; considers, in this light, that EUR 15 million of extraordinary expenditure for security in 2016 should not be included in the basis for the calculation of the percentage increase for 2017, just like the that while certain extraordinary expenditure for security is justifiable for the 2017 budget, the growing use of extraordinary expenditure annually is problematic in terms of budgetary scrutiny and stability; believes extraordinary expenditure for 2017 should be deducted wincluded in the basis for then calculatingon of the percentage increase for 2018difference between budgets year on year;
Amendment 46 #
2016/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 66 #
2016/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Considers it appropriate to maintain or decrease the appropriations for the envelope of the expenditure regarding parliamentary assistance for 2017 at samcompared to the level as for 2016; calls for an evidence-based justification for the increased appropriations;
Amendment 71 #
2016/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Questions the added value of oral explanation of votes, and indicates the availability of written explanations of votes to Members; notes that currently oral explanation of votes take place immediately after voting sessions in plenary; deplores the additional cost required for interpretation as a result; urges the Secretary-General to reconsider the utility of oral explanation of votes and, in the interim, calls for oral explanation of votes to be placed after the end of business each day on the plenary agenda;
Amendment 76 #
2016/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Reiterates its call to the Bureau on the definition of more precise rules regarding the accountability of the expenditure authorised under the general expenditure allowance, which could include cost effective measures such as Members publishing their spending records, as already practiced by a growing number of Members, and could be accompanied by a simplified system for re-paying the unused funds; suggests that the Parliament website should link to the places where Members currently publish their spending in order to improve transparency; reiterates that this should not require additional staff for Parliament's administration;
Amendment 96 #
2016/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Welcomes the progress that has been made regarding translation and interpretation efficiencies; asks the Secretary-General to make further rationalisation proposals such as increased translation and interpretation on demand; considers that the linguistic profiling system in place since October 2014 for committee-stage amendments is an example of efficiencies that can be made; urges the Secretary-General to consider extending the scope of this linguistic profiling system to other areas of parliamentary activity;
Amendment 104 #
2016/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Takes notQuestions the added value and added expense of the proposal ofed internalisation of chauffeur service replacing the external service provider with Parliament's contractual agents, which will correspond to approximately EUR 2,3.7 million of immediate additional expenses; considers that a well organised external contract concluded pursuant to applicable public procurement rules, where the external service provider is clearly obliged to take responsibility for security and background checks as well as for decent working conditions and pay, would be a preferable alternative;
Amendment 118 #
2016/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34a. Believes the Parliament's budget should be reprioritized in order to focus on its core activity as a co-legislator; questions in this regard the added value of the Parliament's communication and promotional campaigns, in particular the LUX Prize, whose costs reached an all- time high of EUR 906 902 in 2014; calls for a survey on the public's awareness of the LUX Prize to be made available as soon as possible;
Amendment 125 #
2016/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Urges the Secretary-General to devise detailed arrangements for the full sharing of back office functions and services between Parliament, the Committee of the Regions and the European Economic and Social Committee; calls on the Secretary- General to undertake a study on whether synergies in back office functions and services can also be made between the Parliament, the Commission and the Council;
Amendment 129 #
2016/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 a (new)
Paragraph 36 a (new)
36a. Recalls the its resolution of 20 November 2013 on the location of the seats of the European Union’s Institutions1, which estimated the costs of the geographic dispersion of the Parliament to be between EUR 156 million and EUR 204 million and equivalent to 10% of the Parliament's budget; emphasises that the report also estimates the environmental impact of the geographic dispersion to be between 11,000 to 19,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions; reiterates the negative public perception caused by this dispersion; calls therefore for a roadmap to a single seat; __________________ 1 Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0498.
Amendment 142 #
2016/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 a (new)
Paragraph 40 a (new)
40a. Calls upon the Secretary-General and the Parliament's Bureau to closely follow Commissioner Georgieva's work on performance-based budgeting; urges all parties involved in the drafting of the Parliament's estimates to identify negative priorities in order to free up spending for the Parliament's core responsibilities; considers this exercise particularly vital in the context of the Parliament's increasingly legislative role;
Amendment 143 #
2016/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 b (new)
Paragraph 40 b (new)
40b. Notes that the appropriations for the funding of European political parties and European political foundations amount to 2,7% of the 2017 budget; believes that the funding for European political parties should not be increased, and that the proportion of the budget of European political foundations funded by the Parliament is too high and should be reduced from 85% to 50%; considers that both political parties and foundations should move towards being entirely financed by the national parties concerned or from other "own funding";
Amendment 5 #
2016/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the 2017 budget will have to face a context of fragile economic recovery jeopardised by the situation in emerging markets and, the difficult fiscal position in a number of Member States, and on-going geopolitical tensions;
Amendment 14 #
2016/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the 2017 budget will coincide with the mid-term review and possible revision of the multiannual financial framework (MFF);
Amendment 17 #
2016/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Notes that the overall annual ceiling for the 2017 Budget limits commitment appropriations to EUR 154.5 billion in current prices; recalls that the purpose of the MFF is to deliver an adequate level of predictability for preparing and implementing medium and long-term investments;
Amendment 29 #
2016/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines that the capacity of the Union budget to tackle these crises arises principally from the use of all means available agreed upon in the MFF negotiations, and particularly the use of special instruments such as the flexibility instrument; recalls Parliament’s decisive role in shaping those instruments during the MFF negotiations; highlights, however, that if the crises continue to worsen even the full activation of the existing flexibility provisions will be insufficient to address the problem; stresses, in this context, invites the Council to reconsider its position on the question of budgeting the MFF special instruments so as to alleviate the constraints weighing on the Union budget; reiteratthe necessity of all institutions exercising budgetary restraint when drawing up their estimates of Union expenditure for the following financial year, ensuring the budget is prioritised in the areas of need and that a sufficient margin is available to respond to unforeseen circumstances; believes that the mid-term review of the MFF provides ian that connection its long-standing position that theopportunity to examine institutional differences in the calculation of payment appropriations for the special instruments (the flexibility instrument, the EU Solidarity Fund, the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund and the Emergency Aid Reserve) should be calculated over and above the MFF ceilings, as is the case for commitments; expects these issues to be resolved, and for a resolution to be found in the interests of budgetary stability and predictability;
Amendment 38 #
2016/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. NotWelcomes the Commission’s European Economic Forecast (Autumn 2015), which indicates a modestgradual recovery; stresses, however, that this recovery remains worryingly weak andmust be built upon in order too slow for a promptensure a return to full employment to be achieved, with long-term and very long- term unemployment on the rise; notes, furthermore, the appearance of new challenges, such as the slowdown in emerging market economies and global trade, with particular pressure arising from volatility on Chinese markets, the need to tackle the refugee crisis, and persisting geopolitical tensions;
Amendment 49 #
2016/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes, additionally, the Commission’s Annual Growth Survey for 2016; strongly believes that boosting investment, including a coordinated increase in public investment with a focus on the Europe 2020 targets, is a proper policy response with a view to a more balanced economic policy; believes that those two elements should be taken into consideration in the preparation of the draft budget for 2017 insofar as this should help identify priorities within an economic context; calls, consequently, for more synergies between the Union dimension of the European semester for economic policy coordination and the Union budget;
Amendment 58 #
2016/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 86 #
2016/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recalls that the Union budget provides the backbone of the investment plan by making available the EUR 8 billion required in commitment and payment appropriations for the provisioning of the guarantee fund of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI), out of which a total of EUR 3.38 billion has already been mobilised in the 2015 and 2016 budgets; reiterates its commitment to reinforcthe Horizon 2020 programme and the Connecting Europe Facility through the annual budgetary procedure, in order to compensate the cuts agreed during the EFSI negotiations, by mitigating any negative impact from the creation of EFSI as much as possible;
Amendment 102 #
2016/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers the European Youth Initiative (YEI), in particular, to be a fundamental contribution to the Union’s priority objective for jobs and growth, and therefore reiterates its commitment to continued funding for this programme with a view to scaling it up and thereby offering a greater number of young people the prospect of effectively entering the labour market by receiving a good quality offer of employment, continued education or apprenticeship to be a complementary measure to national schemes tackling youth unemployment; nevertheless believes that creating a competitive and vibrant economic environment offers the best means of reducing levels of youth unemployment; recalls the commitment made to the YEI by the three institutions to ‘ensure appropriate funding via an Amending Budget in 2016, by making use of all available means provided for in the MFF, and primarily of the Global Margin for Commitments’; notes that the figures for implementation indicate full success in terms of absorption capacity; calls on the Commission to present its evaluation of the YEI at the latest by the end of April 2016, and at all events in time for the inclusion of a prolongation of the programme in the EU budget 2017, while also laying the groundwork for the search for a permanent source of funding for the YEI as part of the revision of the MFFevertheless, believes that the Commission's assessment on the implementation of the YEI will be vital in determining the future funding needs of the programme; calls on the Commission to present its evaluation of the YEI at the latest by the end of April 2016;
Amendment 119 #
2016/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Acknowledges the mobilisation of significant budgetary means by the Union and its Member States spread over 2015 and 2016 to address the migration and refugee, crisis both internally within the Union and externally in refugees’ countries of origin; stresses, however, that substantial additional financial means are required to address this crisis, as the increase in numbers of refugees and migrants cannot be considered a temporary phenomenon; highlights however, that longer-term solutions should be sought, not only in the annual budgetary procedure, but alsowill not be achieved by increased budgetary means alone, but may also require a significant reorientation of existing EU budget allocations, which should be considered in the upcoming interim revisionreview of the MFF;
Amendment 132 #
2016/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes the setting-up of the Union Regional Trust Fund in Response to the Syrian Crisis and of the Emergency Trust Fund for stability and addressing the root causes of irregular migration and displacement of people in Africa; urges the Member States to stand by their pracknowledges that the contribution made by some Member States to these funds is below the Commises and contribute to these fundssion's expectations; notes however the contributions made by Member States via other humanitarian aid schemes such as the World Food Programme and UNHCR; underlines that the Member States have reconfirmed their commitment, at the informal meeting of EU Heads of State or Government held to discuss migration on 23 September 2015, the European Council of 15 October 2015, and the Valletta summit of 11-12 November 2015; stresses, however, that further financial efforts will be needed to provide humanitarian assistance along the transit routes and to manage the challenges posed by increasing numbers of refugees; reminds that the above funds were created in response to the lack of flexibility and funding in the EU budget; insists that the actions undertaken to tackle the migration and refugee problem should not come at the cost of the EU´s development policies in other areas;
Amendment 186 #
2016/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Recalls that the final agreement on the MFF 2014-2020, as signed in December 2013, included a proposal for a compulsory review of the MFF 2014-2020, accompaniedArticle 2 of Regulation (EU) No 1311/2013 allows for a compulsory review of the MFF 2014-2020 by the end of 2016 at the latest, accompanied, as appropriate, by a legislative proposal for revision of the MFF by the end of 2016; stresses that the purpose of the review/revision is to provide the Union with sufficient resources to address internal and external crises; stresses that the Council should live up to the expectations raised by its own statements and decisions; underlines in this respect that the Council should take on should be to orient the budget further towards jobs, growth and competitiveness; underlines that all institutions have responsibility for ensuring the adequate financing of new tasks, either and unforeseen circumstances, by clearly identifying the policy areas which would no longer be among the Union’s priorities or by agreeing to an upward revision of the MFF ceilingsare not delivering added value;
Amendment 195 #
2016/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Reiterates its position in favour of an in-depth reform of the system of Union own resources, and gives the highest political importance toNotes the work of the High Level Group on Own Resources created as part of the MFF 2014-2020 agreement; expects the Commission and the Council to take on board the final outcome, which is expected by the end of 2016, including any new candidate for own resources; recalls that the leading idea behind the own resources reform is to make the Union budget more stable, more sustainable, and more predictable, and more autonomous, while also alleviating the burden of excessive spending from national budgets and improving transparency for the citizens;
Amendment 211 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Title 1
Title 1
Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and amending Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002, Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, EU No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1305/2013, (EU) No 1306/2013, (EU) No 1307/2013, (EU) No 1308/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014,(EU) No 283/2014, (EU) No 652/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Decision No 541/2014/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012
Amendment 212 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 1
Citation 1
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 42, 43(2), 46(d), 149, 153(2)(a), 164, 168(4)(b), 172, 175, 177, 178, 189(2), 209(1), 212(2), 322(21) and 349 thereof, in conjunction with the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Articles 106a thereof,
Amendment 365 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
6. ‘blending operation’ means an action carried out within a blending facility which combines non-repayable forms of support and/or financial instruments from the EU budget and financial instruments from development or other public finance institutions as well as from commercial finance institutions and investors, notwithstanding the rule contained in Article 201(4) stating that only public law bodies or bodies with a public service mission may be entrusted with the implementation of the Union budget. Blending operations may include preparatory action leading to potential investments from finance institutions;
Amendment 367 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
7. ‘blending facility’ means a facility established as a cooperation framework between the Commission and development or other public finance institutions as well as commercial finance institutions and investors which aims at achieving certain Union priority objectives and policies in using blending operations and other individual actions, notwithstanding the rule contained in Article 201(4) stating that only public law bodies or bodies with a public service mission may be entrusted with the implementation of the Union budget;
Amendment 372 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 27
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 27
27. ‘financial instruments’ means Union measures of financial support provided from the budget in order to address one or more specific policy objectives of the Union. Such instruments may take the form of equity or quasi-equity investments, loans, repayable advances or guarantees, or other risk-sharing instruments, and may, where appropriate, be combined with other forms of financial support or with funds under shared implementation or EDF funds;
Amendment 375 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 34
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;
Amendment 376 #
2016/0282(COD)
38. 'multiplier effect' means the investment by eligible final recipientsamount of private capital attracted divided by the amount of the Union contribution.
Amendment 378 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 46 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 46 a (new)
46 a. 'repayable advance' means a loan for a project which is paid in one or more instalments and the conditions for the reimbursement of which depend on the outcome of the project;
Amendment 419 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point e
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point e
Amendment 423 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
Article 29 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. The transfer proposal shall be approved, if, within the six-week period, any of the following occurs: neither the European Parliament nor the Council take a decision to amend or refuse the transfer proposal.
Amendment 424 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 6 – point a
Article 29 – paragraph 6 – point a
Amendment 425 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 6 – point b
Article 29 – paragraph 6 – point b
Amendment 426 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 6 – point c
Article 29 – paragraph 6 – point c
Amendment 435 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1
1. Programmes and activities which entail significant spending shall be subject to ex-ante and retrospectivewith resources mobilized exceeding EUR 5 000 000 shall be subject to impact assessment and ex- post evaluation ("evaluation"), which shall be proportionate to the objectives and expenditure.
Amendment 436 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2
Article 32 – paragraph 2
2. Ex-ante evaluationImpact assessments supporting the preparation of programmes and activities shall be based on evidence on the performance of related programmes or activities and shall identify and analyse the issues to be addressed, EU added value, objectives, expected effects of different options and monitoring and evaluation arrangementsthe policy options available including the risks associated with them, expected effects of different options in particular any economic, social and environmental impact, and monitoring and evaluation arrangements needed to measure them, the most appropriate method of implementation for the preferred option(s), the internal coherence and relations with other relevant instruments, the volume of appropriations, human resources and other administrative expenditure to be allocated with due regard to cost- effectiveness, and the lessons learned from the past.
Amendment 437 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3
Article 32 – paragraph 3
3. RetrospectiveEx-post evaluations shall assess the performance of the programme or activity, including aspects such as effectiveness, efficiency, economy, coherence, relevance and EU added value. They shall be undertaken periodicallyIn so doing, they shall take into account the outcome of the monitoring exercise with performance indicators, as specified in Article 31(2). They shall be undertaken periodically, and at least every six years for programmes and activities which entail significant spending, and in sufficient time for the findings to be taken into account in ex-ante evaluationimpact assessments which support the preparation of related programmes and activities.
Amendment 438 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Any proposal or initiative submitted to the legislative authority by the Commission, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (the ‘High Representative’) or by a Member State, which may have an impact on the budget, including changes in the number of posts, shall be accompanied by a financial statement and by an ex ante evaluationimpact assessment as provided for in Article 32.
Amendment 454 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Before submitting the draft budget, the Commission shall perform a consultation of citizens.
Amendment 458 #
2016/0282(COD)
This working document shall also include specific information on the ten worst- performing financial instruments, as well as an overview of the administrative expenditure arising from management fees and other financial and operating charges paid for the management of financial instruments in total and per managing party and per financial instrument managed.
Amendment 512 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 6
Article 110 – paragraph 6
6. Provisional budgetary commitments shall be implemented by the conclusion of one or more legal commitments giving rise to an entitlement to subsequent payments. However, in cases relating to expenditure on staff management, Members or former Members of a Union institution or relating to communication expenditures engaged in by the institutions for the coverage of Union events or in cases referred to in point 14.5 of the Annex to this Regulation, they may be implemented directly by payments.
Amendment 513 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 114 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 114 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) 960 calendar days for contribution agreements, contracts and, grant agreements involving technical services or actions which are particularly complex to evaluate and for which payment depends on the approval of a report or a certificate;
Amendment 515 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 114 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 114 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 546 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 132 – paragraph 4 – point a
Article 132 – paragraph 4 – point a
(a) a natural or legal person who is a member of the administrative, management or supervisory body of the et person or entity referred to in Article 131(1), or who has powers of representation, decision or control with regard to these persons or entities, including persons and entities within the ownership and control structure and beneficial owners, is in one or more of the situations referred to in points (c) to (f) of paragraph 1;
Amendment 547 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 133 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 133 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) information on natural or legal persons that are members of the administrative, management or supervisory body of the participant or that have powers of representation, decision or control with regard to that participant, including persons and entities within the ownership and control structure and beneficial owners, and appropriate evidence that one or several of those persons are not in one of the exclusion situations referred to in points (c) to (f) of Article 132(1).
Amendment 560 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 151 a (new)
Article 151 a (new)
Amendment 563 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 153 – paragraph 3
Article 153 – paragraph 3
3. For financial instruments within blending facilities, point (h) of Article 202(1) shall be deemed to be complied with if an ex ante evaluationimpact assessment is carried out prior to the establishment of the relevant blending facility;
Amendment 573 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 175 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 175 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
The precise criteria for the required output shall be negotiated between the Commission and the beneficiary and be specified in the grant agreement, on a case-by-case basis and as the circumstances require.
Amendment 602 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 186 – paragraph 4
Article 186 – paragraph 4
4. In the case of operating grants, the grant agreement shall be signed within sixthree months of the start of the beneficiary's financial year. Costs eligible for financing may neither have been incurred before the grant application was submitted nor before the start of the beneficiary's financial year.
Amendment 605 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 186 a (new)
Article 186 a (new)
Article 186 a By way of derogation from this Article, 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.
Amendment 610 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 189 – paragraph 1 – point d – paragraph 6
Article 189 – paragraph 1 – point d – paragraph 6
The first subparagraph shall not apply to public bodies, Member State Organisations, and the international organisations referred to in Article 151.
Amendment 612 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 191 – paragraph 5 – point c a (new)
Article 191 – paragraph 5 – point c a (new)
(ca) Member State Organisations;
Amendment 614 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 191 – paragraph 6
Article 191 – paragraph 6
6. The authorising officer responsible may, depending on a risk assessment, waive the obligation to verify the operational capacity of public bodies, Member State Organisations, or international organisations.
Amendment 623 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 202 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 202 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) achieve a leverage or a multiplier effect, by mobilising a global investment exceeding the size of the Union contribution or guarantee. The target range of values for the leverage and multiplier effect shall be based on an ex-ante evaluationimpact assessment for the corresponding financial instrument or budgetary guarantee;
Amendment 624 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 202 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 202 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) provide for any remuneration of the implementing entities or counterparts involved in the implementation to be performance based. Performance based fees shall comprise administrative fees to remunerate the entity or counterpart for the work carried out in the implementation of a financial instrument or budgetary guarantee calculated on the basis of funds actually transferred, and, where appropriate, policy related incentives to promote the achievement of the policy objectives or incentivise the financial performance of the financial instrument or budgetary guarantee. Exceptional expenses may be reimbursed;
Amendment 626 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 202 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 202 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) be based on ex-ante evaluationimpact assessments, individually or as part of a programme, in line with Article 32. The ex-ante evaluationimpact assessment shall contain explanations concerning the choice of the type of financial operation taking into account the policy objectives pursued and the associated financial risks and savings for the budget of the Union. These assessments shall be reviewed and updated to take into account the effect of major socioeconomic changes on the rationale of the instrument or guarantee.
Amendment 629 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 203 – paragraph 2
Article 203 – paragraph 2
2. Budgetary guarantees and financial assistance may generate a contingent liability for the Union which may only exceeding the financial assets provided to cover the financial liability of the Union if so provided in a basic act establishing a guarantee and under the conditions set out therein.
Amendment 640 #
2016/0282(COD)
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 evaluationimpact assessment, carried out in accordance with point (h) of Article 202(1), prior to contributing to an existing financial instrument.
Amendment 643 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 215 – paragraph 3
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.
Amendment 644 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 215 – paragraph 6 a (new)
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.
Amendment 646 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 215 – paragraph 7
Article 215 – paragraph 7
Amendment 657 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 227 – paragraph 3 – point a
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;
Amendment 661 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 227 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
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.
Amendment 676 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 242 – paragraph 1
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.
Amendment 678 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 250 – paragraph 1
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 OctoberJuly. The replies of institutions other than the Commission shall be sent to the Commission at the same time.
Amendment 684 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 256 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
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.
Amendment 754 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 278 – paragraph 2
Article 278 – paragraph 2
Such review shall cover, inter alia, the implementation of the provisions of Title VIIIX of Part One and the deadlines set out in Article 251.
Amendment 755 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 279 – paragraph 1
Article 279 – paragraph 1
Regulation (EC,U, Euratom) No 966/2012 and Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1268/2012 areis repealed with effect from 1 January 20XX.
Amendment 756 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 280 – paragraph 5 a (new)
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.
Amendment 6 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
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;
Amendment 18 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
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;
Amendment 19 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
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 tois 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;
Amendment 38 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – introductory part
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 beenbeen unnecessarily pushed to its limits; due to a lack of sufficient reprioritisation within the budget to meet these new challenges;
Amendment 41 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
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;
Amendment 42 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
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 hadthat 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);
Amendment 81 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
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;
Amendment 102 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
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
Amendment 110 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
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;
Amendment 123 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 20 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Member States' fiscal positions
Amendment 126 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
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
Amendment 131 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)
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
Amendment 132 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 c (new)
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;
Amendment 133 #
Amendment 134 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 d (new)
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
Amendment 145 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
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;
Amendment 149 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
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.
Amendment 152 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Anticipates that any further needs thatcould arise within 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.
Amendment 155 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Recalls that the legislative flexibility, as enshrined in Point 17 of the Interinstitutional Agreement (IIA), allows for an increaseadjustment 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.
Amendment 159 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading II
Subheading II
II. Mid-term revision of the MFF – an imperative requirement
Amendment 162 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
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 objectivesappropriate; recalls that delivering on the Europe 2020 strategy remains the main priority to be supported by the EU budget;
Amendment 166 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Urges the Commission, when preparing itsif 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 applicablboth Council and Parliament as the budgetary authority regarding changes to the MFF Regulation, in particular, the need to respect the ceilings which were algready for the current MFFed to in 2013;
Amendment 173 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
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;
Amendment 194 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Strongly supports the continuation ofNotes the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI), as a meancomplementary 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 forin the remaining years of the current MFF; notes that this should entail an upwards revision of the ceilings ofyears ahead; believes that due consideration should also be given to the restricted room for manoeuvre in Subheading 1b, as no margins are available;
Amendment 200 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
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 requiredwho 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;
Amendment 219 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
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;
Amendment 226 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
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 alsbelieves that the mid-term review of the MFF provides an opportunity to examine institutional differences and for a resolution to be cfounted over and above the annual MFF payment ceilingsd in the interests of budgetary stability and predictability;
Amendment 236 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
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;
Amendment 238 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
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 necessthus fary;
Amendment 239 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
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 billhighlights an increase in the annual appropriations available from the previous MFF, with the additional possibility of carry-over of unused appropriations;
Amendment 241 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
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;
Amendment 243 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
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; deplorrecognises 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;
Amendment 247 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42 a (new)
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;
Amendment 278 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
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;
Amendment 285 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a (new)
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;
Amendment 286 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
Paragraph 46
46. Considers that the key prioritifurther 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;
Amendment 297 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. Underlines that an essential element of the difficulties in agreeing on a multiannual financial framework between Member States is their 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;
Amendment 311 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Underlines the need for a fully- fledged reform of the oNotes that the High Level Group on Own rResources system, with simplicity, fairness and transparency as guiding principles; is therefore expectis 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 Odidate 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 2017has 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;
Amendment 313 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
Paragraph 53
Amendment 317 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
Paragraph 54
Amendment 328 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
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 allscrutiny 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;
Amendment 336 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58
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;
Amendment 342 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59
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 establishmentan 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 avoidminimize the use of ad hoc solutions like the setting-up of trust funds;
Amendment 1 #
2015/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)
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;
Amendment 2 #
2015/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 a (new)
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;
Amendment 4 #
2015/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
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 MFFhelp 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;
Amendment 12 #
2015/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that, between 2007 and 2014, 1341 funding applications for a total amount of EUR 561.142.4 million were submitted by 20 Member States to provide support to 122 1211 380 workers;
Amendment 16 #
2015/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
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;
Amendment 18 #
2015/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
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;
Amendment 24 #
2015/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
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;
Amendment 25 #
2015/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
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;
Amendment 28 #
2015/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
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 fundfocus more on re- integration and ensure that any re- training effor sectors likely to face problems in the futurets actually help people to re- integrate rather than delay re-integration;
Amendment 35 #
2015/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
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;
Amendment 56 #
2015/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 67 #
2015/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
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;
Amendment 69 #
2015/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)
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;
Amendment 70 #
2015/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 c (new)
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;
Amendment 1 #
2015/2269(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2a (new)
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;
Amendment 2 #
2015/2269(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 3 #
2015/2269(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 4 #
2015/2269(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 5 #
2015/2269(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 6 #
2015/2269(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6a (new)
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;
Amendment 1 #
2015/2264(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Reiterates that the mobilisation of this instrument, as provided for in Article 11 of the MFF Regulation, shows, once more, the crucial need for the Union budget tat the Union budget can be flexible but that it must also be more flexibletargeted; 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; underlineregrets 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);
Amendment 2 #
2015/2264(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
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;
Amendment 3 #
2015/2264(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 1 #
2015/2253(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas afterthe Commission, having examined all possibilities for re-allocating commitment appropriations under heading 3, it appearargues it is necessary to mobilise the Flexibility Instrument for commitment appropriations;
Amendment 2 #
2015/2253(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
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;
Amendment 3 #
2015/2253(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
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 ;
Amendment 6 #
2015/2253(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
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 moreadequately flexible;
Amendment 7 #
2015/2253(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 1 #
2015/2252(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
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;
Amendment 2 #
2015/2252(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
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 revisionew of the Multiannual Financial Framework;
Amendment 4 #
2015/2252(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
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 aconsider these issues as part of the revisionew of the Multiannual Financial Framework accordingly;
Amendment 5 #
2015/2252(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
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; noteswelcomes 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 headingappropriations are targeted in the highest priority areas;
Amendment 3 #
2015/2212(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
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;
Amendment 5 #
2015/2210(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas these measures demonstrate the added value which the EU budget can provides, but also highlightnevertheless 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;
Amendment 7 #
2015/2210(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 11 #
2015/2210(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
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;
Amendment 15 #
2015/2210(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the ideasNotes the proposedal to help strengthen parliamentary oversight, in particularthe scrutiny role of both the pEuroposal to adapt Parliament's structures to the specific nature of the single currencyean Parliament in advance of the publication of the Annual Growth Survey and of the national Parliaments more generally in relation to the European Semester;
Amendment 16 #
2015/2210(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
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;
Amendment 17 #
2015/2210(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 20 #
2015/2210(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 28 #
2015/2210(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
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;
Amendment 30 #
2015/2210(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
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;
Amendment 31 #
2015/2210(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Welcomes the contributions of Member States to the Investment Plan for Europe;
Amendment 36 #
2015/2210(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
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;
Amendment 23 #
2015/2155(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
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;
Amendment 2 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
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;
Amendment 6 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
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 thoseis 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 appropto reprioriationsse and refocus the 2016 budget for this purpose is needed;
Amendment 9 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
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;
Amendment 12 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
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; stresseregrets that the Parliament fully endorses thas part of the budgetary authority doese new 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 budgetot 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;
Amendment 15 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
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 necessbelieves 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;
Amendment 18 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
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 confirmings 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 thesesubsequent 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 objecrespect prior political agreements and meet urgent prioritives agreed only two years ago with the adoption of their respective legal baseselsewhere in the 2016 budget;
Amendment 21 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
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 shouldcan 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 ceilingrequested for the 2007- 2013 cohesion policy programmes without the need to increase payment appropriations in 2016;
Amendment 24 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Restores allNotes cuts proposed by Council to the DB (EUR 563,6 million in commitments and EUR 1 421,8 million in payments); fails to understandacknowledges 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 policiesfinance 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; contestapproves, 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 programmesa significant step towards ensuring that the Union budget provides value for money;
Amendment 26 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
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 deployshould 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;
Amendment 36 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
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 level of the DB for COSME, Horizon 2020, EaSI and Erasmus+ programmess wishes to see a continued emphasis on job-creating and growth- promoting budget lines in subsequent Union budgets;
Amendment 64 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Decides, in light of the current, exceptional flows of migrants and refugees to concentrate its reinforcements on strengthening the AMIF; strongly supportesses 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;
Amendment 70 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. DeplorAcknowledges that the Council deDB for 2016 under Heading 3 increases commitment appropriations by over EUR 25,100 million and payment appropriations by EUR 33,600 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;
Amendment 73 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
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); notes with surpriseevertheless 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 Councilmay be subject to change given recent developments and the unprecedented scale onf the migration agenda, on thend refugee crisis and on cooperation with countries of origin and transit;
Amendment 83 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
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;
Amendment 85 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
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;
Amendment 117 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 94
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 facshould 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;
Amendment 7 #
2015/2074(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. WBelcomes the fact thatieves the Commission Draft General Budget of the European Union for the financial year 2016 reinforces those priorities and pis 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;
Amendment 10 #
2015/2074(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
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';
Amendment 11 #
2015/2074(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
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;
Amendment 17 #
2015/2074(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
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, therstrongly 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, for the Youth Employment Initiative to be continued by making use of any flexibility provision contained in the MFFurther appropriations are allocated to the Youth Employment Initiative ; stresses in this regard the importance of results based policy making;
Amendment 27 #
2015/2074(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
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 andwhich remain acute in 2015; fearnotes 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;
Amendment 44 #
2015/2074(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Underlines that past under-budgeting of payin 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 concernednotes that the Commission has had tointroduced 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;
Amendment 47 #
2015/2074(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
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 this subheadingo 2007-2013 cohesion programmes expected in 2016;
Amendment 52 #
2015/2074(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. In addition to itsHighlights the Special Report from the ECA No 3/2015 and calls for a continuation of the Youth Employment Initiative, stresses that an acceleration of itsthe 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 urgentis 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;
Amendment 80 #
2015/2074(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
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 inbelieves 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;
Amendment 27 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
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;
Amendment 32 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
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;
Amendment 34 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
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;
Amendment 37 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points toAcknowledges 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;
Amendment 45 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
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;
Amendment 53 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
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;
Amendment 56 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Doubts whether voluntary initiatives are adequateBelieves 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;
Amendment 78 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
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;
Amendment 96 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. QuestionAcknowledges 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 foreseenod 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;
Amendment 108 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
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;
Amendment 112 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
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 selectidentifying best practices for application at EU level; notes in particular the Groceries Code Adjudicator in the UK as a potential model for adaptaother Member States to adapt, taking into consideration their national market conditions at EU levelnd specifities;
Amendment 132 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
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;
Amendment 133 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
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;
Amendment 158 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. BelievNotes 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;
Amendment 170 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Argues that such legislationwhere 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.
Amendment 191 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
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;
Amendment 194 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 e (new)
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;
Amendment 195 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 f (new)
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;
Amendment 5 #
2015/2012(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
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;
Amendment 6 #
2015/2012(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Believes, therefore, that the Parliament should freeze its budget, with greater efforts being made to optimise existing resources;
Amendment 2 #
2015/2008(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
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 tangibleproperly targeted investment at the EU level can help to boost Member State economies and have a positive impact on citizens’' lives ;
Amendment 11 #
2015/2008(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the EU budget cannot accomplish its mission if its soundness and credibility are putis 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 asparticularly the situation of unpaid invoices at year-end, are resolved without any delay;
Amendment 15 #
2015/2008(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
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 revisionew will be launched;
Amendment 19 #
2015/2008(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Highlights the indisputable potential and added value of the EU budget in the creation of employment andthrough 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;
Amendment 26 #
2015/2008(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
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;
Amendment 27 #
2015/2008(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
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;
Amendment 86 #
2015/2008(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
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 times closer cooperation between police and judicial authorities, while at the same time there is a need to promotinge stability and peace in conflict areas; invitescalls on the Commission, if there is a need to propose targeted reinforcements of the relevant programmes and instruments, thus demonstrating the EU’s pledge to tackle these threatso find savings from other budget lines were financing is less urgent;
Amendment 94 #
2015/2008(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
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;
Amendment 99 #
2015/2008(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Reiterates its long-standing position thatgrets 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;
Amendment 111 #
2015/2008(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on the Council, in its consideration of next year’s budget, to live up to the expectations raised byremain 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 implementaconcrete proposals for action;
Amendment 113 #
2015/2008(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
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;
Amendment 116 #
2015/2008(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
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;
Amendment 118 #
2015/2008(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
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 necessaryas 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;
Amendment 122 #
2015/2008(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Reaffirms its position in favour of an in-depth reformview 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;
Amendment 2 #
2015/0204(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. UnderlinWelcomes that the proposed modifications to the methods applicable to adjustments of contributions aim at avoiding that a similar incident as the one which occurred in 2014 could happen againre 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;
Amendment 3 #
2015/0204(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that theseall 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 toby reducing the divergence in timings of additional contributions from Member States, as to the timing of their additional contributions resulting fromnd 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;
Amendment 5 #
2015/0204(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Underlines the fact thatcontinued 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;
Amendment 46 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36 a (new)
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.
Amendment 79 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Title 1
Title 1
Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on the European FundGuarantee 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.)
Amendment 98 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
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 Statecompetitiveness. This lack of investmentcompetitiveness slows economic recovery and negatively affects job creationinvestment, long-term growth prospects and competitivenessjob creation.
Amendment 111 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
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 investmentcompetitiveness. 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.
Amendment 126 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
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. FurtherAlongside 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.
Amendment 133 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
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
Amendment 148 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) The EFSI is part of a comprehensive approach to address uncertaintystrategy 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.
Amendment 157 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
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.
Amendment 161 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) The investment environment within the Union should be improved by carrying out necessary structural reforms, removing barriers to investment, reinforccompleting 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.
Amendment 163 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)
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.
Amendment 164 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 b (new)
Recital 9 b (new)
(9b) The EFSI is meant to tackle the investment gap and is therefore by nature a temporary instrument.
Amendment 178 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
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 havingas 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.
Amendment 199 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
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.
Amendment 263 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
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.
Amendment 295 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
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 crisisguarantee the financing of projects across the Union. The EFSI should only be used where financing is not available from other sources on reasonable terms.
Amendment 312 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
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.
Amendment 354 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) In order to enable the EFSI to support investments, the Union should grant a temporary guarantee of an amount equal tono 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 000significant additional investment by the EIB and EIF. This EUR 60 800 000 000lending, 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 2017of 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.
Amendment 375 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) In order to allow for further increase in its resources, participadirect contribution in the EFSI should be open to third parties, including Member States, national promotional banks or public agencies owned or controlled by Member States, private sector entities and entities outside the Union subject to the consent of existing contributors. Third parties may contribute directly to the EFSI and take part in the EFSI governance structure.
Amendment 407 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) In accordance with the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Infrastructure and project investments supported under EFSI should be consistent with State aid rules. To that end, the Commission has announced that it will formulate a set of core principles, for the purpose of State aid assessments, which a project will have to meet to be eligible for support under the EFSI. If a project meets these criteria and receives support from the EFSI, the Commission has announced that any national complementary support, will be assessed under a simplified and accelerated State aid assessment whereby the only additional issue to be verified by the Commission will be the proportionality of public support (absence of overcompensation). The Commission has also announced that it will provide further guidance on the set of core principles with a view to ensuring an efficient use of public funds.
Amendment 428 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) The EIB should regularly evaluate activities supported by the EFSI with a view to assessing their additionality (i.e. added economic value and no crowding out principle), prudent handling of tax payers money, relevance, performance and impact and to identifying aspects that could improve future activities. Such evaluations should contribute to accountability and analysis of sustainability.
Amendment 445 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) Alongside the financing operations that will be conducted through the EFSI, a European Investment Advisory Hub ('EIAH') should be created within the EIB. The EIAH should provide strengthened support for project development and preparation across the Union, by building on the expertise of the Commission, the EIB, national promotional banks and the managing authorities of the European Structural and Investment Funds. This should establish a single point of entry for questions related to technical assistance for investments within the Union.
Amendment 456 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) In order to cover the risks related to the EU guarantee to the EIB, a guarantee fund should be established. The guarantee fund should be constituted by a gradual payment from the Union budget, whilst fully respecting the relevant Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) ceilings and authorised by the annual budgetary procedure. The guarantee fund should subsequently also receive revenues in proportion with its risk-taking and repayments from projects that benefit from EFSI support and amounts recovered from defaulting debtors where the guarantee fund has already honoured the guarantee to the EIB.
Amendment 463 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28 a (new)
Recital 28 a (new)
(28a) All payments to the guarantee fund and budget decisions otherwise associated with the operation of the EFSI should be fully consistent with the terms of the multiannual financial framework and authorised by the European Parliament and the Council through the annual budgetary procedure.
Amendment 480 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) To partially finance the contribution from the Union budget, the available envelopes of the Horizon 2020 – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation 2014-2020, provided by Regulation (EU) No 1291/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council2 , and the Connecting Europe Facility, provided by Regulation (EU) No 1316/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council3 , ishould be reduced. Those programmes serve purposes that are not replicated by the EFSI. However, the reduction of both programmes to finance the guarantee fund is expected to ensure a greater investment in certain areas of their respective mandates than is possible through the existing programmes. TGiven that the aim of EFSI is to help businesses by overcoming capital shortages, it is possible that basic or early stage scientific research might not benefit from this Regulation. Therefore the Commission should ensure that redeployment of funds does not adversely affect such programmes. Furthermore, the EFSI should be able to leverage the EU guarantee to multiply the financial effect within those areas of research, development and innovation and transport, telecommunications and energy infrastructure compared to if the resources had been spent via grants within the planned Horizon 2020 and Connecting Europe Facility programmes. It is, therefore, appropriatunder these conditions, possible to redirect part of the funding presently envisaged for those programmes to the benefit of EFSI. __________________ 3 Regulation (EU) No 1316/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 establishing the Connecting Europe Facility, amending Regulation (EU) No 913/2010 and repealing Regulations (EC) No 680/2007 and (EC) No 67/2010 (OJ L 348, 20.12.2013, p. 129).
Amendment 499 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Within the Union, there are a significant number of potentially viable projects that are not being financed due to a lack of certainty and transparency with respect to such projects. Often, this is because private investors are not aware of the projects or have insufficient information to make an assessment of the investment risks. The Commission and the EIB, with support from the Member States, should promote the creation on a voluntary basis of a transparent pipelinedirectory of current and future investment projects in the Union suitable for investment. This 'project pipelinedirectory' should ensure that information is made publicly available regarding investment projects on a regular and structured basis to ensure that investors have reliable information on which to base their investment decisions.
Amendment 519 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) To ensure accountability to European citizens, the EIB should regularly report to the European Parliament and the Council on the progress and economic impact of the EFSI. and the correct use of the guarantee
Amendment 530 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36 a (new)
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.
Amendment 536 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter 1 – title
Chapter 1 – title
European FundGuarantee for Strategic Investments (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
Amendment 538 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – title
Article 1 – title
European FundGuarantee for Strategic Investments (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
Amendment 545 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The Commission shall conclude annegotiate a draft agreement with the European Investment Bank (EIB) on the establishment of a temporary European Fund for Strategic Investments ('EFSI'). The EFSI Agreement shall be approved by the co- legislators, prior to the entry into force of this Regulation so as to ensure that the EFSI Agreement provides for the proper implementation of the Regulation. (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
Amendment 573 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The purpose of the EFSI shall be to support investments in the Union, as detailed in Article 5.2, in a non-discriminatory way, and to ensure increased access to financing for companies having up to 3000 employees, with a particular focus on small and medium enterprises, through the supply of risk bearing capacity to the EIB ('EFSI Agreement'). The EFSI shall not crowd out private investments. The selection of projects that will be supported through the EFSI shall be based solely on economic criteria without sectoral or geographical quota.
Amendment 584 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Amendment 619 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The EFSI Agreement shall contain, in particular, the following:
Amendment 621 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Amendment 631 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Amendment 637 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Amendment 638 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Amendment 644 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Amendment 648 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point e
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point e
Amendment 653 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point f
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point f
Amendment 657 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point g
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point g
Amendment 662 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point h
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point h
Amendment 665 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point i
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point i
Amendment 669 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point j
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point j
Amendment 673 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Arrangements concerning the establishment of the EFSI as well as the amount and terms of the financial contribution to be provided by the EIB, including, i. provisions governing the establishment of the EFSI as a distinct, clearly identifiable and transparent guarantee facility and separate account managed by the EIB; ii. the amount and terms of the financial contribution which shall be provided by the EIB through the EFSI which shall not be inferior to 5.000 000 000 euros in guarantees or cash;; iii. the terms of the funding which shall be provided by the EIB through the EFSI to the European Investment Fund ('EIF'). The involvement of the EIF will be limited to the work of EFSI on providing finance to small and medium enterprises and small mid-cap companies;
Amendment 674 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 b (new)
governance arrangements concerning the EFSI including, i. the composition of Investment Committee, their appointment and dismissal procedures in line with EIB provisions, renumeration; ii. the procedure for the appointment of the Managing Director and of the Deputy Managing Director, their remuneration and working conditions, that shall follow the provisions on staff of the EIB, the rules and procedures on his/her replacement in his/her function and on accountability; iii. the procedure for the appointment and dismissal of the members of the Investment Committee, their remuneration and working conditions, the voting modalities within the Investment Committee, specifying the quorum and the allocation of votes to each member and the rules of procedure iv. the requirement that financing and investment operations supported by the EFSI are ultimately approved by the EIB governing bodies, pursuant to the provisions laid down in Protocol (No 5) on the Statute of the European Investment Bank.;
Amendment 675 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 c (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 c (new)
The arrangements concerning the EU guarantee, that shall be unconditional, irrevocable, first demand guarantee in favour of the EIB, including, i. detailed rules on the provision of the EU guarantee, in accordance with Article 7, among which its modalities of coverage, its defined coverage of portfolios of specific types of instruments; ii. requirements that remuneration for risk taking be allocated amongst contributors in proportion with their respective share in risk taking. Remuneration to the Union and payments on the EU guarantee shall be made in a timely manner and only occur after remuneration and losses from operations have been netted; iii. requirements governing the use of the EU guarantee in accordance with Article 5 of this Regulation, among which payment conditions, such as specific time frames, interest on due amounts and the necessary liquidity arrangements; iv. provisions and procedures relating to recovery of claims, that shall be entrusted to the EIB, in line with Article 7(4).
Amendment 676 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 d (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 d (new)
The modalities for the approval by the Investment Committee of the use of the EU guarantee for individual projects or through investment platforms, or national promotional banks or institutions in line with this Regulation and in particular Article 2a;
Amendment 677 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 e (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 e (new)
The procedures for the submission of investment proposals and approval of proposals for the use of the EU guarantee, including, (i) the procedure for the transmission to the Investment Committee of projects; (ii) the requirement that the procedure for submission and approval of proposals for the use of the EU guarantee is without prejudice to the EIB decision making rules laid down under Protocol (No 5) on the Statute of the European Investment Bank, and in particular Article 19 thereof (iii) rules further detailing the transitional provisions under Article 20, and in particular the manner how operations signed by the EIB during the period referred to in Article 20 will be included under the EU guarantee coverage.;
Amendment 678 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 f (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 f (new)
Arrangements for the reporting, monitoring and accountability concerning the EFSI, including, (i) the operational reporting obligations incumbent on the EIB and, as appropriate, in cooperation with the EIF, in line with Article 10 of this Regulation; (ii) the financial reporting obligations stemming from the EFSI; (iii) rules on auditing and anti-fraud, in accordance with Articles 14 and 15 of this Regulation; (iv) key performance indicators, as regards, in particular, the use of the EU guarantee, the fulfilment of the general objectives laid down in Article 2a, the mobilisation of private capital, and the macroeconomic impact of the EFSI, including its effect on supporting investment.
Amendment 679 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 g (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 g (new)
The procedures and conditions for the Agreement to be amended, that may take place upon the initiative of the Commission or of the EIB, and that shall include the obligation to report to the Council and to the European Parliament on the amendment;
Amendment 680 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 h (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 h (new)
Any other conditions of an administrative or organisational character necessary for the management of the EFSI in so far as they permit the proper use of the EU guarantee.
Amendment 701 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The EFSI Agreement shall provide for the creation of a European Investment Advisory Hub ('EIAH') within the EIB. The EIAH shall have as its objective to build upon existing EIB and Commission advisory services in order to provide advisory support for investment project identification, preparation and development and act as a single technical advisory hub for project financing within the Union. This shall include support on the use of technical assistance for project structuring, use of innovative financial instruments, use of public-private partnerships and advice, as appropriate, on relevant issues of EU legislation. The EIAH shall provide services in addition to those already available under other Union programmes. Services provided by EIAH shall include:
Amendment 704 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point i (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point i (new)
(i) providing a single point of entry for technical assistance for authorities and project promoters;
Amendment 705 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point ii (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point ii (new)
(ii) assisting project promoters, where appropriate, in developing their projects to fulfil the project eligibility criteria under this Regulation;
Amendment 706 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point iii (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point iii (new)
(iii) leveraging local knowledge to facilitate EFSI support in the whole Union;
Amendment 707 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point iv (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point iv (new)
(iv) providing a platform for peer-to-peer exchange and sharing of know-how regarding project development.
Amendment 723 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
The EIAH shall be partially financed by the Union up to a maximum amount of EUR 210 000 000 per year during the period ending on 31 December0 June 2020 for the additional services provided for by the EIAH over existing EIB technical assistance. For the years after 2020 the financial contribution from the Union shall be directly linked to the provisions included in the future multi-annual financial frameworks.
Amendment 775 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 882 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3
Decisions of the Investment Committee shall be taken by simple majority. When participating in the activities of the Investment Committee its members shall perform their duties impartially and in the interests of the EFSI. When implementing the guidelines of the EFSI agreement and taking decisions on the use of the EU guarantee, they shall not seek nor take instructions from the EIB, the Union institutions, the Member States or any other public or private body. Adequate organisational arrangements shall be in place to ensure operational independence of the Investment Committee, without prejudice to the provision of analytical, logistical and administrative support by the staff of the EIB to the Investment Committee.
Amendment 904 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
The Union shall provide a guarantee to the EIB for financing or investment operations carried out within the Union including investments linking the Union and one or more third countries covered by this Regulation ('EU guarantee') and the EFSI agreement. The EU guarantee shall be granted as a guarantee on demand in respect of instruments referred to in Article 6.
Amendment 923 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The EU guarantee shall be granted for EIB financing and investment operations approved by the Investment Committee referred to in Article 3(5) or funding to the EIF in order to conduct EIB financing and investment operations in accordance with Article 7(2). The operations concerned shall be econsistent with Union policiesomically viable and compliant with Union policies, as set out in Union legislation and the requirements defined therein, and support any of the following general objectives:'.
Amendment 1033 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
In addition, the EU guarantee shall be granted for support of dedicated investment platforms and national promotional banks, via the EIB, that invest in operations meeting the requirements of this Regulation. In that case, the Steering Board shall specify policies are specified regarding eligible investment platforms. The Commission shall ensure that any redeployment of funds from the EU budget does not adversely affect programmes. that fund basic or early- stage scientific research.
Amendment 1061 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
In accordance with Article 17 of the Statute of the European Investment Bank, the EIB shall charge the beneficiaries of the financing operations to cover itsall expenses related to the EFSI. Without prejudice to sub-paragraph 2 and 3, no administrative expenditure or any other fees of the EIB for financing and investment activities conducted by the EIB under this Regulation shall be covered from the Union budgetgeneral budget of the Union.
Amendment 1071 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. Provided that all relevant eligibility criteria are fulfilled, Member States may use European Structural and Investment Funds, in accordance with EU state aid rules, to contribute to the financing of eligible projects in which the EIB is investing with the support of the EU guarantee, provided that both the eligibility criteria of the relevant instruments and of the EFSI are fulfilled..
Amendment 1074 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The EU guarantee may be granted for EIB financing and investment operations for which a contract between the EIB and the beneficiary or financial intermediary has been signed by 30 June 2020 and which are approved by the Investment Committee before 30 June 2019.
Amendment 1075 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. The EU guarantee may be granted for funding or guarantees to the EIF in order to conduct EIB financing and investment operations in accordance with Article 7(2) for which a contract between the EIF and the financial intermediary has been signed by 30 June 2020 and which are approved by the EIF Board of Directors before 30 June 2019.
Amendment 1088 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) EIB loans, guarantees, counter- guarantees, capital market instruments, any other form of funding or credit enhancement instrument, equity or quasi- equity participations. These Instruments shall be granted, acquired or issued for the benefit of operations carried out in the Union, including cross-border operations between a Member State and a third country, in compliance with this Regulation and where EIB financing has been granted in accordance with a signed agreement which has neither expired nor been cancelled and respecting the timing specified in article 5 (5 and 6);
Amendment 1092 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) EIB funding to the EIF enabling it to undertake loans, guarantees, counter- guarantees, any other form of credit enhancement instrument, capital market instruments and equity or quasi-equity participations. These Instruments shall be granted, acquired or issued for the benefit of operations carried out in the Union, in compliance with this Regulation and where EIF financing has been granted in accordance with a signed agreement which has neither expired nor been cancelled and respecting the timing specified in article 5 (5 and 6).
Amendment 1105 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. The EU guarantee to the EIB shall be of an amount equal to no more than EUR 16 000 000 000 at any point in time, of which a maximum amount of EUR 2 500 000 000 may be allocated for EIB guarantees or funding to the EIF in accordance with paragraph 2. Without prejudice to Article 8(9), aAggregate payments from the Union under the guarantee to the EIB shall not exceed the amount of the guarantee.
Amendment 1108 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The coverage of the guarantee over a particular type of instrument portfolio, referred to in Article 6, shall be determined by the risk of that portfolio and by the type of instrument. The EU guarantee shall be eligible to provide either first loss guarantees on a portfolio basis or a full guarantee. The EU guarantee may be granted on a pari passu basis with other contributors.
Amendment 1116 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The EU guarantee shall be granted as a guarantee on demand in respect of instruments referred to in Article 6 to cover: - for debt instruments referred to in Article 6(2)(a): the principal and all interest and all amounts due to the EIB but not received by it in accordance with the terms of the financing operations up until the point of default; - for equity investments referred to in Article 6(2)(a): the amounts invested and their associated funding cost; - for operations referred to in Article 6(2) (b): the amounts used and their associated funding costs. The EU guarantee shall also cover the amounts referred to in the second and third sub-paragraph of Article 5 (3).
Amendment 1135 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) revenues and any other payments received by the Union in accordance with the EFSI Agreement.
Amendment 1159 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 6
Article 8 – paragraph 6
Amendment 1178 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 8
Article 8 – paragraph 8
8. From 1 January 2019, iIf as a result of calls on the guarantee, the level of the guarantee fund falls below 50% of the target amount, the Commission shall submit a report on exceptional measures that may be required to replenish it while fully respecting the MFF.
Amendment 1192 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – title
Article 9 – title
European investment project pipelinedirectory (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
Amendment 1208 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission and the EIB shall develop, update and disseminate, on a regular and structured basis, informatprojects displayed on the European investment project directory shall be for visibility to investors and information purposes only, and shall be without prejudice to decisions on current and future investments which significantly contribute to achieving EU policy objectivesthe final projects selected for support under this Regulation or under any other EU instrument or public funding.
Amendment 1209 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1223 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. The EIB, in cooperation with the EIF as appropriate, shall report semi-annually to the Commission on EIB financing and investment operations under this Regulation. The report shall include an assessment of compliance with the requirements on the use of the EU guarantee and the key performance indicators establisespecially thed pursuant to Article 2(1)(g)rinciple of additionality. The report shall also include statistical, financial and accounting data on each EIB financing and investment operation and on an aggregated basis.
Amendment 1229 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The EIB, in cooperation with the EIF as appropriate, shall report annually to the European Parliament and to the Council on EIB financing and successful and unsuccessful investment operations. The report shall be made public and include:
Amendment 1237 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) an assessment of the added value, the mobilisation of additional private sector resources, the estimated and actual outputs, outcomes and impact of EIB financing and investment operations at an aggregated basis;
Amendment 1269 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) the EIB's and EIF's risk assessment and grading information concerning EIB financing and investment operations with respect to EFSI;
Amendment 1279 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6
Article 10 – paragraph 6
6. The Commission shall, by 30 June of each year until the end of the programme, send to the European Parliament, the Council and the Court of Auditors an annual report on the situation of the guarantee fund and the management thereof in the previous calendar year, including an assessment of the adequacy of the target amount, of the level of the guarantee fund and of the need for replenishment of the guarantee fund. The annual report shall contain the presentation of the financial position of the guarantee fund at the end of the previous year, the financial flows during the previous calendar year as significant transactions and any relevant information on the financial accounts. The report will also include information about the financial management, the performance and the risk of the fund at the end of the previous year..
Amendment 1288 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
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
Amendment 1293 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. The Managing Director shall reply orally or in writing to questions addressed to the EFSI by the European Parliament or by the Council, in any event within five weeks of receipt of a question.
Amendment 1300 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. At the request of the European Parliament or the Council, , the Commission shall report to the European Parliament or the Council, on the application of this Regulation.
Amendment 1309 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 1310 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 1315 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Amendment 1321 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3
Article 12 – paragraph 3
3. The EIB, in cooperation with the EIF as appropriate, shall contribute to and provide the necessary information for the Commission evaluation and report under paragraph 1 and 2 respectively.
Amendment 1324 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 5
Article 12 – paragraph 5
Amendment 1336 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
In accordance with its own transparency policies on access to documents and information, the EIB shall make publicly available on its website information relating to all EIB financing and investment operations with respect to EFSI and how they contribute to the general objectives referred to in Article 5(2).
Amendment 1380 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17
Article 17
Amendment 1429 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
(2a) The Commission shall ensure that any redeployment of funds from the EU budget do not adversely affect programmes that fund basic or early-stage scientific research.
Amendment 1456 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Regulation (EU) No 1316/2013
Article 21 (4)
Article 21 (4)
Article 21 (4) of Regulation (EU) No 1316/2013 is deleted.
Amendment 1457 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Regulation (EU) No 1316/2013
Article 14, paragraph 2
Article 14, paragraph 2
In Article 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1316/2013, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following: The overall contribution from the Union budget to the financial instruments shall not exceed 0,5 % of the overall financial envelope of the CEF as referred to in Article 5(1).
Amendment 1 #
2014/2185(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. Is of the opinion that the effects of aggressive competition and rising fuel prices are not exclusive to Air France; stresses real concern that the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF) risks subsidising the costs of redundancies which are caused by corporate and commercial decisions; stresses that the EGF should not be used as a vehicle for transferring costs to the public sector;
Amendment 3 #
2014/2135(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2013; / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 7 #
2014/2135(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Approves the closure of the accounts of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 1 #
2014/2134(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen 2 Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen 2 Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2134(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Approves the closure of the accounts of the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2133(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Joint Undertaking for the implementation of the Joint Technology Initiative on Innovative Medicines for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Joint Undertaking for the implementation of the Joint Technology Initiative on Innovative Medicines for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2133(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Approves the closure of the accounts of the Joint Undertaking for the implementation of the Joint Technology Initiative on Innovative Medicines for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the Joint Undertaking for the implementation of the Joint Technology Initiative on Innovative Medicines for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 3 #
2014/2132(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 6 #
2014/2132(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Approves the closure of the accounts of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 1 #
2014/2131(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the Clean Sky 2 Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the Clean Sky Joint Undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the Clean Sky 2 Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the Clean Sky Joint Undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2131(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Approves the closure of the accounts of the Clean Sky Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the Clean Sky Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 1 #
2014/2130(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the SESAR Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the joint undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the SESAR Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the joint undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2130(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Approves the closure of the accounts of the SESAR Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the SESAR Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy discharge in respect of the implementation of the joint undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy discharge in respect of the implementation of the joint undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 6 #
2014/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Approves the closure of the accounts of the Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2128(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Agency for the Οperational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Agency for the Οperational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2128(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Agency for the Οperational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Agency for the Οperational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2126(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Asylum Support Office discharge in respect of the implementation of the Office’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Asylum Support Office discharge in respect of the implementation of the Office's budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2126(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Asylum Support Office for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Asylum Support Office for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 1 #
2014/2125(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology discharge in respect of the implementation of the Institute’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology discharge in respect of the implementation of the Institute’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 3 #
2014/2125(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2124(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Management Committee of the Office of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications discharge in respect of the implementation of the Office's budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Management Committee of the Office of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications discharge in respect of the implementation of the Office's budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 3 #
2014/2124(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the Office of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the Office of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 3 #
2014/2123(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 6 #
2014/2123(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2122(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Securities and Markets Authority discharge in respect of the implementation of the Authority’s budget for the financial year 2013; / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Securities and Markets Authority discharge in respect of the implementation of the Authority's budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2122(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Securities and Markets Authority for the financial year 2013; / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Securities and Markets Authority for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2121(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority discharge in respect of the implementation of the Authority’s budget for the financial year 2013; / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority discharge in respect of the implementation of the Authority’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2121(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority for the financial year 2013; / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 3 #
2014/2120(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Banking Authority discharge in respect of the implementation of the Authority’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Banking Authority discharge in respect of the implementation of the Authority’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 5 #
2014/2120(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Banking Authority for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Banking Authority for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2119(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Institute for Gender Equality discharge in respect of the implementation of the Institute’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Institute for Gender Equality discharge in respect of the implementation of the Institute's budget for the financial year;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2119(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Institute for Gender Equality for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Institute for Gender Equality for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2118(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Police Office discharge in respect of the implementation of the Office’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Police Office discharge in respect of the implementation of the Office’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2118(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Police Office for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Police Office for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2117(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director-General of the Euratom Supply Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director-General of the Euratom Supply Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2117(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the Euratom Supply Agency for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the Euratom Supply Agency for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2116(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Chemicals Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Chemicals Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2116(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Chemicals Agency for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Chemicals Agency for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2115(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Fisheries Control Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Fisheries Control Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2115(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Fisheries Control Agency for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Fisheries Control Agency for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 3 #
2014/2114(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European GNSS Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European GNSS Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 5 #
2014/2114(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European GNSS Agency for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European GNSS Agency for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 3 #
2014/2113(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 7 #
2014/2113(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2112(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Police College discharge in respect of the implementation of the College’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Police College discharge in respect of the implementation of the College's budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 5 #
2014/2112(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Police College for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Police College for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2111(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Railway Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Railway Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2111(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Railway Agency for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Railway Agency for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2110(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Union Agency for Network and Information Security discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Union Agency for Network and Information Security discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2110(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Union Agency for Network and Information Security for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Union Agency for Network and Information Security for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2109(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control discharge in respect of the implementation of the Centre’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control discharge in respect of the implementation of the Centre’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2109(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2108(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Food Safety Authority discharge in respect of the implementation of the Authority’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Food Safety Authority discharge in respect of the implementation of the Authority's budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2108(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Food Safety Authority for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Food Safety Authority for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2106(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Aviation Safety Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Aviation Safety Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2106(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Aviation Safety Agency for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Aviation Safety Agency for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2105(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Maritime Safety Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Maritime Safety Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2105(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Maritime Safety Agency for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Maritime Safety Agency for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2104(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Training Foundation discharge in respect of the implementation of the Foundation’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the European Training Foundation discharge in respect of the implementation of the Foundation's budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2104(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Training Foundation for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Training Foundation for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2103(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Administrative Director of Eurojust discharge in respect of the implementation of Eurojust’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Administrative Director of Eurojust discharge in respect of the implementation of Eurojust’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 6 #
2014/2103(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of Eurojust for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of Eurojust for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 3 #
2014/2102(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Medicines Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Medicines Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 5 #
2014/2102(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Medicines Agency for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Medicines Agency for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2101(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union discharge in respect of the implementation of the Centre’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union discharge in respect of the implementation of the Centre’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 5 #
2014/2101(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2100(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2100(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2099(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Environment Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Environment Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2099(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2090(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction discharge in respect of the implementation of the Centre’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction discharge in respect of the implementation of the Centre’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2090(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 3 #
2014/2089(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 6 #
2014/2089(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2088(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions discharge in respect of the implementation of the Foundation’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions discharge in respect of the implementation of the Foundation’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2088(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2087(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training discharge in respect of the implementation of the Centre’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training discharge in respect of the implementation of the Centre’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2087(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2086(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European External Action Service for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European External Action Service for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2085(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the European Data Protection Supervisor discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Data Protection Supervisor for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the European Data Protection Supervisor discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Data Protection Supervisor for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 1 #
2014/2084(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the European Ombudsman discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Ombudsman for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the European Ombudsman discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Ombudsman for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 3 #
2014/2083(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Secretary-General of the Committee of the Regions discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Committee of the Regions for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Secretary-General of the Committee of the Regions discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Committee of the Regions for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2082(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Secretary-General of the European Economic and Social Committee discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Economic and Social Committee for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Secretary-General of the European Economic and Social Committee discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Economic and Social Committee for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 1 #
2014/2081(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Secretary-General of the Court of Auditors discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Secretary-General of the Court of Auditors discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2080(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Registrar of the Court of Justice discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Court of Justice for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Registrar of the Court of Justice discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Court of Justice for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2078(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. GrantPostpones its President discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Parliament for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 31 #
2014/2078(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Reiterates that maintaining the security of Parliament's buildings and their immediate surroundings must be given the highest priority; requests that as part of this work security in the car parks should be improved, and the access to the parts of the buildings containing Members' offices in Parliament should be controlled;
Amendment 47 #
2014/2078(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 b (new)
Paragraph 33 b (new)
Working places of Parliament (subtitle) 33b. Notes that the European Council whilst justifiably calling for austerity on the part of Parliament, continuous to deny in the opportunity to make the considerable savings that would arise from ceasing to hold meetings in Strasbourg;
Amendment 56 #
2014/2078(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Reminds that the budget for the EuroparlTV was EUR 8 000 000 in 2013 and EUR 5 000 000 in 2014 while the performance of the service has been improved with a number of new activities and projects; notes that between 2012 and 2014 the average monthly number of videos watched has gone up from 53 000 to 400 000; remarks that the cost of this project is still very high;
Amendment 59 #
2014/2078(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39 c (new)
Paragraph 39 c (new)
39c. Calls for efficiencies to be found in its budget;
Amendment 61 #
2014/2078(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Notes with concern that mission expenses in 2013 of the Information Offices amounted to EUR 1 839 696, with missions to Strasbourg accounting for EUR 1 090 290; regrets that the cost of missions from Information Offices to Strasbourg increased by around 7 % from 2012, with a further 2 % increase being due to the creation of the new Information Office in Croatia; insists that priority should be given to the use of videoconferences, making both structural cost reductions to the Parliament's budget and environmental improvements, which do not detract from Parliament's work;
Amendment 91 #
2014/2078(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 a (new)
Paragraph 48 a (new)
48a. Notes that the property portfolio of Parliament has substantially increased over recent years; insists that no additional buildings be purchased or leased during the next multiannual financial framework period;
Amendment 1 #
2014/2077(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. GrantPostpones the Commission discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the eighth, ninth and tenth European Development Funds for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2077(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. ApprovPostpones the closure of the accounts of the eighth, ninth and tenth European Development Funds for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 3 #
2014/2075(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Commission discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Commission discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 6 #
2014/2075(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 9 #
2014/2075(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 3
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (formerly the Executive Agency for Competitiveness and Innovation) discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the Executive Agency for Small and Medium- sized Enterprises (formerly the Executive Agency for Competitiveness and Innovation) discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 12 #
2014/2075(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 4
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency (formerly the Executive Agency for Health and Consumers) discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency (formerly the Executive Agency for Health and Consumers) discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 15 #
2014/2075(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 5
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Research Council Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Research Council Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 18 #
2014/2075(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 6
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the Research Executive Agency discharge in relation to the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the Research Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 21 #
2014/2075(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 7
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the Innovation and Networks Executive Agency (formerly the Trans-European Transport Network Executive Agency) discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the Trans-European Transport Network Executive Agency (formerly the Trans-European Transport Network Executive Agency) discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 24 #
2014/2075(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 8
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Approves the closure of the accounts of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2013;
Amendment 116 #
2014/2075(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Reiterates the need to work on finding longer term solutions that can allow the Commission to regain control of its budget, in particular, there is a 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;
Amendment 5 #
2014/2040(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 1 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1
Subheading 1
The EU budget – endowing citizens with the tools to find a way out of the crisibackground and general guidelines
Amendment 4 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that despite some remaining headwinds that the European economy is showing some signs of recovery and considers that the European budget canmust be a very strong tool to increase strategic investment with European added value andto help put the European economy back on track, generating sustainable growth and employment while aiming to foster competitiveness and increase economic and social cohesion throughout the EU;
Amendment 9 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Recalls in this light that many Member States remain engaged in long term fiscal rebalancing (for example France and Spain) and believes that Europe should continue to show not only solidarity, but budgetary responsibility and restraint in light of these ongoing national budgetary consolidation efforts;
Amendment 10 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. 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 that all programmes and expenditure should be carefully analysed for viability, efficiency and effectiveness;
Amendment 13 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights in particular the importance of the European Structural and Investment Funds, which form the biggest single block of expenditure in the EU budget; underlines the fact thatat the primary focus of these ESIFs are particularly important inshould be to helping Member States anddress regions to exit the current crisis and achieve the Europe 2020 targets; stresses the need to endow citizens with the tools to find a way out of the crisis;al disparities and believes the best way to do requires judicious selection of policy instruments and objectives, such as promoting trade, strengthening the single market and providing a supportive framework for innovation, stresses in this regard the special need to invest in areas such as ICT, cross border connectivity, education and mobility, research and innovation, SMEs and entrepreneurship, in order to boost the creation of employment – in particular youth employment;
Amendment 20 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. 3. Considers it also important to invest in other areas such as renewable energy, infrastructures, a stronger and enhanced use of ‘'innovative financial instruments’', particularly in respect of long term investments; underlines the importance of ensuring that sufficientappropriate resources are made available for EU external actions; recalls the EU’'s international commitments as regards the allocation of 0.7 % of GNP to the Millennium Development Goals Instruments by 2015;
Amendment 26 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls the recent agreement on the 2014-2020 multiannual financial framework (MFF), which defines the main parameters for the annual budgets until 2020; underlines the fact that each annual budget must be in line with the MFF Regulation and the Interinstitutional Agreement and should not be considered an excuse to re-negotiate the MFFtresses the need for both arms of the budgetary authority to respect the provisions laid down there-in; points out, however, that this does not exclude the use of all means available to the budgetary authority within the framework of the annual budget procedure;
Amendment 41 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Underlines the importance of decentralised agencies, which are vital for the implementation of EU policies and programmes; stresses the need to assess all agencies individually and to provide them in the 2015 budget and in the following years with the appropriate financial means and staff so that they are able to properly fulfil the tasks assigned to them by the legislative authority; notes the joint statement on decentralised agencies annexed to the 2014 budget agreement, which underlines the need for a closer and more permanent scrutiny on the development of decentralised agencies to ensure a coherent approach, without prejudice to their respective prerogatives
Amendment 50 #
2014/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Insists on the use of all means available under the MFF Regulation, including recourse to the contingency margin and/or revision of the payment ceiling,Notes the existence of certain special mechanisms including the possible recourse to the contingency margin and/or revision of the payment ceiling, which may be used in under certain conditions subject to the provisions laid down in the MFF Regulation and IIA in order to meet the Union’s legal obligations pursuant to Article 323 TFEU and so as not to jeopardise or delay payments to all stakeholders, such as researchers, universities etc., and at the same time to decrease the amount of the outstanding year-end payments;
Amendment 9 #
2014/0332(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. Whereas onea number of Member States which, over the years, hadve largely benefited from past underestimation of itstheir GNI expressed its reluctance to pay by the legal deadline the additional amounts dutheir concern with the unprecedented level of redistribution to be paid by the legal deadline;
Amendment 15 #
2014/0332(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is concerned byNotes the proposed larger discretion left to Member States as to the timing of their contributions to the Union budget; stresses that this would create a precedent that could have an impact on the Commission's treasury, the timing of payments to the beneficiaries of the Union budget and, ultimately, the credibility of the Union's budget;
Amendment 16 #
2014/0332(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines the fact that this proposal makes the Own Resources system even more complex and is aimed at amending legislation that will soon be replaced, retroactively, by already agreed pieces of legislation; 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;
Amendment 47 #
2014/0255(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 a (new)
Recital 16 a (new)
(16a) In order to ensure that the lines of distribution and the supply of veterinary medicines are not restricted, where Member States have a legally defined, professionally qualified animal medicines advisor, they shall continue to prescribe and supply certain veterinary medicines.
Amendment 165 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) In addition, experience has shown that in order to facilitate the application of the rules provided for in those Directives a number of the provisions require more precise wording and consistent terminology. In the interests of clarity and consistency of Union legislation, it is also appropriate to provide for more definitions, including for reasons of consistency and clarity a definition of ‘breed’.
Amendment 166 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
Amendment 171 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
Amendment 173 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Experience gained, particularly in the application of Directive 90/427/EEC, and to a lesser extend Directives 89/361/EEC and 2009/157/EC, indicates that more precise rules are required to settle effectively disputes between breeders on the one hand and breed societies on the other hand based on a clearly established rules of procedure and described rights and duties of members. This is best achieved, if the disputes are settled within the legal system of the Member State where they arise. The Commission should only be involved in disputes which arise between those entities located in different Member States and which cannot be settled effectively by the legal systems of the Member States where they arise.
Amendment 174 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) With the exception of equidae, purebred breeding animals entered in breeding books are identified in accordance with Union animal health legislation on identification. In the case of purebred breeding animals of the equine species, breed societies also carry out the identification of horses and donkeys they enter or register for entry in their breeding books and issue identification documents (passports). They thus provide a service not only to breeders, but also to the competent authority responsible for the identification and registration of farmed animals. However, this system has led to a multitude of passport issuing bodies that has proven to complicate official controls on compliance with Union legislation on food hygiene and veterinary medicines in those cases where essential information was not readily available to the competent veterinary authorities, for example in the absence of a central database, common high standards for the quality of the identification documents were not observed and official supervision was lacking. It is therefore necessary to require that also purebred breeding animals of the equine species are entered in their respective breeding books under their animal health identification, while providing the possibility to competent veterinary authorities to delegate under certain conditions to recognised breed societies the official issuing of identification documents for purebred breeding animals of the equine species.
Amendment 175 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
Amendment 178 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
Amendment 179 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) Performance testing and genetic evaluation may be carried out by institutions designated by the breed society or the breeding operation. Those designated institutions shall cooperate with the European Union reference centres designated by the Commission. The Commission should therefore be empowered to designate by way of implementing acts European Union reference centres and the necessary powers should be granted to the Commission to adopt delegated acts describing their duties and functiontasks, where necessary by amending Annex IV. Those reference centres qualify for Union aid in accordance with Council Decision 2009/470/EC of 25 May 2009 on expenditure in the veterinary field15. In the case of purebred breeding animals of the bovine species, performance testing and genetic evaluation carried out by a breed society are at present assisted by the Interbull Centre, the European Union reference body designated by Council Decision 96/463/EC of 23 July 1996 designating the reference body responsible for collaborating in rendering uniform the testing methods and the assessment of the results for purebred breeding animals of the bovine species16. ___________ 15 16OJ L 155, 18.6.2009, p. 30. OJ L 155, 18.6.2009, p. 30. 16 OJ L 192, 2.8.1996, p. 19. OJ L 192, 2.8.1996, p. 19.
Amendment 180 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
Amendment 183 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) The Commission should carry out risk-based controls in Member States as appropriate and in particular in the light of the results of the official controls carried out by Member States to ensure the application of the zootechnical and genealogical rules laid down in this Regulation in all Member States.
Amendment 185 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
Amendment 187 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) ‘breed’ means a group of animals sufficiently homogenous to be considered distinct from other animals of the same species capable of maintaining their distinctiveness in progeny, entered and registered or eligible to be entered in the breeding book;
Amendment 228 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 5
Article 7 – paragraph 5
Amendment 231 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The competent authority referred to in Article 4 may authorise bBreed societies and breeding operations tomay outsource the technical management of their breeding book or breed register and other specific aspects of their breeding programme to a third partyies, provided that:
Amendment 245 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11
Article 11
Amendment 246 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12
Article 12
Amendment 248 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13
Article 13
Amendment 249 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14
Article 14
Amendment 251 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Breed societies may carry out performance testing based on the requirements of their breeding programme and, where performance testing is undertaken, may select activities appropriate for their breeding programme;
Amendment 262 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) collection of semen from breeding animals which have undergone, where applicablrequired by the breeding programme, performance testing and genetic evaluation in accordance with Article 27 or set out in the delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 28(1);
Amendment 273 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Amendment 276 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 23 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Breed societies may prohibit the use of a purebred breeding animal and its germinal products where such use would compromise the improvement, preservation and genetic diversity of the breed concerned;
Amendment 279 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 4
Article 23 – paragraph 4
Amendment 281 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28
Article 28
Amendment 284 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2
Article 29 – paragraph 2
Amendment 286 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Where breed societies outsource the performance testing or genetic evaluation of breeding animals to third parties the conditions laid down in Article 8(2) shall be fulfilled;
Amendment 289 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31
Article 31
Amendment 292 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – title
Article 32 – title
Amendment 293 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. European Union reference centres designated in accordance with Article 31 shall:
Amendment 294 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) the duties and functiontasks of European Union reference centres set out in point 2 of Annex IV.
Amendment 321 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 3 – heading 1 a (new)
Annex 3 – heading 1 a (new)
Breed societies may carry out performance testing based on the requirements of their breeding programme and, where performance testing is undertaken, may select activities appropriate for their breeding programme.
Amendment 322 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 3 – section 1 – subsection 1 – paragraph 2
Annex 3 – section 1 – subsection 1 – paragraph 2
Performance testing shall follow the rules and standards established by the relevant European Union reference centre provided for in Article 31(1) in cooperation with the International Committee for Animal Recording (ICAR).
Amendment 324 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 3 – section 1 – subsection 2 – point 7 – paragraph 3
Annex 3 – section 1 – subsection 2 – point 7 – paragraph 3
Where genomic breeding values are calculated, those values shall be validated for the traits concerned according to the rules and standards established by the relevant European Union reference centre provided for in Article 31(1) in cooperation with ICAR.
Amendment 326 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 3 – section 2 – subsection 2 – point 1 – point a – introductory part
Annex 3 – section 2 – subsection 2 – point 1 – point a – introductory part
(a) the genetic merit of the breeding animal shall be calculated by assessing the qualities of a suitable number of progeny or collaterals or the breeding animal’s ancestry in relation to production characteristics:
Amendment 329 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 4 – point 1 – introductory part
Annex 4 – point 1 – introductory part
1. European Union reference centres designated in accordance with Article 31(1)2 must have:
Amendment 330 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 4 – point 1 – point b
Annex 4 – point 1 – point b
Amendment 331 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 4 – point 1 – point c
Annex 4 – point 1 – point c
(c) staff been instructed to respecprocedures in place to ensure that the confidential nature of certain subjects, results or communications is maintained;
Amendment 332 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 4 – point 2 – introductory part
Annex 4 – point 2 – introductory part
2. The duties and functiontasks of the European Union reference centres designated in accordance with Article 31(1)2 shall be as follows:
Amendment 333 #
2014/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 4 – point 2 – point b – point i
Annex 4 – point 2 – point b – point i
(i) in view of harmonisingwith regard to recommending calculation methods to be used for the various methods of performance testing and genetic evaluation of purebred breeding animals, in particular to recommend calculation methods to be used;
Amendment 1 #
2013/2157(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes thatWelcomes the Annual Growth Survey 2014 differs only marginally from the 2013 edition; regrets therefore once again the absence of new proposals from the Commission on the role which the EU budget can play in stimulating growth and job creation in order to achieve the Europe 2020 goalsof the Commission for the year 2014, setting up five main EU economic priorities of pursuing differentiated and growth friendly fiscal consolidation, restoring lending to the economy, promoting growth and competitiveness, tackling unemployment and the social consequences of the crisis and modernising public administration;
Amendment 2 #
2013/2157(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Stresses that the Annual Growth Survey launches the 2014 European Semester, which is a surveillance mechanism established to ensure that Member States keep their budgetary and economic policies in line with their EU commitments laid down in Stability and Growth Pact, CSRs and Europe 2020 Strategy;
Amendment 6 #
2013/2157(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls the start of the new Multiannual Financial Framework in 2014 and underlines the need for swifteffective implementation of the new programmes at both EU and Member State level, in order to allow these programmes to contribute to the economic recovery process; calls for a particularly speedy implementation of programmes likesuch as Horizon 2020, COSME and Erasmus +; stresses that these frontloaded programmes have a leverage effect and a synergetic and catalytic role in relation to national investment policies;
Amendment 7 #
2013/2157(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls the need to pay particular attention to the speedy, effective and proper implementation of the frontloaded programmes in order to ensure growth and job creation, especially with regard to the Yackling youth Eunemployment Initiative;
Amendment 10 #
2013/2157(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the European Commission to provide a regularly updated scoreboard on the implementation of the new programmes to, allowing for comparisons to be made between Member States and to encourage speedy implementationpermitting more informed decisions regarding spending priorities in light of observable trends by the budgetary authority;
Amendment 11 #
2013/2157(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on Member States, where appropriate and in line with the principle of sound financial management, to make full use of the additional financing opportunities provided for by the European Investment Bank and new innovative financial instruments such as project bonds while also exploring new ways of financing through capital markets;
Amendment 13 #
2013/2157(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines the fact that the low level of payment appropriations and the tight ceiling on payments remain a crucial problem for the EU budget, which has a particularly negative effect on economic recovery as late payments are harmful primarily to the direct beneficiaries; recalls the need to ensure, in the light of implementationRecalls in light of increased budgetary rigour the need for effective and high quality implementation as well as the need to ensure, an orderly progression of payments so as to avoid any abnormal shift of outstanding commitments (‘'RAL’') onto the 2015 budget and, in thius connection, to make use, where appropriate, of the various flexibensuring that the EU fulfil ity mechanisms included in the MFF Regulations obligations in compliance with Article 323 TFEU; intends to continue its in-depth monitoring of the overall situation on payments, especially in relation to the very high amount of payments still needed for the completion of the programmes of the previous MFF;
Amendment 16 #
2013/2157(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Recalls its view that the fiscal situation of Member States can be eased through a new systemNotes the establishment of the High Level Group ofn own resources to finance the Union budget that will reduce GNI contributions,, as foreseen by the statement annexed to the MFF Regulation, which is mandated, by thuis enabling Member States to redirect these resources towards investment in economic recovery and reform measures; underlines,declaration agreed by Parliament, to undertake a general review of the system of own resources guided by the overall objectives of simplicity, transparency and democratic accountability, expects the refore, the importance it attaches to the new high-level group on own resources, which should lead to a true reform of EU financingsult of this review to be delivered before the end of 2016;
Amendment 18 #
2013/2157(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Deplores the fact that no reNotes that incremental progress hads been achieved over the past year oin the debate on a ‘genuine Economic and Monetary Union’ and reiterates its belief that the European Semester can only be truly successful when embedded in the right structureimplementing reforms necessary to improve the functioning of the EMU and calls on Member States to continue with work aimed at bringing their fiscal positions to a more sustainable footing;
Amendment 20 #
2013/2157(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Believes that the democratisation of the European Semester and of economic governance in general has been improved through the strong involvement of the European Parliament and national parliaments: considers, nevertheless, that while respecting existing legal frameworks and relevant Treaty provisions further improvements are needed as regards parliamentary scrutiny in order to give decisions taken in the Semester framework, which have direct effect on the lives of European citizens, the necessary democratic legitimacy and accountability. without prejudice to legal consistency, accountability and predictability;
Amendment 1 #
2013/2055(ACI)
Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Reiterates its position that the eight- week period laid down in Article 4 of Protocol (No 1) on the RNotes that pursuant to Article 4 of Protocol 1 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union on the role of Nnational Parliaments in the European Union to inform national parliaments of any draft legislative act does not apply to budgetary issues; regrets therefore that despite the very tight timeframe for the entry into force of this adjustment and of Amending Budget No 1/2013, the Council has nevertheless let this period elapse before adopting its position, thus squeezing the time for adoption by Parliament as foreseen by the Treatyhat an eight week period shall lapse between a draft legislative act being made available to national Parliaments in the official languages of the Union and the date when it is placed on the Council's agenda; notes further that Article 2 of that Protocol defines draft legislative acts as meaning inter alia proposals from the Commission;
Amendment 2 #
2013/2055(ACI)
Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Regrets furthermore the difficulty with which, even after the eight weeks deadline had elapsed, the Council reached an agreement on this revision, which has led to a delay in the availability of the funding for Croatia due as from 1 July 2013; hopes that this does not become a worrying precedent for further enlargements;
Amendment 4 #
2013/2055(ACI)
Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes that the Council could eventuallyCouncil's agreement on a revision of the 2013 ceilings for payments by the required EUR 374 million; considers that, given the limited amount concerned and the current shortage of payment appropriations in the 2013 budget, this is the proper way to fulfil the obligation that the Member States took out when signing the Accession Treaty and to respect the provisions of point 29 of the IIA of 17 May 2006;
Amendment 1 #
2013/2054(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas in parallel, the Commission, in conformity withpursuant to point 29 of the IIA, has submitted a proposal for the adjustment of the multiannual financial framework to accommodate these changes;
Amendment 2 #
2013/2054(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that, accordingpursuant to point 29 of the IIA, the resources to finance this Amending budget are to be covered through an adjustment of the financial framework, namely a revision of the ceilif new Member States accede to the European Union during the period covered by the financial framework, the European Parliament and the Council, acting on a proposal from the Commission and in accordance with the procedure established by point 3 of the IIA, will jointly adjust the financial framework to take account of the expenditure requirements resultings for 2013 in commitments and paymentrom the outcome of the accession negotiations;
Amendment 3 #
2013/2054(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Reiterates its position that the eight- week period provided for byNotes that pursuant to Article 4 of Protocol 1 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to inform theon the role of national pParliaments of any draft legislative act does not apply to budgetary issues; regrets therefore that despite the very tight timeframe for the entry into force of this Amending budget, the Council has nevertheless let this period elapse before adopting its position, thus squeezing the time for adoption by Parliament as foreseen by the Treatyin the European Union that an eight week period shall lapse between a draft legislative act being made available to national Parliaments in the official languages of the Union and the date when it is placed on the Council's agenda; notes further that Article 2 of that Protocol defines draft legislative acts as meaning, inter alia, proposals from the Commission;
Amendment 4 #
2013/2054(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Regrets furthermore, however, the difficulty with which, even after the eight weeks deadline had elapsed, the Council reached an agreement on this Amending budget, which has led to a delay in the availability of the funding for Croatia due as from 1 July 2013; hopes that this does not become a worrying precedent for further enlargements;
Amendment 6 #
2013/2054(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes that the Council could eventually's agreement on a revision of the 2013 ceilings for payments by the required EUR 374 million; considers that, given the limited amount concerned and the current shortage of payment appropriations in the 2013 budget, this is the proper way to fulfil the obligation that the Member States took out when signing the Accession Treaty and to respect the provisions of point 29 of the IIA;
Amendment 8 #
2013/2054(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 2 #
2013/2018(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas in light of elections to be held for Parliament and in light of budgetary rigour demonstrated by other Union institutions, it is more important than ever that its budgets reflect current conditions in the Union, both to maintain credibility and as a means of expressing solidarity with its electorate;
Amendment 4 #
2013/2018(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that the level of the preliminary draft estimates for the 2014 budget, as suggested by the Secretary-General in his report to the Bureau, amounts to EUR 1 813 144 206; notes the rate of increase of 3,58 %compared with the 2013 budget; notes that this proposed increase has to be seen in the context of its constitutive elements, specifically an increase of 2,20 % stemming from the election of a new Parliament and the application of the Statutes for Members and Members' assistants, and an increase of 1,30 % deriving from other legal obligations; suggests, however, that this level remains too high and further savings should be sought with a view to lowering this initial draft estimate;
Amendment 8 #
2013/2010(BUD)
1. Takes note of the incapacitythat the of Heads of State and Government to comdid not manage to anfind agreement acceptable to all 27 Member States on the next multiannual financial framework (MFF) at the European Council of 22 and 23 November 2012, recalls that such summits rarely find agreement at the first attempt, notes in this regard that Heads of State and Government will be meeting once more on the 7th of February with a view to finding an accord;
Amendment 17 #
2013/2010(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Believes that in the context of continued challenging economic circumstances, the European Union should freeze its budgets; emphasises, however, the need to respect legally binding obligations and possible subsequent increases, on the basis that increases be offset to maintain the level of an overall freeze;
Amendment 18 #
2013/2010(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Believes realistic budgeting to be the key principle of sound financial management given the fiscal and economic challenges facing the Union; takes the view, moreover that the 2014 appropriations should be based on a careful analysis of payment appropriation outturn in 2012 as well 2013, with a view to view to making savings on lines where problems have arisen in implementation, considers that real savings can be made by identifying overlaps and inefficiencies across budgetary lines;
Amendment 33 #
2013/2010(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Attaches the greatest political importance to the joint statements signed by Parliament, the Council and the Commission at their highest political level in December 2012, which are an integral part of the agreement between the two arms of the budgetary authority on the 2013 budget and according to which the necessary additional resources will be provided by Member States next year in order for the Union to be able to pay its bills and preserve its institutional credibility and solvability;
Amendment 45 #
2013/2010(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Contends that the difficulties experienced by the two arms of the budgetary authority in agreeing the annual budget since the entry into force of Lisbon stem, in part, from legal changes and technical constraints to the annual budgetary procedure, considers that in future the idea of returning the procedure to two readings merits serious consideration;
Amendment 50 #
2013/2010(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Is concerned about the high level of unused appropriations (RALs) accumulated at the end of the year 2012, which stood at €217bn; proposes to organise once again this year inter- institutional meetings on the difference between commitment and payment appropriations, to establish a dialogue with the Commission in order to fully clarify the composition of RAL; insists that the Council refrain from deciding a priori the level of payments, without taking account of actual needs and legal obligations; notes further that accruing RAL actually undermines a transparent EU budget in which the relation between commitments and payments in any specific budgetary year is clearly visible;
Amendment 52 #
2013/2010(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Notes that problems have arisen where programmes have experienced above expected implementation, realises that this can lead to a situation where Member States are unable to agree large requests to meet any prospective shortfall in the level of payment appropriations, believes the idea of using only non- differentiated appropriations across the EU budget, should be explored which at the once would prevent both such undesirable situations from arising in future in addition to preventing excessive accumulation of unused appropriations (RALs);
Amendment 56 #
2013/2010(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 62 #
2013/2010(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Recalls that 2014 is scheduled to be the first year of implementation of the new MFF and is therefore important for the successful start of the new programming period; is of the opinion that the priority of the European budget in 2014 should thus be to sustainpromote economic growth and competitiveness and strengthen the efficiency of the administration;
Amendment 67 #
2013/2010(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls that the EU budget is an investment budget and that 94 % of it goes back to the Member States and European citizens through its policies and programmes, and therefore should not be seen as an additional burden but as a tool to boost investment, growth and jobs in Europe; emphasises that, for the regions and Member States, public investment would be minimised or impossible without the contribution of the EU budget; believes that any decrease inin times of fiscal consolidation at Member State level the EU budget wshould inevitably increase imbalances and hamper the growth and competitive strength of the entire Union economy, as well as its cohesiveness, and would undermine the principle of solidarity as a core EU valuefocus on spending more efficiently in order to reduce imbalances by directing funding to those areas who need it most, thus, ensuring the growth and competitive strength of the entire Union economy;
Amendment 71 #
2013/2010(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Acknowledges the persistent economic and budgetary constraints at national level, and the fiscal consolidation efforts undertaken by the Member States at the request of the Union; underlines, however, that the EU budget is an effective tool for investment and solidarity with proven added value at both European and national level; is convinced that the budget’sose areas of the budget with the ability to trigger economic growth, competitiveness and job creation isare even more important in times of economic difficulty and that the EU budget should be seen as an instrument to exit the crisis;
Amendment 84 #
2013/2010(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Highlights the strategic effect of the choice of priorities for 2014, as the first year of the coming MFF; emphasises the urgent need for the EU to foster growth and competitiveness, with the objective of creating jobs whilst underlining the crucial importance of sound public finances, deep structural reform and targeted up front investment for sustainable growth;
Amendment 91 #
2013/2010(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Recalls, in this regard, that the EU 2020 strategy should be at the heart of the next MFF (2014-2020) and invites the Commission to clearly prioritise it already in 2014 and to place emphasis on spending for SMEs, research, broadband infrastructure and mobile communication technologies, development and innovation, renewable energy, sustainable deveyouth unemplopyment, and skills;
Amendment 95 #
2013/2010(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Takes the view that the promotion of growth and jobs will above all require a concentration of scarce available funds to support competitiveness, innovation and small and medium enterprises (SMEs), since most of the EU economic potential lies in its 23 million SMEs, which, according to latest studies, created 85 % of net new jobs in the EU between 2002 and 2010 and are the backbone of our economic growth, considers that strengthening EIB support for SMEs and infrastructure should also be considered a key priority;
Amendment 108 #
2013/2010(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Takes note ofWelcomes the letter dated 7 January 2013 from the Commissioner for Budgets and Financial Programming confirming that 2014 will be the second year in which the Commission will reduce its staffing levels by another 1 %, meaning that any new tasks will be met through available (and decreasing) human resources and by counting on the simplification of delivery modes, as proposed in the new generation programmes; takes note of the Commission’s call on all other institutions to introduce a nominal freeze at 2013 level of all non-salary related expenditure; intends to continue a close examination of the Commission’s intention of reducing by 2018 the staffing level in EU institutions and bodies by 5 % as compared with 2013, and recalls that this is to be seen as an overall goal; recalls that any change to the establishment plan has a direct impact on the budget and should in no way compromise the budgetary prerogatives of the Committee on Budgets and of the European Parliament; considers that any short-term or long-term reduction in staff should be based on a prior impact assessment and should take full account of, inter alia, the Union’s legal obligations and the institutions’ new competences and increased tasks arising from the Treaties as well as the current developments regarding civil services in the Member States;
Amendment 8 #
2013/0000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1a (new)
Paragraph 1a (new)
1a. Believes, moreover that the 2014 appropriations should be based on a careful analysis of payment appropriation outturn in 2012 and 2013, with a view to making savings on lines where problems have arisen in implementation, considers that real savings and efficiencies can be made by identifying overlaps and inefficiencies across budgetary lines,
Amendment 15 #
2013/0000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4a (new)
Paragraph 4a (new)
4a. Expresses concern, however, about the situation under staff regulations whereby certain pensions now seem to out of step with foreseen future economic and demographic circumstances, not least growing pensions schemes which are no longer adapted to proposals to increase retirement age in time of growing life expectancy and falling birth rates; expresses its willingness to give serious consideration to adjusting staff pensions in line with future long term demographic trends;
Amendment 25 #
2013/0000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Considers that Parliament should follow, out of solidarity with other institutions and the Member States, the example of the European Commission in looking for long term efficiencies in its staffing budget by the year 2020, requests in this regard a document be presented by the Secretary General to the Bureau and Committee on Budgets by 31st of May 2013 examining the feasibility of implementing staff reforms in line those adopted by the Commission;
Amendment 34 #
2013/0000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Strongly believes that the Parliament should abandon the controversial and inappropriate European House of History Project, whose rising costs have been noted in reports submitted at the request of the Parliament by its management authorities, considers that if the project were to be cancelled the initial outlay that would be required would more than be compensated for by long term savings,
Amendment 41 #
2013/0000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Supports the idea that funding of European parties and foundations should be financed entirely by the national parties concerned or from other "own resources," considers that this could be achieved giving parties and foundations greater latitude to increase their own funding, allowing the Parliament to make substantial savings, intends therefore to take concrete steps with a view to making these organisations entirely self-sufficient with no further contributions from the Parliament's budget;
Amendment 11 #
2012/2228(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Requests the institutions involved to make the necessary efforts to improve procedural and budgetary arrangements in order to accelerate the mobilisation of the EGF; notes, however, that an agreement on the continuation of the EGF beyond 2013 has yet to be reached; appreciates the improved procedure put in place by the Commission, following Parliament's request for accelerating the release of grants, aimed at presenting to the budgetary authority the Commission's assessment on the eligibility of an EGF application together with the proposal to mobilise the EGF; hopes that, in the event of an agreement under the next MFF further improvements in the procedure will be integrated in thea new Regulation on the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014–2020) and that greater efficiency, transparency and, visibility and clear added value of the EGF will be achieved;
Amendment 14 #
2012/2228(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls the institutions’ commitment to ensuring a smooth and rapid procedure for the adoption of the decisions on the mobilisation of the EGF, providing one- off, emergency, time-limited individual support geared to helping workers who have been made redundant as a result of globalisation and the financial and economic crisis; emphasises the role that the EGF can play in the reintegration of workers made redundant into the labour market;
Amendment 1 #
2012/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. Whereas the debt crisis has prompted the Union and Member Statesespecially the Euro area to set up new financial solidarity instruments in Europetabilisation mechanisms: the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF), the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) and other projects related to the 'banking union'; whereas the financial impact of those instruments is much greater, in terms of the amounts involved, than the Union Budget and whereas the innovative idea of a central budget for the euro area funded by members of the Euro area is now being proposed as the ultimate guarantee for this new financial solidarity;
Amendment 3 #
2012/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. Whereas the multiplication of these solidarity instrumenttabilisation mechanisms makes it difficult to evaluate on the one hand, the actual contribution and guarantees made by each Member State to European solidarityongoing stabilisation efforts, which far exceeds the Member States' respective financial contributions to the Union Budget; whereas, moreover, the diversity of existing instruments, in terms of legal bases, intervention mode and the Member States concerned, is likely to make the whole set-up hard to steer by European leaders,, and, on the other hand, the possible impact of all these stabilisation mechanisms combined, especially on Member States that have not yet adopted the euro or have an opt-out; whereas, moreover, the diversity of existing instruments, in terms of legal bases, intervention mode and the Member States concerned, is likely to lead to systemic control deficiencies, mutual spill- over effects between the participating countries of the 'banking union' and the non-participating ones, and make it difficult to understand for the European citizens at large and unamenable to any parliamentary control;
Amendment 4 #
2012/2151(INI)
C. Whereas, without appropriate consolidated data on the public accounts of the Union, Member States and local and regional authorities, it is impossible to assess the right policy mix within the euro area and within the rest of the Union; whereas such data should also make it possible to evaluate which proportion of national, regional and local budgets is dedicated to the financing of the Union's objectives, such as the Europe 2020 strategy; whereas, currently, even the magnitude of such basic data is unknown;
Amendment 9 #
2012/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. All commitments and guarantees undertaken by the Union or by some of its Member States in the framework of the new European solidarity instrumenttabilisation mechanisms, such as the EFSF, ESM or other projects related to the 'banking union', should be summed up in an overview annexed to the Union Budget and broken down Member State by Member State;
Amendment 10 #
2012/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Further budgetary coordination within the Union requires consolidated data on the public accounts of the Union, Member States and local and regional authorities, reflecting the Union's objectives. The Commission should therefore include the establishment of such consolidated data in upcoming legislative proposals; together with forecasts on budgetary trends related to the duration of the proposed legislative proposals;
Amendment 11 #
2012/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. The situation whereby the financing needs of the Union Budget conflict with the necessary budget consolidation in Member States should be addressed urgently. The time has come, therefore, to engage in a progressive return to a situa in order to allow for a evidence based and thorough assessment of all options, in which the Union Budget is financed by genuine own resources, which would relieve national budgets accordinglycluding the possibility of a temporary budget freeze of all or some sections of the EU budget;
Amendment 13 #
2012/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 1 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes, however, that, given the budgetary difficulties and painful savings made in many Member States, the Union's budget should also show realism and constraintfinancial responsibility is of the utmost importance; believes, therefore, that resources must be concentrated on those areas where the EU budget can deliver added value, whilst they could be reduced in sectors which are experiencing unjustified delays and low absorption, with a view to making savings on lines where problems have arisen in implementation and considers that real savings can be made by identifying overlaps and inefficiencies across budget lines, while respecting existing legal commitments;
Amendment 3 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 6 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Asks the Commission to provide both arms of the budgetary authority with prompt, regular and complete information on the implementation - on the basis of performance target indicators - of the various programmes and initiatives under Heading 2, and to weigh them against the EU's political commitments
Amendment 7 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 9 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is fully aware of the severe difficulties arising from the state of the nationongoing smart fiscal economiessolidation and of the need for a responsible and realistic reading; cannot accept, however, theany approach according toby which the EU budget is made the source for possible savings with the same proportion and logic applied to the national budgets, given their substantial difference in nature, objectives and structure; highlights that decreasing EU resources will surely result in a lack of investments and liquidity in the Member States, thus aggravatout corresponding evidence backing such decisions being provided; highlights that decreasing EU resources in areas where spending is proven to add value must not lead to corresponding losses in competitivity given the huge structural challenges facing the problems they are facingMember States;
Amendment 9 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Expresses its willingness, in line with paragraph 4 of the Parliament's report on the Mandate for Trilogue on the 2013 Draft Budget, to look for, where possible, negative priorities and possible savings;
Amendment 10 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that improvements can be made in the clearance of accounts of previous years and calls ondemands that the Commission to urgeand Member States to improve their administrative performance in this area; believes, however, that this involves a long-term effort and therefore considersexpresses concern regarding the Council's estimates of income in 2013 from the clearance of accounts to be highly unrealistic; insists on partly reinstating the Commission's estimates contained in the 2013 Draft Budget; additionally, rejects the Council's proposed cuts in the School Fruit Scheme, coupled direct aid and international agricultural agreements;
Amendment 11 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that the EU budget is to be seen insteadmust, in areas where it adds value, be seen as a complementary instrument of support for the Member States' economies, capable of concentrating initiatives and investments in areas strategic for growth and jobs and of bringing an actual added value in sectors overcoming national boundaries; highlights that such a role is legitimised by the same Member States, who, together with Parliament, are responsible for the decisions from which most of the EU law stems;
Amendment 12 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that the CAP is expectedmust continue to be reformed in the near future and therefore proposes an increase in the budget line aimed at raising awareness of the CAP; furthermore proposes to increase the budgets available for promotion measures and producer organisations, which is also in line with the current CAP reform;
Amendment 17 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that 2013 is the last year of the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), which makes it of the utmost importance to reach a balance between commitments undertaken so far and payments deriving from them that need to be honoured, the institutional credibility of the EU being at stake as well as possible legal consequences for the Commission in case of missing reimbursement of legitimate payment claim; considers that in this regard an urgent assessment of possible legal consequences of a failure to honour previous commitments should be drawn by the Parliament's Legal Service for the consideration of the Committee on Budgets;
Amendment 19 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Deplores, therefore,Notes the decision of the Council to proceed again this year with the usual approach of horizontal cutscut to the DB, aimed at artificially reducing the level of the EU resources for 2013 all in all by EUR 1 155 million (-0,8%) in commitment appropriations (CA) and by EUR 5 228 million (- 3,8%) in payment appropriations (PA) as compared to the DB, leading thereby to a very modest increase compared to the 2012 budget both in commitments (+1,27% vs. 2% of the DB) and in payments (+2,79% vs. 6,8% of the DB);
Amendment 23 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Is surprisedConsiders that, in this exercise, the Council has not taken imight not have taken sufficiento account of the latest Commission's forecasts for programmes' implementation, based on estimates of the same Member States, which on the one hand clearly highlight areas of over- performances where reinforcements armight be needed already in 2012 and on the other hand warn about the severe risk ofthat there might be a possible shortages of payments, in particular under Headings 1a, 1b and 2; recalls in this context the letter that President Barroso addressed to the 27 Member States in July 2012 expressing his concern about the cuts made to the DB by the Council's readingby the Council to the DB increase of 6,8% suggested by the Commission, as a result of which there is a risk that sufficient funds aremight not madbe available to enable the EU to honour its debprevious commitments;
Amendment 26 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that Council's cuts are spread over all the headings, but that Headings 1a and 1b aresult particularly affected as regards payments (-EUR 1,9 billion and -EUR 1,6 billion respectively as compared to DB), i.e.s concerned that the headings where most of the programmes and initiatives responsible for the delivery of the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy are concentrated; warns that such an approach puts atmay risk the respect of commitments previously undertaken and consequently the delivery of jointly decided EU priorities;
Amendment 27 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Highlights that these cuts are fully at odds withto the Commission proposal could conflict with some of the June European Council's conclusions, which identified the EU budget as «"a catalyst for growth and jobs across Europe»" and decided to concentrate resources, including EUR 55 billion coming from the Structural Funds, on much needed growth-enhancing measures; considers that such a decision, taken at the highest political level of the EU, needs to be translated into a sufficientn appropriate and targeted level of payments for 2013 in favour of programmes and actions underpinning this prioritythe most effective areas of spending across all Member States;
Amendment 28 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. RejectsAsks that Council's arguments that these cuts correspond to under- implemented or low-performing programmes, since they affect also programmes showing excellent implemenare suitably substantion ratesd (e.g. Lifelong learning Programme and the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP) under Heading 1a and the Competitiveness and Employment objective under Heading 1b), whilsand that they do not touch areas experiencing under-implementation; highlights that such criteria completely with proven added value; highlights that any unsubstantiated savings in areas experiencing problems with uptake might disregard the multiannual character of the EU policies, and of cohesion policy in particular, characterised by a rising profile of payments towards the end of the MFF;
Amendment 29 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Points out that the substantial reduction in the level of payments as compared to commitments set by Council would logically bring as a consequence thea further increase of the RAL at the end of the year, by increasing the gap between CA and PA by EUR 4,1 billion, especially considering that the largest shares of RAL relate to cohesion policy (65,6%) and to R&D sectors (10,5%), which are the two areas mainly suffering from the cuts;
Amendment 30 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. On the basis of the data presented by Commission in the inter-institutional meeting on payments of 26 September 2012, doubtconsiders that the increase in payments by 6,8% proposed in the DB will beis more than sufficient to cover reimbursements of payment claims awaitedgiven previous uptake by Member States under the various headings – and in particular for Headings 1a and 1b –; notes that in the absence of an amending budget covering payment needs for 2012; will therefore reject any attempt to reduce the leve the EU might struggle to implement all of the payment appropriations as compared to the DB proposalrequests of the Member States;
Amendment 32 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Due to the recent years' experience, does not deemmust be sure that the declaration of payments proposed by the Council in its reading as a sufficient guarantee that an adequate level of payments will eventually be made available for all headings; takes the general approach, therefore, of restorcorresponds to the actual needs presented in the Autumn 2012; therefore believes that a general approach of looking, at the level of DB payments cut by Council setting all headings and to increase payment appropriations over DB on a selected number of lines characterised by high levels of implementation within each headingn adequate amount of payments in areas where expenditure is substantially proven to add value, in particular in Headings 1a and 4, to cover the actual needs of the corresponding programmes, as identified by the Commission, should be adopted;
Amendment 36 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. RegretNotes that the Council has departed substantially from certain areas of the budget (all in all by EUR 2,15 billion), as regards commitments, from the financial programming figures, which result from a joint decision with Parliament at the beginning of the programming period, as well as that Council completely disregarded Parliacorrespond to the stated requests of all the Member States; expects in this regard that the Member States must, as a matter of best practice, improve the accuracy of their forecasts for payment's priorities, as expressed in Parliament's mandate for the trilogue; recalls that Parliament's reading is based instead upon, and coherent with, these benchmarkssubmitted to the Commission across not only financial year but across the Multi-annual Financial Framework so as to facilitate the budgetary authority's continuing efforts towards effective and realistic budgeting;
Amendment 39 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Is of the opinion that the answer to the crisis must not reflexively be more Europe and not less Europe, in order to restart investments and help rebuild confidence in the economy; having already criticised the proposed freezing in commitment appropriations at the level of the expected inflation rate in the DB, cannot accepbut rather a considered approach should be adopted based on sound evidential and objective policy making in order to restart investments and help rebuild confidence in the economy, building on areas of known added value where pooling of expenditure is known to be of clear mutual benefit; believes that Council's decision to reduce them furthercommitments down to 1,27% compared to budget 2012 must be substantiated with clear, factual and objective evidence, backed where possible by appropriate impact assessment; recalls that commitments reflect EU political priorities and should as such be set having in mind a long term perspective wheren the economic downturn might be over; therefore takes the view that, as a general principle, commitments should be resset at a level that reflects the need to red at the DB level-establish growth at a European level, whilst respecting principles of budgetary rigour; intends, however, to increase commitment appropriations above the DB on a selected number of budget lines directly related to the delivery of the Europe 2020 priorities and in line with traditional Parliament's priorities;
Amendment 44 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. DeploreRegards that, although this is the key heading for the delivery of the Europe 2020 objectives, Heading 1a bears practically the totality of the Council's cuts in commitments (-2,9% compared to DB) in Heading 1 and is the most affected as regards decreases in payments (-EUR 1,9 billion or -14% compared to DB); decides to undo almost allhat, given the proven added value of spending in this area to undo cuts by Council and to reinforce above DB in commitment and payments tonly a selected number of lines directly linked to the objectives of the Europe 2020 Strategy and characterised by high levels of implementation and strong absorption capacity could prove providential;
Amendment 48 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. In particular, highlights that the strong cuts to the Commission's proposal affecting Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) and the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP) programmes are in clear contradictionmust not conflict with the recent European Council's decision to create a «"Compact for growth»" supporting, among others, research and development, innovation and employment; recalls whilst recalling the importance of sound public finances, structural reform and targeted investment for sustainable growth; points to the very good performances of these programmes, for which Commission reports accelerated implementation in 2012 compared to last year;
Amendment 57 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. DeplorNotes the substantial cuts in payments (-EUR 1,6 billion or -3,3 % as compared to DB) made by the Council affecting the Regional Competitiveness and Employment objective (- 12,9%), the European Territorial Cooperation objective (-18,7%) and the Cohesion Fund (-4,7%); notes instead that the Convergence objective is left practically untouched;
Amendment 61 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Recalls that the high level of payments in the DB for this heading (+8,1%) results from commitments undertaken in the past, which need to be honoured at the end of the programming period in line with the natural life cycle of the Structural Funds; stresses that a more realistic approach from the Council as to the actual payment needs under this heading in the recent EU budgetary procedures wouldmay have allowed a much lower percentage of increase in payments;
Amendment 62 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Notes, that forecasts of spending needs in this area are highly uncertain and can fluctuate considerably as implementation rates for major programmes change;
Amendment 64 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Rejects the cuts introduced by the Council on Heading 1b, which would lead to a much more serious shortage in payments than already expected and would impede the correct execution of projects during the last year of the programming period; points out again that this heading is responsible for two thirds of the current outstanding commitments and that cutting the level of payments for 2013 would also lead to a strong increase in the level of RAL by the end of next yearPoints out that heading 1b is responsible for two thirds of the current outstanding commitments; believes that such outstanding commitments can be met by identifying inefficiencies in other spending areas;
Amendment 67 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Does not considerNotes the Council's declaration asking the Commission to submit a draft amending budget in case of insufficient payments under Heading 1b as a sufficient guarantee that an adequate level of payments will be made available in 2013, given that similar commitments have been already undertaken and disregarded by the Council in the past two years;
Amendment 69 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
Amendment 70 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Believes that payment appropriations should be set at the minimum necessary to fund programme implementation and be based on realistic implementation rates and estimates of Member States' absorption capacity;
Amendment 73 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Considers thatQuestions whether the Commission's estimates of budgetary needs are more realistic than the Council's proposals, in particular in the light of forthcoming payments and considering the current economic uncertainty; restores therefore Council's cuts under this Heading to a level of EUR 60 307,51 million, which is 0,6% above the 2012 budgetconsistent with the trend of actual spending in recent years and believes that the Council's proposals are more realistic;
Amendment 79 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Provides for an increasedDoes not consider increased additional support for the school milk programme andnecessary nor the continued support for programme concerning school fruit; considers that both programmes could be more effectively managed and financed at Member State level;
Amendment 80 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Maintains the budget allocation dedicated to the Food Distribution Programme for the Most Deprived Persons in the EU that supports 18 million people with problems of malnutrition within the Union; welcomes the effort made by the Commission in finding a political and legal solution to continue with the programme in for 2013;
Amendment 82 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33a. Notes that the financing of the Food Distribution Programme under CAP expenditure was initially justified because of the use of intervention stocks; however, given that intervention stocks have been reduced to almost zero in recent years and taking into account the Court of Auditors ruling1on the scheme - believes that the link of the programme with agricultural expenditure is unjustified; 1 ECA/09/51.
Amendment 87 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Stresses that the common fisheries policy remains a crucial political priority for the EU and maintains its financing at the proposed DB levels, in view of its upcoming reform; believes that the funding of the integrated maritime policy should not come at the expense of other fisheries actions or programmes under Heading 2; considers effective fisheries' management of crucial importance in order to preserve fish stocks and prevent overfishing;
Amendment 88 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Notes that the overall cuts in funding proposed by the Council compared to DB 2013 is -EUR 15 million in commitment appropriations and -EUR 51 million in payment appropriations; notes that these cuts correspond to -1,07% compared to the DB and to -15,5% compared to the initial financial programming of the Commission based on the requests of the Member States;
Amendment 89 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. RejectNotes the cuts performed by the Council in payment appropriations in the following areas: European Return Fund (- EUR 18 million), European Refugee Fund (-EUR 1,8 million), European Fund for the Integration of third-country nationals (- EUR 3,2 million) and Fundamental Rights and Citizenship (-EUR 1 million); decides, therefore, to restore the level of the DB on the corresponding lines;
Amendment 92 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. RejectNotes the Council's unilateral decisionlegally permissible decision under the Treaty to change the legal basis of the proposal on the «"Schengen evaluation mechanism»" from ordinary legislative procedure to Article 70 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; supportnotes the Conference of Presidents' decision to block cooperation with the Council on the 2013 budget as regards internal security aspects; endorseconsiders, therefore, the position taken by its Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs to put into the reserve some budgetary lines in Title 18 which relate to internal security (in commitment and payment appropriations) until a satisfactoryn outcome is achieved on the Schengen governance package; is of the opinion that this reserve should not be applied to the agencies working under Heading 3a in order not to jeopardise their work;
Amendment 98 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Stresses that measures aimed at combating gender violence must be sufficiently funded; emphasises the important role that the programme for preventing and combating all forms of violence (DAPHNE) has played in eliminating violence against women and girls in the , and therefore increases its payment appropriations above the level of the DBchildren, young people and women;
Amendment 100 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. RegretNotes that, despite the cuts already proposed in the DB, Council makes further cuts in appropriations for Heading 3b, both in commitments and in payments, by approximately EUR 9,5 million; takes the general approach of undoing all Council's cuts so as to ensure a proper implementation of the running programmes and actions under this heading;
Amendment 101 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Reiterates that fostering youth employment and activity are essential for Europe to be able to exploit the talents of the best-educated generation in history; has therefore decided to increase funding for the Youth in Action programme compared to DB, especially considering the sound implementation of the programme for many years runningregain its competitiveness; believes however, that savings can be made by reducing inefficiencies in administrative expenditure and focusing on spending less more efficiently;
Amendment 104 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Considers that the information campaign on the European Year of Citizens 2013 together with communication activities require adequate appropriations to properly involve citizens in the European projectshould be an area where appropriate reductions in appropriations will still effectively involve citizens and promote dialogue on thecommon EU issues; deplorrecognises that the budget proposed by the Commission on this budget line is the smallest ever allocated to a European Year and decides to reinforce appropriations for the corresponding budget lineis one which reflects the ongoing smart fiscal consolidation among the Member States;
Amendment 109 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. Underlines, on the contrary, the need for additionalppropriate financing on a selected number of lines cut by Commission in comparison with the 2012 budget and corresponding to the areas of geographical development cooperation, as well as for the Electoral Observation Mission and the Global Fund to Fight Aids, Tuberculosis and Malaria; therefore proposes an increase in the level of commitment and payment appropriations above the DB for these budget lines;
Amendment 112 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50
50. Also deemsDoes not consider it necessary to increase appropriations for the support to the economic development of the Turkish Cypriot Community in order to ensure the continuation of the EU financial support to the work of the Committee on Missing Persons in Cyprus and of the Technical Committee on Cultural Heritage;
Amendment 114 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Takes note of Council's position, which decreased Commission's proposal on Heading 5 – All sections by EUR 146 million overall, despitein addition to the institutions' efforts, as reflected in their estimates and the DB, towards budget consolidation of administrative expenditure, at a time of economic and budgetary constraints and fiscal rigour at national level;
Amendment 116 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
Paragraph 53
53. Stresses in particular that most institutions, including Parliament and the Commission, complied with and even overstepped their commitmen Commission's request to restrict their administrative budgets to an increase below the expected inflation rate; welcomes these efforts and sets Heading 5 appropriations at an overall level of EUR XXX million, of which EUR XXX million for the Commission;
Amendment 117 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
Paragraph 54
54. WellImportantly notes that the cuts brought by Council stem from the non-budgeting of the 1,7% 2011 salary adjustment, the increase of the standard abatement rate for various institutions and services and other specific cuts to some items of administrative expenditure, but considers such cuts to be ill-founded and simply aimed at artificially freezing administrative expenditure in nominal terms, despitethat savings must, as a general rule, be systemic in nature and not circumstantial one offs if possible, and certainly not in contradiction to statutory and contractual obligations and the EU's new competences and tasks;
Amendment 118 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
Paragraph 56
56. Decides, for all the institutions apart from Council, as well as for European Schools, to restore (or in the case of the Court of Justice, add) in reserve the amounts corresponding to the 1.7% 2011 salary adjustment for budget year 2013, pending the Court's ruling; underlines that this is sound budgeting, given the likelihood of a ruling in favour of the Commission, and warnsmust not prejudice any future Court decision regarding sound budgeting, and points out to the Council that, in such event, the budgetary authority will need to accommodate the retroactive effect of such ruling also for years 2011 and 2012, including late interest;
Amendment 119 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59
Paragraph 59
59. While restoring or maintaining Commission's and, partly, other institutions' requests for posts on the basis of a case-by-case approach, calls for an in- depth impact assessment to be carried out on the planned staff reductions by 2018 to be delivered to the budgetary authority by 31st June 2012, taking full account of, inter alia, the Union's legal obligations and the institutions' new competences and increased tasks arising from the Treaties;
Amendment 120 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60
Paragraph 60
60. Although welcoming the information given in the DB on those areas which were reinforced in staff, such as European economic governance, the single market and security and justice, notes with concern that staff cuts were made within the Commission to some other Directorates-General such as Enterprise and Industry, Competition, Mobility and Transport, Research and Innovation Eurostat which however make a substantial contribution to the achievement of EU's priorities; is also concerned by the adverse impact fewer posts in the areas of administrative support, budgetary management and anti-fraud may have on the swift, regular and effective implementation of EU actions and programmes, especially at a time when the EU's competences continue to increase and a new Member State joins the Union;
Amendment 121 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 64
Paragraph 64
64. Endorses, as a general rule a report to be delivered to the standing Rapporteur responsible for agencies by 31st of June each year, the Commission's estimates of agencies' budgetary and staff needs andbacked by objective fact based evidence; notes that the Commission had already considerably reduced the agencies' initial requests and applied also to them the 1% staff reduction in the DB;
Amendment 126 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68
Paragraph 68
68. Is concerned byNotes the Council's position of a nominal freeze across all EU institutions; believes that each institution should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the needs and specific situation of each institution;
Amendment 130 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 78
Paragraph 78
78. Welcomes the establishment of a joint Working group on the Parliament's budget between the Committee on Budgets and the Bureau; in particular, recalls that such group must reflect the plurality and democratic balance of all political groups in the Parliament, thus ensuring full democratic legitimacy, regrets that up until this point this has not been the case; strongly supports its work on the launch of a comparative study Parliament's budget with the budgets of the US Congress and a sample of Member States' parliaments; recalls that this study is scheduled for completion by the end of 2012; expects this study to create long- term savings in the European Parliament's budget and present ideas for improving its efficiency in 2013 and the following years;
Amendment 140 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 92
Paragraph 92
92. Partially restores remunerations and allowances, to apply a 5,5% standard abatement rate, which will still mean a reduction of the current occupancy rate; partstrongly uendorses other arbitrary cuts made by Council, such as expenditure linked to the Official Journal and operating expenditure such as interpretation, already reduced in 2012 to its 2009 outturn level;
Amendment 141 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 94
Paragraph 94
94. Partially restores appropriations for the Committee of Regions to meet its existing statutory and legal obligations in the field of annual lease payments and staff salaries; notes thatendorses Council's drastic cut on remunerations and allowances which would amount to applying twice the 1% staff cut (already included in the DB) to this institution;
Amendment 142 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 98
Paragraph 98
98. Welcomes the factNotes that, for 2013, the EEAS has frozen appropriations in nominal terms on a number of budget lines and made targeted reductions on other lines, savings which could reach 1,3% of its 2012 budget;
Amendment 144 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 100
Paragraph 100
Amendment 145 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 101
Paragraph 101
101. Rejects, therefore,Welcomes the Council's decision to freeze the EEAS budget in nominal terms at the 2012 level, and proposes an adequate increase in view of its overall financial context;
Amendment 146 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 102
Paragraph 102
102. UndoNotes the cuts made by Council that would entail a reduction in the number of officials and would contradict the efforts made since the creation of the EEAS to recruit and to redeploy staff to meet increased operational requirements;
Amendment 3 #
2012/2089(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Requests the institutions involved to make the necessary efforts to improve procedural and budgetary arrangements in order to accelerate the mobilisation of the EGF; appreciates the improved procedure put in place by the Commission, following Parliament's request for accelerating the release of grants, aimed at presenting to the budgetary authority the Commission's assessment on the eligibility of an EGF application together with the proposal to mobilise the EGF; hopes that further improvements in the procedure will be integrated in the new Regulation on the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014–2020) in the event of an agreement being reached on its continuation into the next Multiannual Financial Framework and that greater efficiency, transparency and visibility of the EGF will be achieved;
Amendment 16 #
2012/2089(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the fact that following repeated requests from Parliament, the 2012 budget shows payment appropriations of EUR 50 000 000 on the EGF budget line 04 05 01; recalls that the EGF was created as a separate specific instrument with its own objectives and deadlines and that it therefore deserves a dedicated allocation, which will avoid transfers from other budget lines, as happened in the past, which could be detrimental to the achievement of the policy objectives ofre is not yet any political agreement on the continuation of the EGF beyond 2013 and asks the Commission to outline clearly the added value in terms of tangible outcomes in creating a separate budget line for the EGF;
Amendment 18 #
2012/2089(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. RegretNotes the decision of the Council to block the extension of the "crisis derogation allowing to provide financial assistance to workers ma"; is of the opinion that the financial crisis can no longer be conside redundant as a result of the current financial and economic crisi the cause of redundancies in addition to those losing their job because of changes in global trade patterns, and allowing the increase in the rate of Union co-financing to 65% of the programme costs, for applications submitted after the 31 December 2011 deadline, and calls on the Council to reintroduce this measure without delaystresses real concern that the EGF could be used as a tool to support the transfer of large multinational companies from one Member State to another;
Amendment 1 #
2012/2058(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 3 a (new)
Citation 3 a (new)
- having regard to the outcome of the EPSCO Council on 1-2 December 2011,
Amendment 2 #
2012/2058(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the future of the EGF within the next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) remains unclear,
Amendment 4 #
2012/2058(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Requests the institutions involved to make the necessary efforts to improve procedural and budgetary arrangements in order to accelerate the mobilisation of the EGF; appreciates, in this sense, the improved procedure put in place by the Commission, following Parliament's request to accelerate the release of grants, aimed at presenting to the budgetary authority the Commission's assessment on the eligibility of an EGF application together with the proposal to mobilise the EGF; hopes that further improvements in the procedure will be reached in the framework of the upcoming reviews of the EGF and in the event of an agreement being reached on its continuation into the next MFF that greater efficiency, transparency and visibility of the EGF will be achieved;
Amendment 6 #
2012/2058(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the fact that following repeated requests from the Parliament, the 2012 budget shows payment appropriations of EUR 50 000 000 on the EGF budget line 04 05 01; recalls that the EGF was created as a separate specific instrument with its own objectives and deadlines and that it therefore, deserves a dedicated allocation, which will avoid transfers from other budget lines, as happened in the past, which could be detrimental to the achievement of the policy objectives ofre is not yet any political agreement on the continuation of the EGF beyond 2013 and asks the Commission to outline clearly the added value in terms of tangible outcomes in creating a separate budget line for the EGF;
Amendment 10 #
2012/2058(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. RegretNotes the decision of the Council to block the extension of the "crisis derogation", allowing to provide financial assistance to workers made redundant as a result of the current financial and economic crisi; is of the opinion that the financial crisis can no longer be considered the cause of redundancies in addition to those loosing their job because of changes in global trade patterns, and inc; streasse the rate of Union co-financing to 65% of the programme costs, for applications submitted after the 31 December 2011 deadline, and calls on the Council to reintroduce this measure without delays real concern that the EGF could be used as a tool to support the transfer of large multinational companies from one Member State to another;
Amendment 11 #
2012/2058(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Notes the Commissions requests for technical assistance in previous years and therefore questions the budget requested for its information activities; calls on the Commission to reduce its audio-visual activities notably on the production of a video; stresses that information activities should focus on the maintenance of the website and the publication of the annual reports;
Amendment 13 #
2012/2058(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Believes that other savings could be made with regard to the administrative and technical support requested by the Commission;
Amendment 4 #
2012/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that the introduction of IFIs at European level was seen as a way of enabling the Union to stimulate investment in the real European economy at a time when, against the background of a constant fall in the volumesmart fiscal consolidation and scarcity of resources for allocatedion to the Union budget, its political ambitions were steadily growing;
Amendment 8 #
2012/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises that the ultimate purpose of and the rationale for IFIs is that they should act as a catalyst which makes it possible, on the basis of a contribution from the Union budget, to mobilise fundinancing – public and/or private – for projects which can secure no support, or only inadequate support,experiencing sub-optimal investment situations when projects do not receive adequate financing from the market; ; points out that intervention by the public sector thus makes it possible to reduce the risk-related costs, or to defray part of those costs, thereby facilitating the implementationfinancing of the projects concerned;
Amendment 9 #
2012/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Firmly believes that IFIs must address one or more specific policy objectives of the Union, in particular those outlined by the EU2020 Strategy, operate in a non discriminatory fashion, must have a clear end date, respect the principles of sound financial management and be complementary to traditional instruments such as grants, thus improving the quality of spending and contributing to the guiding principles of ensuring optimal use of financial resources;
Amendment 12 #
2012/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Emphasises that the use of IFIs is governed by strict legislative (agreement of the legislative authority required) and budgetary rules; notes that the use of IFIs does not generate costs for the Union budget, in that the liability borne by the Union budget ishall be limited to the amount of the Union contribution committed to the IFI in question on the basis of annual budget appropriations, as agreed by the budgetary authority, and there shall not give rise to contingent liabilities for the Union budget; points out that in fact IFIs must contribute to the sound and efficient management of public funds, given that the contribution paid from the budget may generate proceeds which can be reinvested (reflows) in the IFI concerned, thereby strengthening its capacity to provide support and enhancing the effectiveness of public-sector action; stresses the need therefore, for IFIs funded operations to be properly audited by the EU Court of Auditors and for the co-legislators to be fully informed about any findings;
Amendment 14 #
2012/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Points out that investments which are certain to generate a return mustcould be financed by the market, whilst those which are not shcould remain eligible for grants;
Amendment 16 #
2012/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. ReiterateConsiders that the increased use of IFIs in the Union budget mustshould not turn into a strategy to reduce the size of the Union budget, and but that their use shouldn't prejudice their allowing for possible reallocations and redeployments within the Union budget, welcomes the fact that in its communication on IFIs, as referred to above, the Commission acknowledges that ‘the intention behind an increased use of innovative financial instruments is (…) not to replace grant funding with financial instruments’;
Amendment 20 #
2012/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. NotesIs concerned by the fact that in the cohesion policy field IFIs have been beset by delays in implementation, problems in achieving critical mass and major disparities between Member States;
Amendment 26 #
2012/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. WelcomNotes the Commission's proposal to introduce the possibility of combining grants and loans in the context of the Structural and Cohesion Funds;
Amendment 31 #
2012/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Emphasises that since the mid-1990s public investment in the EU has been steadily falling and that this trend has become more pronounced since the start of the financial crisis in 2008; notes, further, that private investors are facing a credit squeeze and are finding it more difficult to borrow money on the capital markets; is convinced, therefore, that a return to coordinated, sustainable, intelligent and inclusive growth throughout the EU is contingent on the continued development of IFIs at Union levelthe continued development of IFIs at Union level could become a contributing factor if the Union is to ensure a return to smart, sustainable and inclusive growth;
Amendment 33 #
2012/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. EmphasisNotes that, according to Commission estimates, implementing the EU2020 Strategy and its seven headline initiatives would require investment throughout the Union totalling EUR 1600 billion between now and 2020; notes that these investments meet objectives ranging from the implementation of major infrastructure projects to the provision of support for smaller-scale projects which offer significant potential for growth at local and regional level, including measures to foster competitiveness, growth, jobs as well as regional and social cohesion;
Amendment 41 #
2012/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Emphasises the importance of ex ante and concurrent assessments in identifying situations of market failure or sub-optimal investment conditions; calls on the Commission to propose relevant criteria to govern the role and use of ex ante assessments; nd concurrent assessments; believes firmly in the principle of evidence based policy making and believes that such assessments will contribute to the efficient and effective running of IFIs;
Amendment 44 #
2012/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Regards it as essential that a reasonable number of simple quantitative and qualitative indicators should be incorporated into the ex ante and ex post assessmentassessments of all IFIs; takes the view that this requirement must not serve to impose an excessive administrative burden on project managers;
Amendment 52 #
2012/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
Amendment 58 #
2012/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Welcomes the prompt agreement reached between Parliament and the Council on the implementation of a trial periodpilot phase (2012-2013) for project bonds in the areas of transport, energy and information technologies3 ; expresses its willingness on the basis of the full-scale independent evaluation of this pilot phase to assess future steps to be taken in order to enhance the efficiency of Union spending as well as to increase investment volumes towards priority projects;
Amendment 60 #
2012/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Is confidentThinks that the greater use of IFIs willcould have an extremely positive impact on the European economy, but fears that in practice this will be limited to projects offering short- to medium-term returns; fears that investment in projects equally fundamental to the achievement of the EU's strategic objectives for intelligent, sustainable and inclusive growth may not be realised because such projects are deemed too risky for investors and because public funds are lacking; calls, therefore, on the Commission to submit as quickly as possible proposals to facilitate the release of savings, an underused resource at present, to support medium- and long-term projects which generate sustainable growth in the Union;
Amendment 3 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that, on account of the austerity measures approved in many Member States in order to rebalance national budgets and reduce public debt, a realistic EU budget stipulating both positive and negative priorities is needed; notes that the commitments budgeted for agriculture and rural development have been raised slightly, with increases in commitments of 0.4% and 1.3% respectively compared with 2012, and increases in payments of 0.5% and 5.4% respectively, resulting in a total increase in payments under Heading 2 of 1.6%, which is well below the overallproposed budget increase of 6.8%; calls on the Commission continually to search for possible budget savings;
Amendment 9 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recognises the persistent economic and budgetary constraints at national level, as well as the need for fiscal consolidation which must be reflected at European level; reiterates, however, its conviction that the EU budget represents a common and effective instrument of investment and solidarity, which is needed particularly at the present time to trigger economic growth, competitiveness and job creation in the 27 Member States; stresses that, despite its limited size that does not exceed 2% of total public spending in the Union, the EU budget has had a real economic impact and successfully complemented so far Member States‘' recovery policies;
Amendment 10 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Believes that advancing the Europe 2020 Strategy requires judicious selection of policy instruments and objectives, such as promoting trade, strengthening the single market and providing a supportive framework for innovation, and takes the view that the Europe 2020 strategy can be credible only if adequately funded but believes that funding for EU2020 should not be increased for 2013 unless accompanied by savings elsewhere in the budget, thus allowing for an inflationary freeze in both commitment and payment appropriations;
Amendment 10 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 14 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Intends, therefore, to strongly defend an adequate level of resources for next year's budget, as defined in the Draft Budget, and to oppose any attempt to cut down the resources especially for policies delivering growth and employmentBelieves that in the context of continued challenging economic circumstances, the European Union should freeze its budgets; emphasises, however, the need to respect legally binding obligations and possible subsequent increases, on the basis that increases be offset to maintain the level of an overall freeze; believes that the EU budget, which cannot run a deficit, should not be the victim of unsuccessful economic policies at national level; notes that in 2012 several Member States are increasing the size of their national budgets;
Amendment 18 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is convinced that, particularly in a period of crisis, financial responsibility is of utmost importance; believes, therefore, that resources must be concentrated on those areas, where the EU budget can deliver an added value whilst they can be decreased in sectors which are experiencing unjustified delays, low absorption and under-implementationtakes the view, moreover that the 2013 appropriations should be based on a careful analysis of payment appropriation outturn in 2011 as well 2012, with a view to view to making savings on lines where problems have arisen in implementation, considers that real savings can be made by identifying overlaps and inefficiencies across budgetary lines; on this basis, it intends to identify, together with its specialised committees, both positive and negative priorities for 2013; for this purpose asks the Commission to provide both arms of the budgetary authority with a prompt, regular and complete information on the implementation of the various programmes and initiatives;
Amendment 23 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Commission to budget realistically and insists that the utmost done to examine the European added value of all current EU programmes, calls for systematic, regular and independent evaluations, ensuring that all spending is achieving the desired outcomes in a cost effective manner while contributing to the EU2020 strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth and respecting the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality;
Amendment 33 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers the proposed increase of 6,8% in PA compared to 2012 as an initial response to Parliament's request for a responsible and realistic budgeting; nNotes that the increases in payments are concentrated in the areas of competitiveness and cohesion, due to a greater level of claims expected by running projects in these fields; fully endorses such increase that results not only from past commitments that need to be honoured but also from the actual implementation of programmes that is expected to reach at the last year of the current MFF a cruising speed;
Amendment 42 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. DeplorNotes Council's reluctance to participate in the inter-institutional political meeting on payments proposed by the Parliament as a follow up to the last year's budgetary conciliation; considers such a meeting the ideal platform for the two arms of the budgetary authority to reach a common understanding - ahead of their respective positions on the Draft Budget - regarding the available data on implementation and absorption capacity and to correctly estimate the payment needs for 2012 and 2013; firmly believes that any doubts –as expressed by some Council delegations- over the Commission's figures and calculations need to be communicated, examined and clarified as soon as possible, in order not to become an impediment for reaching an agreement in this year's conciliation;
Amendment 47 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Recalls that the annual Budget 2013 will be the last budget of the current multiannual financial framework, whose ceilings will become the reference for the next financial framework in the event of no agreement, according to what foreseen by point 30 of the IIA of 17 May 2006; is therefore determined to conduct the negotiations with the Council with the view to achieving for the Budget 2013 a realistic and adequate level of appropriations both in commitments and in payments, which can represent an appropriate basis also for the next MFF;
Amendment 61 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Recalls the Joint Declaration of 1 December 2011 on financing the additional costs of the ITER programme for 2012- 2013, where the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission also agree to make available EUR 360 million in CA in the 2013 budget procedure ‘making full use of the provisions laid down in the Financial Regulation and in the IIA of 17 May 2006, excluding any further ITER- related revision of the MFF’; is concerned that the Commission proposes to finance this additional amount only through redeployment from lines of the FP7 programme, contrary to Parliament's long- standing position on the matter; takes full account of the Commission's claim that this amount derives from performance savings on FP7, and that those cuts on administrative lines will not harm the operation of the programme; intends to examine this claim further as well as to explore other means available under the IIA and the Financial Regulation for this purpose;
Amendment 82 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. DeploresIs concerned by the Commission's proposed decreases for the European Supervisory Authorities compared what originally foreseen in the Financial programming; considers the current level of appropriations insufficient to allow these agencies to cope efficiently with their tasks; expresses therefore the intention to reinstate appropriations at least at 2012 level for the European Banking Authority (EBA) and the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) as well as to further reinforce the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) due to the new tasks entrusted to it;
Amendment 95 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Considers this increase in payments only as a first step to cover the actual needs of running projects and reiterates its concern as to a possible shortage of funds in the field of cohesion policy; will therefore oppose any possible cut in the level of payments compared to the proposal included in the DB 2013;
Amendment 101 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Reminds that price volatility in this sector is a major concern and endorses measures to combat abusive speculation in agricultural commodities; urges the Commission and the Council to carefully monitor developments in agricultural markets; in this context reminds the Commission of the request by the Parliament to install a price and margins observatory to achieve better price comparability and more transparency in setting food prices, to which no suit has been given so far;
Amendment 106 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Notes that climate action and environmental objectives are a priority stipulated in the Europe 2020 strategy, which must be translated into concrete actions to be implemented under the various programmes; welcomes in this context the proposed increase of CA by 3,3% to EUR 366,6 million for LIFE + and considers that this increase must be offset by a reallocation of funds from existing budget lines; considers a cross-cutting approach should be applied whereby sustainable growth becomes a horizontal priority underpinning all EU policies;
Amendment 112 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Considers important to maintain theconsider the arguments in favour and against in terms of value for money of maintaining the current financial backing to the common fisheries policy (CFP) with a view to its imminent reform; stresses in particular the need to support SMEs in the fisheries sector and the access to jobs for young people in this field; welcomes in this regard the proposed increase for the European Fisheries Fund by respectively 2,2% (to EUR 687,2 million) in CA and 7,3% (to EUR 523,5 million) in PA, compared to the 2012 Budget; Stresses however, that any increases must be reflected by cuts or reallocation in other areas of underperformance or under implementation;
Amendment 126 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47
Paragraph 47
Amendment 133 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
Paragraph 51
51. Notes the significant increase of EUR 272,3 million in the proposed margin for Heading 4 compared to the Financial programming for 2013 (from EUR 119,6 million to EUR 391,9 million), which is the net effect of the increase in commitments for ENPI (reinforced by EUR 51,7 million), ICI and ICI + (above Financial programming with EUR 0,3 million) and decreasing the growth in commitments for the Guarantee Fund (-104,5 million EUR), Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (- 99.3 million EUR), Macro-financial Assistance (-37,4 million EUR), Development Cooperation Instrument (- 28,6 million EUR), Instrument for Stability (- 41,4 million EUR); is concerned byNotes the fact that the Commission did not provide sufficient explanation as to why such a significant scaling down of some programmes was needed compared to the Financial programming; stresses that while the principle of scaling down projects that are under-implemented is welcomed if it produces efficiency savings, the decrease in the appropriations should not be done across the lines; warns that the use of an artificially high margin as a negotiating tool in the budgetary procedure cannot be considered as a sound budgetary practice;
Amendment 149 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60
Paragraph 60
60. Welcomes this effort towards budget consolidation in administrative expenditure at a time of economic and budgetary constraints at national level; is however concerned about the adverse impact such measures may have on the swift, regular and effective implementation of EU actions and programmes, especially at a time when EU competences keep increasing and new Member States join the Union and considers that such consolidation must continue to be appropriately reflected throughout all administrative expenditure in 2013; welcomes the presentation of those areas reinforced in staffing, such as European economic governance, Single Market, Security and Justice but requires similar information as to those policy areas and types of posts where cuts in staffing were made as compared to 2012;
Amendment 151 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 62
Paragraph 62
62. Emphasises that for many areas of EU action, sufficient staffing should be ensured in view of the stage of programmes‘' implementation, new priorities and other developments; will therefore carefully scrutinise the overall evolution of staff in the different DGs and services also in light of the priorities presented in this report; in addition to more detailed information in this regard, asks the Commission to proceed to such detailed assessment of the impact of the proposed across the board staff cuts, also taking into account in the longer run any further reduction in Commission's staffing, and to report back to the Parliament; insists that this would be a prerequisite for the budgetary authority to consider accepting, depending of its outcome, this 1% staff reduction and possiblyto ensure cuts are made in the most appropriate services in order to endorse the Commission's objective to reduce, by 2018, the staffing level in the Commission by 5% as compared to 2013;
Amendment 155 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63
Paragraph 63
Amendment 163 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 69 a (new)
Paragraph 69 a (new)
69a. Believes that when the ESAs are given additional tasks in the future there should be a cost assessment made at a suitable stage during the legislative process such as during trilogue negotiations in order for MEPs and Member States understand the cost consequences of the proposals they are making;
Amendment 6 #
2012/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that the institutions, in the context of continued challenging economic circumstances, should at the very least be looking to freeze their administrative budgets; emphasises, however, the need to respect legally binding obligations and possible subsequent increases, believes, however, that the institutions should seek to counterbalance these increases with savings in other areas;
Amendment 10 #
2012/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Requests an updated estimate of the impact of Croatia's accession on Heading 5;
Amendment 17 #
2012/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that real savings can be made by identifying overlaps and inefficiencies across budgetary lines; requests, therefore, a detailed andreport from the Secretary General containing a clear overview of budget lines that were under-implemented in 2011 and 2010, as well as an objective analysis of the reasons for this by the 1st of March 2012;
Amendment 18 #
2012/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Recalls Paragraph 9 of its Resolution P7_TA(2011)0088 of 9th March 2011, adopted by 574 votes in favour to 74 against, which took the view that Parliament should submit biannual reports on the implementation of its budgets, giving details of the implementation of each budget line;
Amendment 21 #
2012/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Believes that, in order to make significant long-term savings, an independent evaluation of the EP budget should be considered, requests that the Services report back to the Committee on Budgets by the 1st of May 2012 with a series of proposals to this end;
Amendment 25 #
2012/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses the need for greater cooperation between the Secretary General, the Bureau, and the Committee on Budgets throughout the year to ensure a smooth budgetary process and effective implementation of the budget; expects the Bureau to present prudent needs-based draft estimates, in which any targeted increases are counterbalanced by savings identified in other areas;
Amendment 36 #
2012/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Notes, following its Resolution of 6 April 2011, and notably its paragraphs 18 and 19, the receipt of a long-term business strategy for the House of European History, requests an updated analysis of the plan's execution by 31st December 2012, containing an evaluation of any cost overruns;
Amendment 38 #
2012/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. EncouragesAsks that all institutions to look for further savings to maintain budgetary discipline and to freeze their budgets whilst bearing in mind legal obligations and new financial challenges such as the Croatian enlargement; notes in this regard the letter of Commissioner Lewandowski, dated 23rd January 2012;
Amendment 20 #
2012/0237(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4
Article 12 – paragraph 4
4. Financial contributions or grants from the general budget of the European Union may not exceed 9085% of the annual reimbursable expenditure of a European political party and 985% of the annual eligible costs indicated in the budget of a European political foundation. European political parties may use any unused part of the EU contribution awarded to cover reimbursable expenditure within the following two financial years after its award. Amounts unused following those two financial years shall be recovered in accordance with the Financial Regulation.
Amendment 26 #
2012/0237(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. Any European political party or European political foundation that receives a donation from within or across borders shallmay benefit from the same tax treatment that is applicable to donations made to a political party or political foundation that has its seat in the Member State concerned., should the relevant tax authorities in the Member State in question so decide;
Amendment 27 #
2012/0237(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. Any natural or legal person donating to a European political party or European political foundation within or across borders shallmay benefit from the same tax treatment that is applicable to donations made to a political party or political foundation that has its seat in the Member State where the donor is resident for tax purposes., should the relevant tax authorities in the Member State in question so decide;
Amendment 29 #
2012/0237(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3
Article 16 – paragraph 3
Amendment 21 #
2011/2175(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Recital J a (new)
Ja. Whereas some Member States ban food being sold at below cost price, robbing retailers of the opportunity to sell unsold fresh food at a cheaper price to consumers towards the end of the day and contributing further to waste in the food chain,
Amendment 46 #
2011/2175(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Believes that all Member States should make it possible for retailers to substantially reduce the price of fresh food, to below the cost of production when it is close to its sell before date, in order to reduce the amount of unsold food discarded and to offer a possibility for consumers with a lower disposable income to buy high quality food at cheaper prices;
Amendment 54 #
2011/2175(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Urges the Commission and the Member States to promote awareness-raising campaigns to inform the public about the causes and effects of food waste and ways of reducing it, fostering a scientific and civic culture guided by the principles of sustainability and solidarity; calls for the introduction of food education courses, particularly in secondary schools and collegsuggests that food education courses be introduced by Member States, so as to encourage better behaviourbetter inform the public; stresses the important role played by local authorities and municipal enterprises in providing information and support to citizens on preventing and reducing food waste;
Amendment 69 #
2011/2175(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission to determine ways and means of better involving agri- food businesses, wholesale markets, shops, distribution chains, and public and private caterers and restaurants in anti-waste practices, including ending bans on selling food at below the cost of production;
Amendment 73 #
2011/2175(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 82 #
2011/2175(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Invites the Commission to assess and encourage measures to reduce food waste upstream, such as dual-date labelling (‘sell by’ and ‘use by’) and discounted sales of out-of-date or damaged goods, stresses that some Member States increase waste by banning below cost selling, as well as to reduce packaging so as to achieve eco- friendly products by means of industrial eco-design;
Amendment 14 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. Whereas the health and sustainability of the 69 species of bumblebees should also be taken into account, bumblebee colonies are uniquely at risk, because only the queen survives the winter and is often at risk of being eaten by predators.
Amendment 15 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas increased bee mortality has been reported in both the EU and other parts of the world; whereas science and veterinary practice cannot currently provide effective prevention or disease control against certain pests and diseases owing to insufficient research and development of new bee-health medicines in the past decades, which is the result of the limited size of the market and the consequent low interest of big pharmaceutical companies,;
Amendment 22 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the health of individual bees and colonies is affected by numerous lethal and sub-lethal factors, many of them interconnected;: whereas the limited number of marketed medicines to fight the Varroa destructor mite are in many cases no longer efficient; whereas the toxic agents stresses that Colony collapse disorder has existed globally for many years, predating the use of modern pesticides, however, a number of factors may be worsening the situation by weakening certain pesticides,olonies immune systems and allowing opportunities for opportunistic pathologies, including changing climatic and environmental conditions, the excessive use of pesticides, loss of plant biodiversity, land use change, mismanaged beekeeping practices and the presence of invasive species weaken colonies' immune systems and favour opportunistic pathologies,;
Amendment 51 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission to increase the level of support for honeybee-health- related research under the next financial framework (FP8) and to focus the research on technological developments, disease prevention and control, particularly the impact of environmental factors on bee colony immune systems, defining sustainable agricultural practices and increasing non-chemical alternativfurther encouraging Integrated Pest Management techniques, and the development of veterinary medical products for current EU honeybee-disease- causing agents, especially Varroa destructor mites, Nosema ceranae endoparasites and other opportunistic diseases and to encourage member states to raise their level of funding for research; calls on the Commission to rule out overlaps in the use of funds and to create new financial opportunities where needed;
Amendment 60 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Considers that it is important to take urgent measures to protect bee health, taking into account the specificities of beekeeping, the diversity of actors involved and the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity;
Amendment 61 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Reiterates concerns that increased mortality among honeybees and wild pollinators in Europe would, if left unchecked, have a profound negative impact on agriculture, food production and security, biodiversity, environmental sustainability and ecosystems;
Amendment 65 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to promote the setting up of appropriate national surveillance systems and to develop harmonised standards at EU level to allow comparison; stresses the need for uniform identification and registration of bee hives at national level;
Amendment 84 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to continue supporting scientific research on honeybee health, building on the good examples of the COST Action COLOSS and the BeeDoc and STEP initiatives and to encourage member states to support scientific research in this area; stresses nevertheless that relations with beekeepers and beekeeper organisations should be enhanced;
Amendment 94 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Calls for coordination and collaboration between beekeepers, growers, industries, public authorities and researchers in order to determine the causes of the problem and bring effective solutions to it.
Amendment 95 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 109 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to provide financial support for the research, development and field- testing of new bee- health medicinal products, especially for SMEs, in light of the beekeeping sector's contribution to biodiversity and the public good in the form of pollination;
Amendment 112 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Notes that public awareness and education of bees is vitally important as bees are often mistaken for wasps and many people remain scared of bees as a result, in addition, poor knowledge of the work that bees do in gardens often means that hobby gardeners do not plant the right types of plants and flowers; stresses that more public awareness in this area may help provide more varied food sources for bees and help their survival as a result.
Amendment 117 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Stresses that in urban environments, including heavily densely populated cities, roof gardens can encourage diversity in the environment and food sources available for bees and that greater public awareness can help people managing roof gardens to find the right mix of flowers and plants to aid the survival of bees in these environments.
Amendment 121 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Stresses that Colony collapse disorder is not a modern phenomena and has been recorded before the advent of modern farming practices; considers that the health of honeybees should be seen as an important bio-indicator for the state of our environment and the sustainability of agricultural practices;
Amendment 125 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Invites the Commission to improve risk assessment methodology for pesticides, which should focus on both the individual insect and the entire colony, to protect colony health and development and to ensure freadequate access to the results of ecotoxicological studies included in the authorisation dossiers;
Amendment 134 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. CStresses the importance of sustainable farming and calls on the Member States to transpose and fully implement, as soon as possible, Directive 2009/128/EC on the sustainable use of pesticides and, in particular, to promote low-pesticide-input pest managementand bee friendly practices, particularly through training and education and integrated pest management;
Amendment 140 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on the Commission to consider chronic, larval and sub-lethal toxicity, and substance-pathogen and substance- substance synergies in the risk assessment of pesticides; calls on the Commission to pay special attention to specific pesticides, such as those of the family of the neonicotinoide family (Clothianidin, Thiacloprid, Imidacloprid, Thiamethoxam), phenyl-pyrazoles (Fipronil) and pyrethroHighlights the importance of ensuring that European farmers have adequate solutions while respecting EU levels of health safety and environmental protection, including bee safety; notes that the recently approved new rules for the authorisation of Pesticides, or active substances such as Chlorpyrifos or Dimethoat, as these active substances in pesticides have a proven adverse effect on bee and colony health; application methods such as seed coating should also be considerRegulation 1107/2009 includes testing for chronic, larval and sub-lethal effects of pesticides, to ensure that colony development is not adversely affected;
Amendment 151 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18 a. Calls on the Commission to pay special attention to the use of specific pesticides, which could have an adverse effect on bee and colony health,
Amendment 155 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls for comprehensive scientific research, based on appropriate risk assessment, on the possible replacement of active substances in pesticides, that are harmful to the pollinator or to aquatic animalproved, through their use, to pose a risk to pollinator stocks;
Amendment 174 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. With special regard to the 2009 EFSA project commissioned by EFSA entitled ‘Bee mortality and Bee Surveillance in Europe’, calls on the Commission to conduct objective researchtake into account the findings onf the possible negative effects of GMO crops and monocultures on honeybee healthreport especially regarding GMOs, which are considered not to be one of the factors involved in bee colony losses;
Amendment 196 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Calls on the Commission to provide significantly more financial resources for the beekeeping sectorfacilitate greater coordination and sharing of research into bee mortality between member states and to encourage the development of joint projects, and on the Member States to provide technical assistance for the beekeeping sector; calls on the Commission to provide a safety net or a common insurance system for apiculture in order to mitigate the impact of crisis situations on beekeepers;
Amendment 213 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30 a. Calls on the Commission to encourage agri-environment schemes which incentivise farmers to grow legumes as fodder for bees and to ensure that food is available for bees all year round;
Amendment 27 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas food has a strategic importance, with the most favourable way of ensuring food security is to maintain a stable, profitable agricultural sector; whereas the CAP is failing to achieve this,
Amendment 35 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas food security remains a central challenge for agriculture not only in the EU but globally, in particular in developing countries, as the world population is predicted to grow from 7 to 9 billion by 2050 and demand for food is projected to double by the same year according to the FAO; whereas this extra food will need to be produced against a background of pressure on natural resources, meaning that farmers will need to produce more, using less land and using less fertilisers and pesticides,
Amendment 36 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas food security remains a central challenge for agriculture not only in the EU but globally, in particular in developing countries, as the world population is predicted to grow from 7 to 9 billion by 2050 and demand for food is projected to double by the same year according to the FAO, whereas this extra food will need to be produced against a background of pressure on natural resources, meaning that farmers will need to produce more using less land and less fertilisers and pesticides,
Amendment 98 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas the Commission should further strengthen funding for R&D in agriculture,
Amendment 99 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I b (new)
Recital I b (new)
Amendment 100 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I c (new)
Recital I c (new)
Ic. whereas the sharp rises in global commodity prices are increasing the price of food and the costs of production, while farm incomes are decreasing,
Amendment 102 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas the European Parliament has often expressed its opposition to a renationalisation of the CAP and an increase in cofinancing, which could detract from fair competition on the EU internal market, and therefore advocates that direct payments be wholly financed by the EU budget,
Amendment 106 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas a two-pillar CAP, with pillar one focused on market support measures and pillar two focused on rural development, should be retained,
Amendment 121 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas there should not be any differentiation in the treatment of farmers according to size of holding and legal form for the purpose of direct payments, although the possibility of introducing a basic allowance for small farmers should not be excluded,
Amendment 137 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M a (new)
Recital M a (new)
Ma. whereas further measures are needed into the use of modern technology in farming to reduce the use of inputs, specifically focused on precision farming techniques,
Amendment 141 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
Amendment 156 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
O. whereas, because the world economy is becoming integrated more rapidly, trade systems are as rule being liberalised more by multilateral negotiations (the Doha Round) and whereas in relation to imports from third countries environmental, animal welfare, plant protection and consumer protection standards need to be raised to EU level and minimum employment standards, particularly regarding child labour, should be complied with,
Amendment 187 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital P a (new)
Recital P a (new)
Pa. whereas the European Parliament resolution of May 2010 on the simplification of the CAP has not been taken into account in the Commission communication,
Amendment 202 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Expects the re-design of the CAP to align with the EU 2020 Strategy priorities of smart, inclusive and sustainable growth; Believes that agriculture is well placed to make a major contribution to tackling climate change, creating new jobs through green growth and supplying renewable energy whilst at the same time continuing to provide safe, high quality food products and food security for European consumers;
Amendment 203 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Urges the Commission to start considering the reform of the CAP in the context of future challenges, including food security, climate change, population growth, the integration of markets and the competition for resources; and considers these challenges the main drivers for post 2013 CAP.
Amendment 207 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Calls for the CAP to remain structured around two pillars; Points out that pillar 1 should remain fully financed by the EU budget and yearly based, while multiannual programming, a voluntary and contractual approach and co- financing should continue to apply under pillar 2;
Amendment 208 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. In respect of food security, insists that the Commission takes due and proper account of the Policy Coherence for Development agenda to ensure that CAP reform is consistent with other EU initiatives with regard to its impact on developing countries,
Amendment 460 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses the need for an adequate basic allowance for small farmers, which Member States can optionally determine in thosesmall farmers to remain viable wherever possible, as in Member States where these farms help to stabilise rural development; calls for these Member States to decide, in accordance with subsidiarity, whether to offer such a scheme, and if so, what percentage of the direct payments to be incorporated in theto a new subsidy system shwhich could be made available to their small farmers; particularly through rural development funding; stresses, however, that this must not hamper the necessary structural change;
Amendment 497 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 d (new)
Paragraph 14 d (new)
14d. Believes that the EU has a role to play in meeting the challenges of food security and energy security, and therefore needs to ensure that agriculture plays a full role in meeting both these challenges; Believes therefore, that it is inappropriate for compulsory set-aside to be included in the list of sustainability measures as proposed by the Commission;
Amendment 520 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that decoupling has essentially proved its worth, and should be further extended to other sectors still coupled to production given the increased effect on income and greater autonomy in decision-making on the part of farmers and the associated simplification of the CAP, and calls for this also, in general, to apply to suckler cow and sheep premiums; recognises, however, that in certain sectors and regions such as mountain regions, where there are no alternatives to relatively labour-intensive livestock farming, there may be considerable economic and environmental drawbacks which cannot be reconciled with the aims of the Treaty; acknowledges, therefore, that production- based premiums might be defensible within a narrowly defined framework for a limited period even after 2013; but only through Article 68 measures decided by the Member State concerned;
Amendment 531 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls – without casting any doubt on the results of the 2008 Health Check of the CAP – for appropriations under Article 68 of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 primarily to be allocated for measures to promote territorial coherence and boost key sectors (e.g. the dairy and sheep sectors and suckler cows)strictly used to help preserve sensitive production in specific locations, for area-based environmental measures (e.g. organic farming) which to date have not been included in the second pillar; considers that the budget for Article 68 could – subject to contrary results of an impact assessment – cover up to 10% of direct payments5% of direct payments; and that any coupled support payments be limited to a maximum of 3.5% of the national or regional envelope for direct payments; furthermore, calls for any measures submitted by member states to be subject to approval by the Commission under delegated acts to ensure that they do not distort production and markets within the single market but that the threshold for trade distorting measures within article 68 should not be increased from its present level of 3.5%;
Amendment 566 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Observes that, for historical reasons, farms in the European Union have a very diverse structure as regards size, employment arrangements and legal form; is aware that direct payments are moving away from a historical basis to area-based payments and that the provision of public goods is independent of farm size; strongly rejects, therefore, measures which discriminate against particular types of farm, particularly as the EU will need to produce more food in the future to meet food security concerns;
Amendment 580 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on the Commission to submit by 30 June 2016 a report setting out comprehensively how livestock farming in Europe can be safeguardeddevelop in the long term with regard to multifunctionality and regional aspects (such as mountain areas, Nordic regions and extremely remote areas) and also dealing with the question of how fawhether the aims of the CAP can be realised in a more efficient, targeted way by means of decoupled, indirect support, e.g. premiums for extensive grassland or pasture land;
Amendment 603 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Considers that direct payments should be made only to active farmers; realises that, under the system of decoupled direct payments, each farmer who uses farmland for production or who tends it in order to maintain GAEC should receive direct payments; calls on the Commission therefore to devise a definition of ‘inactive farmer’ to clearly identify which farmers or landowners would not qualify for payments reserved only for 'active farmers' which the Member States can administer without additional administrative effort, while it should be ensured; reaffirms that traditional farming activities (full-time and various degrees of part-time) are classified as active farming;
Amendment 604 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Considers that direct payments should be made only to active farmers; realises that, under the system of decoupled direct payments, each farmer who uses farmland for production or who tends it in order to maintain GAEC should receive direct payments; calls on the Commission therefore to devise a definition of ‘" inactive farmer", to clearly identify which farmers or landowners would not qualify for payments reserved only for "active farmer’s" which the Member States can administer without additional administrative effort, while it should be ensured; reaffirms that traditional farming activities (full-time and various degrees of part-time) are classified as active farming and that contract farming arrangements as well as management of common land are taken into account;
Amendment 689 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Considers therefore that any environmental advantages can be attained more effectively and directly by means of second-pillar measures adopted by the Member States, which should ideally build on existing agrienvironmental measures or should supplement measures which take into account climatic and geographical differences in the Member States; observes that resource protection programmes should be pursued everywhere by means of a priority catalogue of area-based measures in the second pillar which are subject to basic requirements, particularly in the fields of climate, environment and innovation (Annex I), and are 100% EU- financed; regards the greening of direct payments in the first pillar as lying in the fact that any recipient of direct payments in the EU must implement at least two priority area-based resource protection programmes in order to be eligible for the complete farm payment; believes that the administration involved in these measures canmust be minimised; considers that by managing them in accordance with the system of the existing agrienvironmental programmes, thus avoiding duplication of monitoring and additional application and administration procedures can be avoided;
Amendment 725 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Regards this model as making a substantial contribution to the simplification of the direct payments system and to the attainment of new compulsory environmental objectivesimproving the environmental performance of farming; observes that, under this model, there is no need to step up the current rate of monitoring and the current monitoring capacities, as existing checks can be used, and that checks in the second pillar can be combined in the basic and regeneration programme; considers also that no new systems of payments or penalties need be introduced;
Amendment 782 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Points out that the cross-compliance system makes the granting of direct payments subject to compliance with statutory requirements and the maintenance of farmland in good agricultural and environmental condition, and remains one of the appropriate means of optimising the provision of baseline eco-system services by farmers and meeting new environmental challenges by securing the provision of basic public goods; notes, however, that the introduction of cross-compliance has raised a whole range of problems relating to administrative issues and acceptance by farmers, who had the impression that they were losing a degree of freedom in their work; calls therefore for the administrative burden on farmers to be reduced through a simplified implementation system for cross- compliance requirements;
Amendment 784 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 b (new)
Paragraph 27 b (new)
27b. Rejects, therefore, the introduction of burdensome and unclear requirements derived from the water framework directive into the cross-compliance system until clarification is established as regards the state of play of implementation of this directive in all Member States;
Amendment 785 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 c (new)
Paragraph 27 c (new)
27c. Believes that genuine efforts are being made to simplify the system and reduce the administrative red-tape placed on farmers; calls however for a simplified, more proportionate and risk-based approach by the Commission and Member States to the implementation of regulatory controls, the conduct of compliance audits and the system of penalties;
Amendment 794 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Calls, in view of the greater concentration of direct payments on resource protection and environmental measures, for a substantial reduction of the scope of CC; calls on the Commission to make significant progress in simplifying and harmonising rules on monitoring; calls on the Commission to consider the introduction of tolerance levels and the application of proportionality within any penalty system;
Amendment 796 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28a. Considers that any proposal to CAP payments to larger farms runs contrary to the principle of CAP simplification, as farms will simply be split up to avoid losing direct payments;
Amendment 829 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Considers that the general market orientation of the CAP should be maintained and that the general structure of market management instruments should likewise be retainbe simplified;
Amendment 848 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Considers that the health check approach should be pursued further, as these existing market instruments have also demonstrated their value as a safety net; takes the view that these market measures, and in particular intervention, should only be used as a minimum safety net in case of extreme price crises and potentialmajor market disruption;
Amendment 866 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Considers that, in view of the anticipated environmental and climate dangers and the risk of epidemics and considerable price fluctuations on agricultural markets, additional risk prevention is of vital importance, particularly at individual farm level if the EU is to contribute to increasing global food production to ensure food security;
Amendment 887 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Considers that a multi-stage safety net comprising private storage, public intervention, market disruption instruments and an emergency clause would confer the greatest possible benefit; calls for private storage and public intervention to be permitted for specific sectors where market disruptions are of limited duration; calls furthermore for a market disruption instrument and an emergency clause to be established for all sectors in common, making it possible for the Commission, under certain circumstances, in the event of crises to take action over a limited period which goes beyond the existing instruments; stresses that any powers given to the Commission under such circumstances must be only for a period of no longer than one year;
Amendment 965 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
Amendment 984 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
Amendment 1003 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 a (new)
Paragraph 44 a (new)
44 a. Recalls that EU farmers are required to produce food to the highest safety, environmental, quality and animal welfare standards and should be rewarded for doing so; believes that imports from third countries should, respecting WTO rights and obligations, meet equivalent standards to ensure fairer competition; calls on the Commission to uphold the interests of European farmers in the context of multilateral and bilateral trade agreements negotiated on behalf of the EU;
Amendment 1004 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
Amendment 1043 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47
Paragraph 47
47. Observes that speculation in agricultural commodities should be combatedhas not been proved to cause significant movements in agricultural commodities and cannot drive prices in the long run, as for every buy there is a sell; recognises that futures markets and hedging could play a more important role in farmers' risk management strategies; advocates a worldwide notification system for agricultural stocks; observes that consideration should be given to whether it is feasible to maintaining stocks of vital agricultural commodities at a global level;
Amendment 1049 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47 a (new)
Paragraph 47 a (new)
47 a. Calls for measures to be taken to strengthen primary producers' and producer organisations' management capacity and bargaining power vis-à-vis other economic operators in the food chain (primarily retailers, processors and input companies), provided these developments do not hinder the proper functioning of the internal market; takes the view that the functioning of the food supply-chain should be improved, through greater transparency of food prices and action to address unfair commercial practices, enabling farmers to obtain the added value they deserve; believes that the appointment of ombudsmen should be considered with a view to solving disputes between the operators along the food supply-chain;
Amendment 1061 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. Is aware of the importance ofPoints out that rural development under the second pillar, in view of its environmental, modernisation and structural improvement achievements, but also for attaining political objectives, which should also benefit farmers; calls therefore for second-pillar measures to be better suited to their objectives, so that the effectiveness of grows now an integral part of the CAP architecture and should remain an important element of the future CAP through a well-equipped rural development strategy with a reinforced focus on growth and innovation in rural areas, improving th,e employment and climate measures and measures for the benefit of rural areas can be increased; considers that, in this context, particular attention should be devoted to assisting young farmernvironment, mitigating and adapting to climate change, modernising and restructuring agriculture, strengthening cohesion in EU rural areas, revitalising disadvantaged areas and areas at risk of abandonment, improving agricultural added-value and competitiveness and creating new jobs in rural areas;
Amendment 1082 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. Is aware of the importance of the second pillar, in view of its environmental, modernisation and structural improvement achievements, but also for attaining political objectives, which should also benefit farmers; calls therefore for second- pillar measures to be better suited to their objectives, so that the effectiveness of growth, employment and climate measures and measures for the benefit of rural areas can be increased; considers that, in this context, particular attention should be devoted to assisting young farmers, who are the future of farming in the European Union;
Amendment 1107 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
Paragraph 49
49. Advocates therefore introducing targeted measures, to be decided by the Member States in the second pillar, to attain priority objectives of the EU (2020 Strategy); observes that these measures should be applied in addition to the basic programmes for greening of direct payments in the first pillar and that a reduced national cofinancing rate of 25% should apply, for a targeted approach under the second pillar, with sufficient flexibility left to Member States and regions to prioritise their rural development programmes at key priorities providing instruments to achieve the EU 2020 Strategy objectives;
Amendment 1124 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49 a (new)
Paragraph 49 a (new)
49 a. Calls, in line with the Commission Communication, for a more outcome- oriented approach through a general move towards the use of delivery tools that set goals and empower farmers and rural communities to choose their own systems to meet multiannual targets and objectives, such as outcome agreements and simple contracts;
Amendment 1128 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49 b (new)
Paragraph 49 b (new)
49 b. Believes that Green growth should be at the heart of a new rural development strategy that focuses on creating new opportunities in terms of: - developing rural areas' potential to produce more renewable and sustainable energy from second-generation biofuels, from biomass, agro-materials, agro-waste and the by-products of agriculture; - boosting on-farm small-scale renewable energy production; - investing in innovative techniques as well as projects for applying research and development on farms; - providing technical support and advice to farmers, especially young farmers, in applying new agricultural techniques;
Amendment 1224 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55
Paragraph 55
55. Calls for simplification and a review of the cross-compliance rules for the second pillar in alignment with cross-compliance rules in the first pillar as described in paragraphs 27-31, considers simplification of the current indicator system to be necessary and takes a critical view of the introduction of quantitative targets;
Amendment 1249 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 57
Paragraph 57
Amendment 4 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Voices its concern about the Commission's optimistic assumption that the evolution of agricultural markets will remain fairly stable and largely favourable, as well as about the consistent decrease in needs for market-related expenditure; points out that improved market situations often have differentiated impacts on certain sectors; urges the Commission to monitor developments in agricultural markets carefully and to be prepared to react swiftly and effectively with the necessary mechanisms to counter adverse market developments, such as the current situation in the olive oil sector;
Amendment 8 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines the importance of adequate financing for specific programmes such as the school fruit scheme, and school milk and programmes for deprived persons; recalls that those specific programmes not only benefit farmers but also support vulnerable population groups and encourage a healthier diet;
Amendment 14 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Notes the importance of limiting the growth in payments to the EU budget in 2012;
Amendment 15 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Expresses concern that the EU agriculture budget includes too much waste and inefficiency; calls for an increased impetus for EU spending to deliver added value;
Amendment 16 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. New spending pressures should be accommodated by redeployment rather than extra funding, to promote sound financial management and greater transparency;
Amendment 17 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 d (new)
Paragraph 7 d (new)
7d. At 41% of the EU budget, the CAP cannot be immune from the difficult spending choices being made by member states; the CAP must be a part of a wider strategy to deliver budgetary restraint by identifying savings across the EU budget;
Amendment 18 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 e (new)
Paragraph 7 e (new)
7e. In a smaller share of the EU budget, future CAP expenditure must tackle the key objectives of encouraging a competitive and sustainable EU agricultural sector, to reduce the reliance on subsidies and to focus resources on the provision of public goods;
Amendment 8 #
2011/0416(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 9
Article 1 – point 9
1. Each Member State shall appoint a liaison agencyensure that there is a liaison agency, establishing one where none already exists, whose tasks shall be to:
Amendment 16 #
2011/0301(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) Given the magnitude of investment needs and objectives laid down in the Europe 2020 strategy over the next decade, the Commission should, if the Europe 2020 Project Bond Initiative be deemed to have been a success following appropriate monitoring and assessment, consider a more complete roll-out in the Union's effort toward leveraging and attracting additional funding.
Amendment 25 #
2011/0301(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 a (new)
Recital 10 a (new)
(10a) Given that the risk of the project bond is capped for the Union but the residual risk is fully borne by the EIB, robust monitoring systems for increased liabilities should also be established by the EIB as well as for the EU budget contribution.
Amendment 30 #
2011/0301(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) In order to implement the pilot phase of the Europe 2020 Project Bond Initiative, Decision No 1639/2006/EC and Regulation (EC) No 680/2007 should be amended. This pilot phase aims to support infrastructure projects with commercial potential in the transport, energy and ICT sectors across all Member States, while after 2013 the initiative may potentially be extended to other sectors.
Amendment 33 #
2011/0301(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) The pilot phase of the Europe 2020 Project Bond Initiative should be launched no later than 31 July 2012 in preparation of the proposed Connecting Europe Facility. This pilot phase, should it prove successful, and following appropriate analysis and evaluation, will help to pave the way for the risk-sharing financial instrument under the Connecting Europe Facility.
Amendment 40 #
2011/0301(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point -1 (new)
Article 1 – point -1 (new)
-1. In Article 8, the following paragraph is added: "5a. The Commission shall obtain a full- scale external, independent evaluation of the pilot phase of the risk-sharing instrument for project bonds referred to in paragraphs 2a to 2da of Article 31, which shall cover, inter alia, its added value, including the impact on the financial viability of the project, additionality compared to other Union or Member State instruments and any other long-term debt financing, and the multiplier effect achieved, and shall include general observations on market developments including the creation or correction of distortive effects, if any. Furthermore, the Commission shall in that evaluation make an assessment of future steps to be taken in order to enhance the efficiency of Union spending as well as to increase investment volumes towards priority projects. That assessment shall examine, inter alia, how to make the project bond instrument even more attractive to a wider range of long-term investors, including public ones and how to widen the scope of projects eligible, including through the possible creation of project portfolios, to be supported by standardised and more liquid project bonds, the option of issuing European public bonds guaranteed by the Union budget and the possible development of equity instruments to finance Union infrastructure. The Commission shall also obtain a full scale external, independent evaluation of the pilot phase of the risk-sharing instruments for project bonds referred to in paragraphs 2a to 2da of Article 31, which shall cover, inter alia, an assessment of the risks involved including project risk, the consequences of investor withdrawal and partner risk, give an accurate assessment of the weighted cost of capital, consider whether a maximum rate of return would be appropriate for private sector investor funding of public projects, provide a cost comparison with alternative means of project finance to include bank loans and equity and shall also evaluate the effectiveness of the EIB's monitoring systems and structures for increased liabilities incurred as a result of these instruments.''
Amendment 46 #
2011/0301(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 2 – point b
Article 1 – point 2 – point b
2ca. Before undertaking any risk-sharing instruments for project bonds, the Commission and EIB must undertake, and make public, a full risk assessment of the project, which shall be updated subsequently in the event of any material change to the fundamental principles of the project.
Amendment 52 #
2011/0301(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point 3 a (new)
Article 2 – point 3 a (new)
(3a) In Article 16, the following paragraph is added: "2a. The Commission shall obtain a full- scale external, independent evaluation of the pilot phase of the risk-sharing instrument for project bonds referred to in point (g) of Article 6(1), which shall cover, inter alia, its added value, including the impact on the financial viability of the project, additionality compared to other Union or Member State instruments and any other long-term debt financing, and the multiplier effect achieved, and shall include general observations on market developments including the creation or correction of distortive effects, if any. Furthermore, the Commission shall in that evaluation make an assessment of future steps to be taken in order to enhance the efficiency of Union spending as well as to increase investment volumes towards priority projects. That assessment shall examine, inter alia, how to make the project bond instrument even more attractive to a wider range of long-term investors, including public ones and how to widen the scope of projects eligible, including through the possible creation of project portfolios, to be supported by standardised and more liquid project bonds, the option of issuing European public bonds guaranteed by the Union budget and the possible development of equity instruments to finance Union infrastructure. The Commission shall also obtain a full scale external, independent evaluation of the pilot phase of the risk sharing instruments for project bonds referred to in point (g) of Article 6(1), which shall cover, inter alia, an assessment of the risks involved including project risk, the consequences of investor withdrawal and partner risk, give an accurate assessment of the weighted cost of capital, consider whether a maximum rate of return would be appropriate for private sector investor funding of public projects, provide a cost comparison with alternative means of project finance to include bank loans and equity and shall also evaluate the effectiveness of the EIB's monitoring systems and structures for increased liabilities incurred as a result of these instruments.''
Amendment 119 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) Budget discipline also demands a continuous examination of the medium- term budget situation. The Commission, when submitting the draft budget for a given year, should therefore present its forecasts and analyses to the European Parliament and the Council and propose, if necessary, appropriate measures to the legislator. Furthermore, the Commission should make full use of its management powers at all times to ensure compliance with the annual ceiling and, if necessary, propose appropriate measures to the European Parliament and to the Council or to the Council to redress the budget situation. If, at the end of a budget year, the annual ceiling cannot be complied with as a result of the reimbursements requested by the Member States, the Commission should be able to take measures allowing provisional distribution of the available budget, taking into account a margin of EUR 300 000 000 below that ceiling, among the Member States in proportion to their requests for reimbursement not yet paid, as well as compliance with the ceiling fixed for the year concerned. Payments for that year should be charged to the following budget year and the total amount of Union financing per Member State should be definitively established, as should compensation between Member States in order to comply with the established amount.
Amendment 121 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The rural development programmes are financed from the Union budget on the basis of commitments in annual instalments. Member States should be able to draw on the Union funds provided for as soon as they begin the programmes. Member States may indicate to the Commission within two months of this decision that it does not wish to receive a pre-financing amount. A suitably restricted prefinancing system ensuring a steady flow of funds so that payments to beneficiaries under the programmes are made at the appropriate time is therefore needed.
Amendment 289 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. With a view to ensuring that the annual ceilings set out in the Regulation (EU) No xxx/xxx [MFF] for the financing of the market related expenditure and direct payments are respected, an adjustment rate of the direct payments shall be determined when the forecasts for the financing of the measures financed under that subceiling for a given financial year indicate that the applicable annual ceilings, taking into account a margin of EUR 300 000 000 below that ceiling, will be exceeded.
Amendment 292 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 6
Article 25 – paragraph 6
Amendment 309 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 1
1. Following the Commission decision approving the programme, an initial prefinancing amount for the whole programming period shall be paid by the Commission, unless the Member State concerned notifies the Commission within 2 months of the decision that it does not wish to receive a pre-financing amount. This initial pre-financing amount shall represent 4% of the EAFRD contribution to the programme concerned. It may be split into a maximum of three instalments depending on budget availability. The first instalment shall represent 2% of the EAFRD contribution to the programme concerned.
Amendment 428 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 61 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Member States may reduce checks where the error rates are at an acceptable level.
Amendment 463 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 2
Article 70 – paragraph 2
2. Member States may set up decentralised databases on condition that these, and the administrative procedures for recording and accessing data, are designed homogeneously throughout the territory of the Member State and are compatible with one another in orderin such a way as to allow for cross- checks.
Amendment 465 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 1
Article 71 – paragraph 1
The identification system for agricultural parcels shall be established on the basis of maps or land registry documents or other cartographic references. Use shall be made of computerised geographical information system techniques, including aerial or spatial orthoimagery, with a homogenous standard guaranteeing accuracy at least equivalent to cartography at a scale of 1:510,000.
Amendment 472 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 73 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 73 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) a farmer does not have to declare his agricultural parcels with landscape features or buffer strips. That farmer shall however indicate in his application that he has these agricultural parcels at his disposal and shall, at the request of the competent authorities, indicate their location.
Amendment 476 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 73 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 73 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Member States may decide that an aid application or a payment claim that fulfils the requirements laid down in Paragraph 1 is to remain valid for a number of years provided that beneficiaries concerned are under the obligation to report any change to the information they first submitted.
Amendment 481 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 74 – paragraph 1
Article 74 – paragraph 1
The single system to record the identity of each beneficiary of support referred to in Article 68(2) shall guarantee that all aid applications and payment claims submitted by the same beneficiary can be identified as such.
Amendment 483 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 75 – paragraph 1
Article 75 – paragraph 1
1. In accordance with Article 61, Member States, through the paying agencies or the bodies delegated by them, shall carry out administrative checks on the aid application to verify the eligibility conditions for the aid. Those checks shall be supplemented by on-the-spot checks whose purpose shall be to monitor compliance with the provisions of the aid schemes and the level of inherent risk and whose number shall be adjusted in the light of inherent and control risks.
Amendment 543 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 91 – paragraph 3
Article 91 – paragraph 3
Amendment 553 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 92 – paragraph 2
Article 92 – paragraph 2
However, Article 91 shall not apply to beneficiaries participating in the small farmers scheme referred to in Title V of Regulation (EU) No xxx/xxx[DP] and to the beneficiaries receiving aid under Article 29(9) of Regulation (EU) No RD/xxx.
Amendment 652 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 106 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. By way of derogation from paragraph 3, Member States may convert the amount of aid expressed in euro into the national currency on the basis of the average of a maximum of the thirty most recent exchange rates set by the Member States' national central bank or the European Central Bank prior to 1 October of the year for which aid is granted.
Amendment 725 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II — Main Issue "Soil and carbon stock" — GAEC 6
Annex II — Main Issue "Soil and carbon stock" — GAEC 6
Maintenance of soil organic matter level through appropriate practices including ban on burning arable stubble
Amendment 734 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II — Main Issue "Biodiversity" — SMR 2 — last column
Annex II — Main Issue "Biodiversity" — SMR 2 — last column
Article 3(1), Article 3(2)(b), Article 4 (1), (2) and (4), Article 5(a), (b), (d)
Amendment 742 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II — Main Issue "Biodiversity" — SMR 3 — last column
Annex II — Main Issue "Biodiversity" — SMR 3 — last column
Article 6 (1) and (2), Article 13(1)(a)
Amendment 749 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II — Main Issue "Landscape, minimum level of maintenance" GAEC 8
Annex II — Main Issue "Landscape, minimum level of maintenance" GAEC 8
Retention of landscape features, including where appropriate, hedges, ponds, ditches, trees in line, in group or isolated, field margins and terraces, and including a ban on cutting hedges and trees during the bird breeding and rearing season and possible measures for avoiding invasive species and peststake all reasonable steps to avoid encroachment of unwanted vegetation, such as invasive species on agricultural land.
Amendment 757 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II — Main Issue "Identification and registration of animals" SMR 6 —last column
Annex II — Main Issue "Identification and registration of animals" SMR 6 —last column
Articles 3, 4 and 5
Amendment 501 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 84 a (new)
Recital 84 a (new)
(84 a) In order to ensure fair competition and diversity of supply in the EU sugar sector, the Commission shall ensure a fair balance of rights and obligations between producers of cane and beet sugar. Where imports of cane sugar from preferential partners fall short of anticipated levels, the Commission should permit additional imports at zero duty in order to ensure sufficient raw materials are available on the EU sugar market.
Amendment 695 #
Amendment 697 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Amendment 705 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Amendment 707 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Amendment 711 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
In special and duly justified circumstances, the Commission may, by means of implementing acts, restrict tendering procedures to a Member State or region of a Member State, or, subject to Article 14(2), determine the buying-in prices for public intervention per Member State or region of a Member State on the basis of recorded average market prices. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 162(2).
Amendment 714 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 716 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the maximum price at which products eligible for public intervention may be bought-in where this is done by tendering.
Amendment 718 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) for common wheat, barley, maize, paddy rice and skimmed milk powder shall be equal to the respective reference prices fixed in Article 7 in the case of buying-in at a fixed price and shall not exceed the respective reference prices in the case of buying-in by tendering;
Amendment 723 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) for butter shall be equal to 90 % of the reference price fixed in Article 7 in the case of buying-in at a fixed price and shall not exceed 90 % of the reference price in the case of buying-in by tendering;not exceed 90 % of the reference price
Amendment 763 #
Amendment 796 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point f
Amendment 808 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 a (new)
Article 16 a (new)
Article 16 a Conditions for granting of private storage aid (1) Private storage aid may be granted to the products listed in article 16 when the following conditions are met: (a) as regards white sugar, where the average price recorded in the Union for white sugar is below the reference price during a representative period and is likely to remain at that level. (b) as regards olive oil, in the event of a serious disturbance on the market in certain regions of the Union, inter alia, when the average price recorded on the market during a representative period is less than: (i) EUR 1 779/tonne for extra virgin olive oil, or (ii) EUR 1710/tonne for virgin olive oil, or (iii) EUR 1524/tonne for lampante olive oil having 2 degrees of free acidity, this amount being reduced by EUR 36,70/tonne for each additional degree of acidity. (c) as regards beef and veal, the average Union market price recorded on the basis of the Union scale for the classification of carcasses of adult bovine animals referred to in Article 34(1)(a) and is likely to remain, at less than 103 % of the reference price; (d) as regards pig carcasses, where the average market price in the Union as established by reference to the prices recorded in each Member State on the representative markets of the Union and weighted by means of coefficients reflecting the relative size of the pig herd in each Member State is, and is likely to remain, at less than 103 % of the reference price. (e) as regards sheepmeat and goatmeat, when there is a particularly difficult market situation for sheepmeat and goatmeat in one or more of the following quotation areas: (i) Great Britain; (ii) Northern Ireland; (iii) any Member State other than the United Kingdom, taken separately;
Amendment 810 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 160, where necessary in order to provide for market transparency to lay down the conditions under which it may decide to grant private storage aid for the products listed in Article 16, taking into account average recorded Union market prices and the reference prices for the products concerned or the need to respond to a particularly difficult market situation or economic developments in the sector in one or more Member States.
Amendment 827 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission may, by means of implementing acts, decide to grant private storage aid for the products listed in Article 16(a), taking into account the conditions referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 162(2).
Amendment 830 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts fix the aid for private storage provided for in Article 16 in advance or by means of tendering procedures. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 162(2).
Amendment 880 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point j
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point j
(j) the rules relating to the procedures to be followed for buying-in at a fixed price or for granting the aid for private storage at a fixed price;
Amendment 885 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 a (new)
Article 20 a (new)
Article 20 a Specific Provisions on Carcass Classification Union scales and inspections 1. Union scales for the classification of carcasses shall apply in accordance with the rules laid down in Annex IIIa in the following sectors: (a) beef and veal as regards carcasses of adult bovine animals; (b) pigmeat as regards carcasses of pigs other than those which have been used for breeding. In the sheepmeat and goatmeat sector Member States may apply a Union scale for the classification of carcasses as regards sheep carcasses in accordance with the rules laid down in point C of Annex IIIa. 2. On-the-spot inspections in relation to the classification of carcasses of adult bovine animals and sheep shall be carried out on behalf of the Union by a Union inspection committee composed of experts from the Commission and experts appointed by the Member States. This committee shall report back to the Commission and the Member States on the inspections carried out. The Union shall bear the costs resulting from the inspections carried.
Amendment 886 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 b (new)
Article 20 b (new)
Article 20 b Delegated powers concerning carcass classification 1. In order to take account of technical developments and of the needs of the sectors, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 160 adapting and updating the provisions on the classification, identification and presentation of adult bovine carcasses, pig carcases and sheep carcasses laid down in Annex IIIa. 2. In order to standardise the presentation of the different products for the purposes of improving market transparency, price recording and the application of the market intervention arrangements in the form of public intervention and private storage in the beef and veal, pig-meat and sheep-meat sectors as applicable, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 160: (a) laying down provisions on the classification, grading (including by automated grading techniques), presentation, lean-meat content, identification and weighing and marking of carcasses; (b) laying down rules on basis for the calculation of average Union prices of, and the obligations on operators to submit information on, beef, pig and sheep carcases, in particular as regards market and representative prices. 3. In order to take account of the specificities within the Union, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 160 laying down derogations from the provisions, in particular: (a) providing for derogations which may be granted by Member States to slaughterhouses in which few bovine animals are slaughtered; (b) authorising Member States not to make application of the grading scale for pig carcase classification and to use assessment criteria in addition to weight and estimated lean-meat content. 4. In order to ensure that the Union inspection committee fulfils its objectives, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 160 determining its responsibilities and the way it is composed.
Amendment 887 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 c (new)
Article 20 c (new)
Amendment 892 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – title 1 – chapter 2 – section 1 – subsection 1
Part 2 – title 1 – chapter 2 – section 1 – subsection 1
Amendment 894 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Under conditions to be determined by the Commission by means of delegated and implementMember states may grant aid for the distribution of fruit to schools ing acts pursuant to Articles 22 and 23, Union aid shall be granted for:cordance with Article 152 of this Regulation.
Amendment 895 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 898 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 900 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2
Article 21 – paragraph 2
Amendment 901 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 3
Article 21 – paragraph 3
Amendment 905 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 4 – point a
Article 21 – paragraph 4 – point a
Amendment 908 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 4 – point a
Article 21 – paragraph 4 – point a
(a) exceed EUR 1590 million per school year; nor
Amendment 909 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 21 – paragraph 4 – point b
Amendment 910 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 21 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) exceed 75 50% of the costs of supply and related costs referred to in paragraph 1, or 9075 % of such costs in less developed regions and in the outermost regions referred to in Article 349 of the Treaty; nor
Amendment 912 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 4 – point c
Article 21 – paragraph 4 – point c
Amendment 914 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 5
Article 21 – paragraph 5
Amendment 915 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 6
Article 21 – paragraph 6
Amendment 916 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 7
Article 21 – paragraph 7
Amendment 917 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 8
Article 21 – paragraph 8
Amendment 918 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22
Article 22
Amendment 926 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23
Article 23
Amendment 1045 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 31 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Crisis prevention and management measures, including any repayment of capital and interest as referred to in the third subparagraph, shall not comprise more than one-third25% of the expenditure under the operational programme.
Amendment 1225 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 1
Article 55 – paragraph 1
Without prejudice to any other provisions applicable to agricultural products, as well as the provisions adopted in the veterinary, phytosanitary and food sectors to ensure that products comply with hygiene and health standards and to protect animal, plant and human health, this Section lays down the rules concerning the general marketing standard and marketing standards by sector and/or product for agricultural products.
Amendment 1228 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56
Article 56
Amendment 1234 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57
Article 57
Amendment 1238 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 1
Article 58 – paragraph 1
1. Marketing standards may apply for one or more of the following products and/or sectors: (a) olive oil and table olives in respect of the products referred to in point (a) of Part VII of Annex I; (b) fruit and vegetables; (c) processed fruit and vegetables; (d) bananas; (e) live plants; (f) eggs; (g) poultrymeat; (h) spreadable fats intended for human consumption; (i) hops. 1a. The products for which marketing standards by sectors or products have been laid down may be marketed in the Union only in accordance with suchf they conform to those standards.
Amendment 1335 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iv
Article 70 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iv
(iv) the product is obtained from vine varieties belonging to Vitis vinifera; or a cross between the Vitis vinifera species and other species of the genus Vitis;
Amendment 1600 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 106 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Member States shallmay recognise, on request, producer organisations, which:
Amendment 1670 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 106 – paragraph 1 a (new)
By way of derogation from paragraph 1, Member States shall recognise, on request, producer organisations in the fruit and vegetable sector and olive oil and table olives sector which meet the criteria in paragraph 1 and which in the case of producer organisations in the fruit and vegetable sector pursue at least one of the objectives in paragraph 1(c)(i) to (iii).
Amendment 1685 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 107 – paragraph 1
Article 107 – paragraph 1
Subject to paragraph 2, Member States shallmay recognise, on request, associations of producer organisations in any of the sectors listed in Article 1(2) which are formed on the initiative of recognised producer organisations. Member States shall not recognise an association of producer organisation which holds a dominant position on a given market unless this is necessary in pursuance of the objectives of Article 39 of the Treaty
Amendment 1701 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 108 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 108 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shallmay recognise, on request, interbranch organisations in any of the sectors listed in Article 1(2) which:
Amendment 1784 #
Amendment 1824 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 111
Article 111
Amendment 1833 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 112
Article 112
Amendment 1844 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 113
Article 113
Amendment 1911 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 125 a (new)
Article 125 a (new)
Amendment 2048 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 154 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 154 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 2074 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 155 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 155 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The Commission may, by means of implementing acts, adopt exceptional support measures for the affected market:
Amendment 2095 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 156 – title
Article 156 – title
Measures to resolve specific practical problems
Amendment 2099 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 156 – paragraph 1
Article 156 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt necessary and justifiable emergency measures to resolve specific practical problems. Those measures may derogate from the provisions of this Regulation only to an extent that is strictly necessary and for a period that is strictly necessary. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 162(2).
Amendment 2136 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 159 – paragraph 1
Article 159 – paragraph 1
Funds transferred from the Reserve for crises in the agricultural sector under the conditions and procedure referred to in paragraph 14 of the Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management47 shall be made available for the measures to which this Regulation appliesexpenditure under Chapter 1 of this Part for the year or years for which the additional support is required and which are implemented in circumstances that go beyond normal market developments.
Amendment 2140 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 159 – paragraph 2
Article 159 – paragraph 2
Amendment 2147 #
2011/0281(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 159 – paragraph 3
Article 159 – paragraph 3
Amendment 120 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation and to avoid unfair competition or discrimination between farmers, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission in respect of: the fixationing of the annual national ceiling for the basic payment scheme; the adoption of rules on applications for allocation of payment entitlements; the adoption of measures regarding the reversion of non- activated payment entitlements to the national reserve; the adoption of requirements related to the notification of transfer of payment entitlements to the national authorities and the deadlines within which such notification are to take place; the setting out of the annual ceiling for the payment for agricultural practises beneficial for the climate and the environment; the setting out of the annual ceiling for the payment for areas with natural constraints; the setting out of the annual ceiling for the payment for young farmers; the setting out of the annual ceilings for the voluntary coupled support; the adoption of rules on the procedure for the assessment and approval of decisions in the framework of the voluntary coupled support; the adoption of rules on the procedure of the authorisation and the notifications to the producers related to the authorisation of land and varieties for the purposes of the crop specific payment for cotton; the provision for rules on the calculation of the reduction of the amount of the crop specific payment for cotton; the adoption of rules concerning general notification requirements. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers.
Amendment 141 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Experience from the application of the various support schemes for farmers has shown that support was in a number of cases granted to beneficiaries whose business purpose was not or only marginally targeted at an agricultural activity, such as airports, railway companies, real estate companies and companies managing sport grounds, and/or whose land was not used for agricultural activities. To ensure the better targeting of support, Member States should refrain from granting direct payments to such natural and legal persons and/or in respect of such land. Smaller part-time farmers contribute directly to the vitality of rural areas, for that reason they should not be prevented from being granted direct payments.
Amendment 170 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
Amendment 224 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
Amendment 225 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
Amendment 226 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
Amendment 254 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
Amendment 255 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
Amendment 261 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
Amendment 262 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
Amendment 269 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
Amendment 287 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) Member States should be allowed to use part of their national ceilings for direct payments for coupled support in certain sectors in clearly defined cases. The resources that may be used for any coupled support should be limited to an appropriate level, while allowing such support to be granted in Member States or in their specific regions facing particular situations where specific types of farming or specific agricultural sectors are particularly important for economic, environmental and/or social reasons. Member States should be allowed to use up to 510 % of their national ceilings for this support, or 10 % in case their level of coupled support in at least one of the years of the period 2010- 2013 exceeded 5 %. However, in duly justified cases where certain sensitive needs in a region are demonstrated, and upon approval by the Commission, Member States. Coupled support should only be granted to the extent necessary to create an incentive to maintain current levels of production in those regions, and in order to ensure the proper observance of that condition, the Commission should be allempowered to use more than 10 % of their national ceiling. Coupled support should only be granted to the extent necessarymonitor production levels in the sectors and regions where this form of support is applied and, where necessary, require Member States to create an incentive to maintain curduce the percentage of direnct levels of production in those regionspayments provided in coupled form. This support should also be available to farmers holding, on 31 December 2013, special payment entitlements allocated under Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 and Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 and who do not have eligible hectares for the activation of payment entitlements. As regards the approval of voluntary coupled support exceeding 10 % of the annual national ceiling fixed per Member State, the Commission should further be empowered to adopt implementing acts without applying Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.
Amendment 288 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) Member States should no longer be allowed to use part of their national ceilings for direct payments for coupled support in certain sectors in, except in very clearly defined cases and for a limited period of time. The resources that may be used for any coupled support should be limited to an appropriate level, while allowing such support to be granted in Member States or in their specific regions facing particular situations where specific types of farming or specific agricultural sectors are particularly importantessential for economic, environmental and/or social reasons. Member States should be allowed to use up to 5 % of their national ceilings for this support, or 10 % in case their level of coupled support in at least one of the years of the period 2010- 2013 exceeded 5 %. However, in. However, in very exceptional and duly justified cases where certain sensitive needs in a region are demonstrated, and upon approval by the Commission, Member States should be allowed to use more than 105 % of their national ceiling. Coupled support should only be granted to the extent necessary to create an incentive to maintain current levels of production in those regions. This support should also be available to farmers holding, on 31 December 2013, special payment entitlements allocated under Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 and Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 and who do not have eligible hectares for the activation of payment entitlements. As regards the approval of voluntary coupled support exceeding 105 % of the annual national ceiling fixed per Member State, the Commission should further be empowered to adopt implementing acts without applying Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. The possibility of coupled support should be limited to small sectors with special needs and should not be used as a general tool. In conjunction with this, all coupled payments should be phased out as soon as possible.
Amendment 294 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
Amendment 296 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) As regards support to the cotton sector, Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 considered necessary that part of it continued to be linked to the cultivation of cotton through a crop specific payment per eligible hectare to ensure against any risk of disruption to production in the cotton producing regions, taking into account all factors that influence this choice. TWhilst this choice should be maintained in accordance with the objectives set out in Protocol No 4 on cotton attached to the 1979 Act of Accession, its application should be strictly limited and progressively reduced.
Amendment 297 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
Amendment 298 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) Chapter 2 of Council Regulation (EC) No 637/2008 of 23 June 2008 amending Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 and establishing national restructuring programmes for the cotton sector24 provided that each cotton producing Member State has, either every four years and for the first time by 1 January 2009, to submit to the Commission a draft four-year restructuring programme or submit to the Commission, by 31 December 2009, a single draft modified restructuring programme for a duration of eight years. Experience has shown that the restructuring of the cotton sector would be better served through other measures, including those under rural development programming financed under Regulation (EU) No […] [RDR], which would also allow for a greater co-ordination with measures in other sectors. However, the acquired rights and legitimate expectations of undertakings already involved in restructuring programmes should be respected. Therefore the ongoing programmes of four or eight years should be allowed to continue to their end. At the end of that period, however, the programmes should end. The funds available from the four-year programmes cshould then be integrated into the available Union funds for measures under rural development from 2014. The funds available after the end of the eight year programmes would not be useful in rural development programmes in 2018 given the programming period and could therefore be more usefully transferred to support schemes under this Regulation, as already provided for in the second sub- paragraph of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 637/2008. Regulation (EC) No 637/2008 will therefore become obsolete from 1 January 2014 or 1 January 2018 as regards Member States which have, respectively, four or eight-year programmes. Regulation (EC) No 637/2008 should therefore be repealed.
Amendment 302 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) A simple and specific scheme for small farmers shouldcan be put in place by a member state in order to reduce the administrative costs linked to the management and control of direct support. For that purpose, a lump- sum payment replacing all direct payments shouldcan be established by a member state. Rules seeking simplification of formalities should be introduced by reducing, amongst others, the obligations imposed on small farmers such as those related to the application for support, to agricultural practices beneficial for the climate and the environment, to cross-compliance and to controls as laid down in Regulation (EU) No […] [HZR] without endangering the achievement of the overall objectives of the reform, it being understood that Union legislation as referred to in Annex II to Regulation (EU) No […...] [HZR] applies to small farmers. The objective of that scheme should be to support the existing agricultural structure of small farms in the Union without countering the development towards more competitive structures. For that reason, access to the scheme should be limited to existing holdings.
Amendment 303 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) A simple and specific scheme for small farmers shouldcan be put in place by a member state in order to reduce the administrative costs linked to the management and control of direct support. For that purpose, a lump- sum payment replacing all direct payments shouldcan be established by a member state. Rules seeking simplification of formalities should be introduced by reducing, amongst others, the obligations imposed on small farmers such as those related to the application for support, to agricultural practices beneficial for the climate and the environment, to cross-compliance and to controls as laid down in Regulation (EU) No […] [HZR] without endangering the achievement of the overall objectives of the reform, it being understood that Union legislation as referred to in Annex II to Regulation (EU) No […] [HZR] applies to small farmers. The objective of that scheme should be to support the existing agricultural structure of small farms in the Union without countering the development towards more competitive structures. For that reason, access to the scheme should be limited to existing holdings.
Amendment 323 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) With a view to strengthening their rural development policy, Member States should be given the possibility to transfer funds from their direct payments ceiling to their support assigned for rural development. At the same time, Member States where the level of direct support remains lower than 90 % of the Union average level of support should be given the possibility to transfer funds from their support assigned for rural development to their direct payments ceiling. Such choices should be made, within certain limits and wherever possible, once and for the whole period of application of this Regulation.
Amendment 326 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii
Amendment 327 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii
Amendment 344 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b – point vi
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b – point vi
Amendment 384 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c – indent 3
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c – indent 3
– carrying out a minimum activity to be established by Member States on agricultural arIf a Member state at national or regional level so chooses, where an area does not require maintenance activity but is insteasd naturally keptmaintained in a state suitable for grazing or cultivation, activities may be defined at national or regional level;
Amendment 508 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Without prejudice to Article 8, the total amount of direct payments which may be granted in a Member State pursuant to Titles III, IV and V in respect of a calendar year, after application of Article 11, shall not be higher than the ceilings set out in Annex III to this Regulation.
Amendment 518 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Amendment 519 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Amendment 547 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. No direct payments shall be granted to natural or legal persons, or to groups of natural or legal persons, where one of the following appliesthe Member state or region has established a list of activities relevant to land which is naturally kept in a state suitable for grazing or cultivation and no such activity is carried out:
Amendment 585 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the annual amount of direct payments is less than 5 % of the total receipts they obtained fromgricultural area of a holding is used for a prohibited non- agricultural activities in the most recent fiscal yeary; or
Amendment 586 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the annual amount of direct payments is less than 5 % of the total receipts they obtained fromgricultural area of a holding is used for a prohibited non- agricultural activities in the most recent fiscal yeary; or
Amendment 602 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) their agricultural areas are mainly areas naturally kept in a state suitable for grazing or cultivation and they do not carry out on those areas the minimum activity established by Member States land is not used for rearing or growing of agricultural products including harvesting, milling, breeding animals and keeping accordance with Article 4(1)(c)nimals for farming purposes.
Amendment 603 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) their agricultural areas are mainly areas naturally kept in a state suitable for grazing or cultivation and they do not carry out on those areas the minimum activity established by Member States land is not used for rearing or growing of agricultural products including harvesting, milling, breeding animals and keeping accordance with Article 4(1)(c)nimals for farming purposes.
Amendment 653 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to farmers who received less than EUR 5 000 of direct payments for the previous year.The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 55 establishing the circumstances when the performance of a non agricultural activity on land will be prohibited and result in direct payments not being made
Amendment 668 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point a
Amendment 671 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point b
Amendment 690 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) where the total amount of direct payments claimed or due to be granted before the reductions and exclusions provided for in Article 65 of Regulation (EU) No […...] [HZR] in a given calendar year is less than EUR 1050;
Amendment 702 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11
Article 11
Amendment 708 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – title
Article 11 – title
Amendment 715 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The amount of direct payments to be granted to a farmer under this Regulation in a given calendar year shall be reduced as follows:by 4 percentage points for amounts exceeding EUR 300 000.
Amendment 717 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. TMember states can choose to reduce the amount of direct payments to be granted to a farmer under this Regulation in a given calendar year shall be reduced as follows:in the following manner:-
Amendment 721 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – indent 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – indent 1
Amendment 737 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – indent 2
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – indent 2
Amendment 747 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – indent 3
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – indent 3
Amendment 756 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – indent 4
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – indent 4
Amendment 772 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Amendment 781 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. TIf a member state decides to make use of the possibility outlined in Paragraph 1, the amount referred to in paragraph 12 shall be calculated by subtracting the salaries effectively paid and declared by the farmer in the previous year, including taxes and social contributions related to employment, from the total amount of direct payments initially due to the farmer without taking into account the payments to be granted pursuant to Chapter 2 of Title III of this Regulation.
Amendment 784 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Amendment 788 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. If a Member States decides to make use of the possibility available in paragraph 1, that Member State shall ensure that no payment is made to farmers for whom it is established that, as from the date of publication of the Commission proposal for this Regulation, they artificially created the conditions to avoid the effects of this Article.
Amendment 790 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Any amount deducted due to progressive reduction of payments should remain in the Member States and region where it originated and can be used to fund activities under Regulation (EU) No {...}RDR
Amendment 876 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Amendment 890 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
2. Payment entitlements obtained under the single payment scheme in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 and with Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 shall expire on 31 December 2013. By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States that, on 31 December 2013, are operating the single payment scheme on the basis of the regional model laid down in Article 59 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 may decide, by 1 August 2013, to maintain the payment entitlements allocated in accordance with Regulation(EC) No 1782/2003 and/or Regulation (EC) No 73/2009
Amendment 1244 #
Amendment 1245 #
Amendment 1246 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Title 3 – chapter 2 – title
Title 3 – chapter 2 – title
Amendment 1247 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Title 3 – chapter 2 – title
Title 3 – chapter 2 – title
Amendment 1259 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Farmers entitled to a payment under the basicsingle payment scheme referred to in Chapter 1 shallmay decide to observe on their eligible hectares as defined in Article 25(2) at least three of the following agricultural practises beneficial for the climate and the environment:
Amendment 1260 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Farmers entitled to a payment under the basicsingle payment scheme referred to in Chapter 1 shallmay decide to observe on their eligible hectares as defined in Article 25(2) at least three of the following agricultural practises beneficial for the climate and the environment:
Amendment 1264 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. FAn additional payment shall be granted to farmers entitled to a payment under the basic payment scheme referred to in Chapter 1 shall observwho undertake under the single payment scheme referred to in Chapter 1 and who undertake on their eligible hectares as defined in Article 25(2) the following agricultural practisces beneficial for the climate and the environment:
Amendment 1265 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. FAn additional payment shall be granted to farmers entitled to a payment under the basic payment scheme referred to in Chapter 1 shall observwho undertake under the single payment scheme referred to in Chapter 1 and who undertake on their eligible hectares as defined in Article 25(2) the following agricultural practisces beneficial for the climate and the environment:
Amendment 1283 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) to have threewo different crops on their arable land where the arable land of the farmer covers more than 3 hectaresexceeds the area corresponding to the average size of agricultural holdings as set out in Annex VI and is not entirely used for grass production (sown or natural), entirely left fallow or entirely cultivated with crops under water for a significant part of the year;
Amendment 1284 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) to have threewo different crops on their arable land where the arable land of the farmer covers more than 3 hectaresexceeds the area corresponding to the average size of agricultural holdings as set out in Annex VI and is not entirely used for grass production (sown or natural), entirely left fallow or entirely cultivated with crops under water for a significant part of the year;
Amendment 1313 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) to maintain existing permanent grassareas of semi natural and uncultivated land on their holding; and
Amendment 1314 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) to maintain existing permanent grassareas of semi natural and uncultivated land on their holding; and
Amendment 1390 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2
Article 29 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to paragraphs 3 and 4 and to the application of financial discipline, linear reductions in accordance with Article 7, and any reductions and penalties imposed pursuant to Regulation (EU) No […...] [HZR], Member States shall grant the additional payment referred to in this Chapter to farmers observing those of the three practises referred to in paragraph 1 that are relevant for them, and in function of their compliance with Articles 30, 31 and 32..
Amendment 1391 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2
Article 29 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to paragraphs 3 and 4 and to the application of financial discipline, linear reductions in accordance with Article 7, and any reductions and penalties imposed pursuant to Regulation (EU) No […...] [HZR], Member States shall grant the additional payment referred to in this Chapter to farmers observing those of the three practises referred to in paragraph 1 that are relevant for them, and in function of their compliance with Articles 30, 31 and 32..
Amendment 1429 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 29 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Farmers complying with the requirements laid down in Article 29(1) of Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 as regards organic farming shall be entitled ipso factoand Article 27 of Regulation (EC) no 1698/2005 as regards agri- environment commitments shall be entitled ipso facto without prejudice to payments made in accordance with Article 27 of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 to the payment referred to in this Chapter.
Amendment 1438 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
By way of derogation from Paragraph 1, Member States may decide to make the payment referred to in this chapter to farmers where they observe agricultural practices beneficial for the climate and environment as defined by the Member State. Such practices shall be of an equivalent environmental and/or climatic value to the practices referred to in Paragraph 1
Amendment 1456 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 29 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
The first subparagraphorganic derogation shall apply only to the units of a holding that are used for organic production in accordance with Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 834/2007.
Amendment 1501 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30
Article 30
Amendment 1530 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1
Article 30 – paragraph 1
1. Where the arable land of the farmer covers more than 315 hectares and is not entirely used for grass production (sown or natural), entirely left fallow or entirely cultivated with crops under water for a significant part of the year, cultivation on the arable land shall consist of at least threewo different crops. None of those three crops shall cover less than 5 % of the arable land and the main one shall not exceed 70 % of the arable land.
Amendment 1532 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1
Article 30 – paragraph 1
1. Where the arable land of the farmer covers more than 315 hectares and is not entirely used for grass production (sown or natural), entirely left fallow or entirely cultivated with crops under water for a significant part of the year, cultivation on the arable land shall consist of at least threewo different crops. None of those three crops shall cover less than 5 % of the arable land and the main one shall not exceed 70 % of the arable land.
Amendment 1590 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31
Article 31
Amendment 1613 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Farmers shall maintain as permanent grassland the areasreas of semi natural and uncultivated land present ofn their holdings declared as such in the application made pursuant to Article 74(1) of Regulation (EU) No XXX (HZ) for claim year 2014, hereinafter referred to as ‘'reference areas under permanent grassof semi natural and uncultivated land’.
Amendment 1646 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2
Article 31 – paragraph 2
2. Farmers shall be allowed to convert a maximum of 58 % of their reference areas under permanent grasslandof semi natural and uncultivated land, without prejudice to the requirements of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) regulation. That limit shall not apply in the case of force majeure or exceptional circumstances.
Amendment 1661 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 3
Article 31 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1686 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32
Article 32
Amendment 1688 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32
Article 32
Amendment 1693 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1
1. Farmers shall ensure that at least 72 % of their eligible hectares as defined in Article 25(2), excluding areas under permanent grassland, is ecological focus area such as land left fallow, terraces, landscape features, buffer strips and afforested areas as referred to in article 25(2)(b)(ii).
Amendment 1820 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33
Article 33
Amendment 1822 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33
Article 33
Amendment 1838 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. In order to finance the payment referred to in this Chapter,increased greening of the CAP through enhanced agri- environmental schemes in Regulation (EU)No[...] [RDR] Member Sstates shall use 320 % of the annual national ceiling set out in Annex II. in the form of Union support to agri-environmental-climate measures under rural development programming financed under the EAFRD as specified in Regulation (EU) No [...][RDR]
Amendment 1841 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. In order to finance the payment referred to in this Chapter, Member States shall usemay use up to 30 % of the annual national ceiling set out in Annex II.
Amendment 1870 #
Amendment 1871 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Title 3 – chapter 3 – title
Title 3 – chapter 3 – title
Amendment 1881 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3
Article 34 – paragraph 3
3. Without prejudice to paragraph 2 and to the application of financial discipline, pro and digressive reduction and cappingmodulation, linear reduction as referred in Article 7, and any reductions and exclusions imposed pursuant to Article 65 of Regulation (EU) No […...] [HZR], the payment referred to in paragraph 1 shall be granted annually per eligible hectare situated in the areas to which Member States decided to grant a payment in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article and shall be paid upon activation of payment entitlements on those hectares held by the farmer concerned.
Amendment 1899 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35
Article 35
Amendment 1919 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1
Article 36 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shallmay grant an annual payment to young farmers who are entitled to a payment under the basic payment scheme referred to in Chapter 1.
Amendment 1948 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 36 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) natural persons who are setting up for the first time an agricultural holding as sole head of the holding, or who have already set up such a holding during the five years preceding the first submission of an application to the basic payment scheme as referred in Article 73(1) of Regulation (EU) No […...] [HZR], and
Amendment 2044 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 38 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Coupled support may be granted to the following sectors and productions: cereals, oilseeds, protein crops, grain legumes, flax, hemp, rice, nuts, starch potato, milk and milk products, seeds, sheepmeat and goatmeat, beef and veal, olive oil, silk worms, dried fodder, hops, sugar beet, cane and chicory, fruit and vegetables and short rotation coppice.
Amendment 2099 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 2
Article 39 – paragraph 2
Amendment 2116 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 2121 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 2128 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 3
Article 39 – paragraph 3
Amendment 2145 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 39 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Member States may, by 1 August 2016, review their decision pursuant to paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 and decide, with effect from 2017:
Amendment 2153 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 5
Article 39 – paragraph 5
5. On the basis of the decision taken by each Member State pursuant to paragraphs 1 to 4 on the proportion of the national ceiling to be used, the Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, fix the corresponding ceiling for the support on a yearly basis. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2).
Amendment 2158 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1
Article 40 – paragraph 1
1. The decisions referred to in Article 39 shall be notified to the Commission by the date referred to in that Article and, except for the decision referred to in Article 39(4)(c), the notification shall include information on the regions targeted, the selected types of farming or sectors and the level of support to be granted. and the current levels of production in the sector(s) and region(s) concerned
Amendment 2159 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2
Article 40 – paragraph 2
2. The decisions referred to in Article 39(2) and (3), or, where appropriate, in Article 39(42)(a), shall also include a detailed description of the particular situation in the region targeted and of the particular characteristics of the types of farming, or specific agricultural sectors, which make the percentage referred to in Article 39(1) insufficient to address the difficulties referred to in Article 38(2) and which justify an increased level of support.
Amendment 2160 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1
Article 40 – paragraph 1
1. The decisions referred to in Article 39 shall be notified to the Commission by the date referred to in that Article and, except for the decision referred to in Article 39(4)(c), the notification shall include information on the regions targeted, the selected types of farming or sectors and the level of support to be granted.
Amendment 2161 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2
Article 40 – paragraph 2
2. The decisions referred to in Article 39(2) and (3), or, where appropriate, in Article 39(4)(a), shall also include a detailed description of the particular situation in the region targeted and of the particular characteristics of the types of farming, or specific agricultural sectors, which make the percentage referred to in Article 39(1) insufficient to address the difficulties referred to in Article 38(2) and which justify an increased level of supportBy 1 August of the year succeeding the first year of implementation of such support, and by 1 August shall communicate to the Commission any changes which have taken place in the levels of production in the sector(s) and region(s) where coupled support has been introduced.
Amendment 2163 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission shall, by means of an implementing act, approve the decision referred to in Article 39(3), or, where appropriate, in Article 39(4)(a), where one of the following needs in the region or sector concerned is demonstrated:In cases where, on the basis of information supplied by a Member State pursuant to Article 40(2), the Commission considers that the requirements of Article 38(4) have not been fulfilled, it shall, by means of implementing acts, require that Member State to adjust its level of coupled support in such a way as to bring it into conformity with those requirements. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2)
Amendment 2165 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission shall, by means of an implementing act, approve the decision referred to in Article 39(3), or, where appropriate, in Article 39(42)(a), where one of the following needs in the region or sector concerned is demonstrated:
Amendment 2166 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 2167 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 2169 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 2170 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 2181 #
Amendment 2182 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45
Article 45
Amendment 2184 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46
Article 46
Amendment 2189 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 1
Article 47 – paragraph 1
1. Farmers holding payment entitlements allocated in 2014 pursuant to Article 21 and fulfilling the minimum requirements provided for in Article 10(1) may opt for participation in a simplified scheme under the conditions laid down in this Title, hereinafter referred to as ‘Member States may establish a simplified scheme for "small farmers" known as the "small farmers scheme’"
Amendment 2193 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 1
Article 47 – paragraph 1
1. Member States may operate a simplified scheme under the conditions laid down in this Title, hereinafter referred to as "small farmers scheme". Farmers holding payment entitlements allocated in 2014 pursuant to Article 21 and fulfilling the minimum requirements provided for in Article 10(1) may opt for participation in a simplified scheme under the conditions laid down in this Title, hereinafter referred to as ‘the 'small farmers scheme’'
Amendment 2204 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 2
Article 47 – paragraph 2
2. Payments under the small farmers scheme shall replace the payments to be granted pursuant to Titles III and IV.For the purposes of this chapter, the following rules apply to those Member States who apply a small farmers scheme
Amendment 2209 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 3
Article 47 – paragraph 3
Amendment 2237 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 49 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Member States shallmay set the amount of the annual payment for the small farmers scheme at one of the following levels, subject to paragraphs 2 and 3:
Amendment 36 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54
Recital 54
(54) In order to promote the Treaty objectives of economic, social and territorial cohesion, the ‘Investment for growth and jobs’ goal should support all regions. To provide balanced and gradual support and reflect the level of economic and social development, resources under that goal should be allocated from the ERDF and the ESF among the less developed regions, the transition regions and the more developed regions according to their gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in relation to the EU average. In order to ensure the long- term sustainability of investment from the Structural Funds, regions whose GDP per capita for the 2007-2013 period was less than 75% of the average of the EU-25 for the reference period but whose GDP per capita has grown to more than 75% of the EU-27 average should receive at least two thirds of their 2007-2013 allocation. Member States whose per capita gross national income (GNI) is less than 90 % of that of the Union average should benefit under the ‘Investment for growth and jobs’ goal from the CF.
Amendment 40 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 59
Recital 59
(59) As regards the Funds and with a view to ensuring an appropriate allocation to each category of regions, resources should not be transferred between less developed, transition and more developed regions except in duly justified circumstances linked to the delivery of one or more thematic objectives and for no more than 210 % of the total appropriation for that category of region.
Amendment 51 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 11 – paragraph 1 – point f
Part 2 – article 11 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) mechanisms for ensuring the coherence and consistency of the programming of the CSF Funds with the country-specific recommendations under Article 121(2) of the TreatyNational Reform Programmes and other relevant Council recommendations adopted under 148(4) of the Treaty.strategies;
Amendment 57 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 16
Part 2 – article 16
Member States shall concentrate support, in accordance with the Fund-specific rules, on actions bringing the greatest added value in relation to the Union strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, addressing the challenges identified in the country-specific recommendations under Article 121(2) of the Treaty and the relevant Council recommendations adopted under 148(4) of the Treaty, and taking into acs translated to the national and regional count national and regional needext by the National Reform Programmes and other strategies.
Amendment 58 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 17 – paragraph 2
Part 2 – article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall assess whether the applicable ex ante conditionalities are fulfillex ante conditionalities laid down in the respective fund-specific rules are applicable to the specific objectives pursued within the priorities of their programmes and whether the applicable ex ante conditionalities are fulfilled. The assessment shall be limited to the criteria laid down in the fund-specific rules and may be proportional, having regard to the level of support allocated.
Amendment 59 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 17 – paragraph 5
Part 2 – article 17 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall assess the information provided on the applicability and fulfilment of relevant ex ante conditionalities in the framework of its assessment of the Partnership Contract and programmes. ItThis assessment shall be limited to the criteria laid down in the fund-specific rules, shall be proportional having regard to the level of support allocated, and shall respect national and regional competences to decide on the specific and adequate policy measures including the content of strategies. In case of disagreement between the Commission and a Member State on the applicability of an ex ante conditionality to the specific objective of the priorities of a programme or its fulfillment, both the applicability in accordance with Article 2 and and the non-fulfillment shall be proven by the Commission. The Commission may decide, when adopting a programme, to suspend all or part of interim payments to the relevant priority axis of programme pending the satisfactory completion of actions to fulfil an ex ante conditionality. The failure to complete actions to fulfil an ex ante conditionality by the deadline set out in the programme shall constitute a basis for suspending payments by the Commission.
Amendment 67 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 82 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Part 3 – article 82 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Resources for the Investment for growth and jobs goal shall be allocated among the following threewo categories of NUTS level 2 regions:
Amendment 68 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 82 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Part 3 – article 82 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Amendment 69 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 82 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Part 3 – article 82 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) more developed regions, whose GDP per capita is above 9075 % of the average GDP of the EU-27.
Amendment 71 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 82 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Part 3 – article 82 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The threewo categories of regions are determined on the basis of how their GDP per capita, measured in purchasing power parities and calculated on the basis of Union figures for the period 2006 to 2008, relates to the average GDP of the EU-27 for the same reference period.
Amendment 75 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Amendment 76 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 2 – point a
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) eligible population, regional prosperity, national prosperity and unemployment rate for less developed regions and transition regions;
Amendment 78 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 3
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 3
3. At least 215 % of the Structural Funds resources for less developed regions, 40% for transition regions and 525% for more developed regions in each Member State shall be allocated to the ESF. For the purposes of this provision, the support to a Member State through the [Food for deprived people instrument] shall be considered as part of the share of Structural Funds allocated to the ESF.
Amendment 83 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 5
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 5
Amendment 84 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 85 – paragraph 2
Part 3 – article 85 – paragraph 2
2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, the Commission may accept, in duly justified circumstances which are linked to the implementation of one or more thematic objectives, a proposal by a Member State in its first submission of the Partnership Contract to transfer up to 210% of the total appropriation for a category of regions to other categories of regions.
Amendment 85 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 86 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Part 3 – article 86 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
In those Member States in which less developed and transition regions cover at least 70 % of the population, the verification shall take place at national level.
Amendment 86 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 86 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Part 3 – article 86 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
In those Member States in which less developed and transition regions cover more than 15 % and less than 70 % of the population, the verification shall take place at national and regional level. For that purpose, those Member States shall provide to the Commission information about the expenditure in the less developed and transition regions at each stage of the verification process.
Amendment 88 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 110 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point e
Part 3 – article 110 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point e
Amendment 90 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 3 – part 3 – paragraph 1
Annex 3 – part 3 – paragraph 1
Where the Commission decides to carry out a financial correction in accordance with Article 86(4), the rate of financial correction shall be obtained by subtracting 3% from the difference between the reference level in the Partnership Contract and the level achieved, expressed as a percentage of the reference level, and then dividing the result by 10. The financial correction shall be determined by applying that rate of financial correction to the Funds' contribution to the Member State concerned for the less developed and transition regions for the full programming period.
Amendment 91 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 3 – part 3 – paragraph 3
Annex 3 – part 3 – paragraph 3
The financial correction shall not exceed 5 % of the Funds' allocation to the Member State concerned for the less developed and transition regions for the full programming period.
Amendment 23 #
2011/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) In line with the Europe 2020 Strategy, the Programme should pursue a coherent approach to promoting employment and combating social exclusion and poverty. Its implementation should be rationalised and simplified, notably through a set of common provisions including, inter alia, general objectives, typology of actions, monitoring and evaluation arrangements. The Programme should also focus on large projects with clear EU added value in order to reach critical mass and reduce administrative burden for both the beneficiaries and the Commission. In addition, greater use should be made of simplified cost options (lump-sum and flat- rate financing) in particular for the implementation of mobility schemes. The Programme should be a one-stop shop for microfinance providers, providing financing for micro-credit, capacity building and technical assistance. Lastly, the Programme should provide for budgetary flexibility through the establishment of a reserve to be allocated on an annual basis in order to respond to policy priorities.
Amendment 25 #
2011/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
Pursuant to Articles 8 and 10 of the Treaty, the Programme should support the mainstreaming of gender equality and anti- discrimination objectives in all its activities. Regular monitoring and evaluation should be carried out to assess the way in which gender equality and anti- discrimination issues are addressed in the Programme's activities, and, in order to minimise its impact on the Programme budget, gender and anti-discrimination spending should be moved to the Rights and Citizenship Programme.
Amendment 29 #
2011/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) 60% to the Progress axis,, of which at least 17% shall be allocated5%, but no more than 20 % shall be allocated, within its different policy areas, to promoting social experimentation as a method for testing and evaluating innovative solutions with a view to scaling them up;
Amendment 31 #
2011/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 33 #
2011/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission may make use of up to 1,5% of the appropriations referred to in paragraph 1 to finance technical and/or administrative assistance, in particular relating to auditing, outsourcing of translation, meetings of experts, and information and communication activities for the mutual benefit of the Commissoperational expenditures for the support of the implementation andof the beneficiariesProgramme.
Amendment 39 #
2011/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 a (new)
Article 19 a (new)
Article 19a Where activities under the PROGRESS axis are financed following a call for proposals, they may receive Union co- financing which shall not exceed, as a general rule, 80 % of the total eligible expenditure. Any financial support in excess of this ceiling may be granted un duly justified exceptional circumstances.
Amendment 40 #
2011/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 a (new)
Article 21 a (new)
Article 21a Where activities under EURES axis are financed following a call for proposals, they may receive Union co-financing which shall not exceed, as a general rule, 95 % of the total eligible expenditure. Any financial support in excess of this ceiling may be granted only in duly justified exceptional circumstances.
Amendment 22 #
2011/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1a) The decision of the European Court of Justice on the food aid scheme in Case T-576/08 Germany v Commission1 () should be taken into account. _____________ 1 OJ C 160, 28.5.2011, p. 16–17
Amendment 29 #
2011/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The ESF should contribute to the Europe 2020 Strategy, and should allow sufficient flexibility to enable Member States to use the fund to address their own Europe 2020 bottlenecks, thereby ensuring greater concentration of support on the priorities of the European Union. The ESF should in particular increase its support for the fight against social exclusion and poverty, through a minimum ring-fenced allocationby refocusing the fund on growth, creating employment opportunities and addressing important skills mismatches. According to the level of development of the supported regions, the choice and number of investment priorities for ESF support should also be limited.
Amendment 31 #
2011/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) The ESF has the potential to add value, especially in the current economic climate by focusing on improving employment opportunities and investing in skills. The extension of the ESF beyond its legal base to other social policy areas is, however, not necessary and does not represent value for money. It is more important to refocus the fund to support growth and job creation which will among other benefits result in increased inclusion and a greater reduction in poverty;
Amendment 37 #
2011/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13a) The ESF should demonstrate Union added value, value for money and should complement and not compete with Member States' existing initiatives.
Amendment 38 #
2011/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 b (new)
Recital 13 b (new)
(13b) Creating synergies between European programmes is crucial in order to avoid duplication and overlaps. It is counterproductive to pre-empt the future of some existing Union programmes beyond 2013 including the EGF and the food aid scheme.
Amendment 43 #
2011/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18 a (new)
Recital 18 a (new)
(18a) The ESF should add real value to Member States' policies, and therefore its distribution should not be automatically linked to the macroeconomic performance of a Member State.
Amendment 57 #
2011/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Amendment 3 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas, pursuant to Article 312(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the Council is required to, acting in accordance with a special legislative procedure, shall adopt a regulation laying down the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), acting unanimously, after obtaining the consent of Parliament;
Amendment 5 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas, in accordance with Article 295 TFEU, the European Parliament, the Council and Commission shall consult each other and by common agreement make arrangements for their coopertation. To this end, an Interinstitutional Agreement shouldmay be adopted to improve the functioning of the annual budgetary procedure and cooperation between the institutions on budgetary matters;
Amendment 6 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas, pursuant to Article 311 TFEU, the Union must provide itself with the means necessary to attain its objectives and carry through its policies, and is towithout prejudice to other revenue, shall, be financed wholly from own resources;
Amendment 14 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas it is necessary for the EU to have both a budget and a budgetary procedure which fully reflect the transparent and democratic essence of the parliamentary decision-making and control process, on a basis of respect for the principles of unity and universality, which require that all revenue and expenditure be entered in full with no adjustment against each other, and that there be a public debate and vote on both revenue and expenditure in line with the Treaty competences;
Amendment 18 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Is fully aware that the negotiations on the MFF 2014-2020 are taking place in a very difficult economic context, in which Member States are engaging in considerable efforts to make fiscal adjustments to their national budgets, at the request of the European Union, with a view to the stability of the banking sector and the single currency; insists that the Union should not be seen as adding an extra fiscal burden on taxpayers; is, however, convinced that the EU budget is a part of the solution to enable Europe to emerge from the current crisis by helping Member States tackle, collectively and in concerted fashion, the present structural challenges, in particular loss of competitiveness, rising unemployment and poverty;
Amendment 23 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that the European Council itself adopted, in June 2012, a ‘Growth and Jobs Compact’, which acknowledges the leverage effect of the EU budget and places major emphasis on its contribution to helping the entire Union overcome the current economic and financial crisis whilst recalling the importance of sound public finances, structural reform and targeted investment for sustainable growth;
Amendment 29 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls that all the, so far, macroeconomic financial stabilisation and structural reform measures taken since 2008 have not yet proved sufficient to overcome the economic and financial crisis; urges Member States to continue in their efforts to address deep rooted structural deficiencies so that domestic potential for sustainable growth can be fully unlocked; believes, therefore, that in order to return to growth and generate employment in Europe, a well- targeted and su, efficient and appropriate EU budget is needed to further help coordinate and enhance the national efforts;
Amendment 38 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses that the EU budget is an investment budget and that 94 % of its total returns are invested in the Member States themselves or for external priorities of the Union; emphasises that, for the regions and Member States, public investment would be minimised or impossible without the contribution of the EU budget; believes that any decrease of the EU budget in those areas where European added value has been clearly demonstrated would inevitably hamper the growth and competitive strength of the entire Union economy;
Amendment 47 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that delivering on the Europe 2020 strategy’s seven flagship initiatives will require a huge amount of future- oriented investment, estimated at no less than EUR 1 800 billion up to 2020 ; stresses that one of the main objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy, namely, to promote jobs and high-quality employment for all Europeans, will only be achieved if the necessary investment in education, in favour of a knowledge society, and in research and innovation, SMEs, and green and new technologies is made now and not delayed any longer; favours the twin track approach of growth friendly fiscal consolidation, combining the reduction of public deficits and debt with the promotion of such investments;
Amendment 58 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses that since 1988 national budgets have grown on average more rapidly than the EU budget; notes that even since the start of the crisis in 2008 total government expenditure in the Member States has risen at an annual nominal rate of 2 %; draws the conclusion that this shrinkage of the EU budget with respect to the national budgets is in flagrant contradiction with the extension of competences and tasks conferred on the Union by the Treaty and with major political decisions taken by the European Counc, mostly on account of essential and extraordinary measures required to safeguard the stabil itself, notably the development of a strengthened European economic governancey of the European financial system;
Amendment 80 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Considers that EU cohesion policy is a strategic tool for investment, growth and competitiveness, with an undisputed EU added value; insists that, in order to effectively reduce macroeconomic imbalances within the EU and contribute to economic, social and territorial cohesion, it should be able to rely on a stable, solid and sustainablappropriate financial framework; reaffirms its position that cohesion policy funding should be maintained at least at the level of the 2007-2013 period, targeted at those regions and Member States who need it most;
Amendment 92 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Recalls its position that, given the wide array of tasks, challenges and objectives that the CAP is called on to respond to, the amounts allocated to the CAP in the budget year 2013 should be at least maintainedcommensurate to the aims of the policy during the next financial programming period; Underlines the importance of financial discipline and transparency in budgetary expenditure; stresses, in this context, the important role played by the second pillar of the CAP, which makes a significant contribution to investment and job creation in rural areas and to enhancing the effectiveness and competitiveness of the farming industry;
Amendment 117 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Reiterates its position that the new responsibilities conferred on the EU by the Treaties will require appropriate additional funding compared to MFF 2007-2013, so as to allow the Union to fulfil its role as a global actor whilst upholding the undertakings it has already given, notably the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals by 2015; underlines the complementary nature of EU assistanceat EU assistance must be complementary to that provided by the Member States, and its catalyst effect in terms of intervening in regions where bilateral assistance is not delivered; is particularly supportive of joint programming between Member States and EU actions which in future must be focused on the reduction of poverty worldwide;
Amendment 126 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29a. Notes that, under this principle, the Union is under a legal obligation not to act if, the objectives of the proposal can be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, either at a central level, or at a regional and local level, consequently, spending should always be subject to a subsidiarity check;
Amendment 127 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 b (new)
Paragraph 29 b (new)
29b. Firmly believes that the principle of European added value should represent the cornerstone of all future expenditures, which also must be guided by the principles of 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;
Amendment 134 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Believes that the effectiveness of EU expenditure depends on sound policy, regulatory and institutional frameworks at all levels; insists that, in accordance with Articles 310(5) and 317 TFEU Member States, shall implement the budget in accordance with the principle of sound financial management; reminds Member States of their legal obligation to ensure that appropriations entered in the budget are used in accordance with this principle and that they must shoulder their share of responsibility in making EU funding more effective; recalls that 90 % of the errors detected by the European Court of Auditors have been in Member States, and that the majority of those errors could have been avoided; calls on all Member States to issue national management declarations signed at the appropriate political level;
Amendment 141 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Supports the introduction of (ex ante and ex post) conditionality provisions to ensure that EU funding, particularly in respect of the Cohesion Fund, the Structural Funds and the rural and fisheries funds, are better targeted to the achievement of the Europe 2020 objectives; considers that effective impact assessment should be used to monitor adherence to aforementioned ex ante conditionalities; believes that if their implementation is based on a reinforced partnership principle through the stronger involvement of local and regional authorities, these conditionality provisions could improve the legitimacy and effectiveness of EU support;
Amendment 142 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34a. Believes that, prior to dispersement of funding the Commission should appoint external players who can contribute their specific expertise in evaluating investments in growth, competitiveness, and employment, considers that these players could be, without prejudice to other sources, from academia as well as from public administrations and should submit these evaluations for the consideration of the Commission and the Budgetary Authority;
Amendment 143 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 b (new)
Paragraph 34 b (new)
34b. Suggests that the Commission, as a matter of best practice, should submit regular reports, using the established reporting mechanism, which could then be examined by the Budgetary Authority with a view to ensuring that the goals of EU funding are being sufficiently achieved;
Amendment 148 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Underlines the crucial workNotes the role of the decentralised EU agencies in supporting the Union’s objectives and the need to match their responsibilities with adequppropriate budgetary resources;
Amendment 151 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Believes, at the same time, that the work of the decentralised EU agencies should result in significantly higher savings at national level; urges the Member States to assess the efficiency gains generated by these agencies at national to make full use of them, thus rationalising their national expenditure; calls, also, on the Member States and the Commission to identify possible areas of duplication of work or reduced or minimal added value in relation to the agencies, with a view to streamlining their functioning;
Amendment 153 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38 a (new)
Paragraph 38 a (new)
38a. Welcomes the ongoing effort of all EU institutions to ensure that administrative costs are kept firmly under control; urges all institutions wherever possible to follow the example of the European Commission in looking for staff efficiencies and economies; believes that administrative expenditure, as one of the most visible areas of EU spending, must reflect the ongoing efforts of Member States to bring public spending to a more sustainable level if the EU is maintain credibility in the eyes of citizens;
Amendment 154 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
Amendment 157 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39 a (new)
Paragraph 39 a (new)
39a. Believes that the EU, not least in the context of the austerity policies being implemented in the Member States, must show responsibility and take immediate, concrete measures to establish a single seat for Parliament;
Amendment 165 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Believes that a certain degree of flexibility (5 %) is indispensable as regards the ceilings for the (sub)headings, to make it possible to adapt to new circumstances without increasing the overall amount and without requiring revision of the MFF;
Amendment 166 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. WelcomNotes the Commission’s proposal to increase the level of legislative flexibility (possibility of departing from a given amount for the entire duration of the programme concerned) from 5 % to 10 %;
Amendment 170 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50
50. Agrees with the Commission that the Emergency Aid Reserve, and the European Union Solidarity Fund, the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund and the reserve for crises in the agriculture sector, given their non- programmable nature, should be entered in the budget over and above the ceilings for the relevant headings
Amendment 173 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Urges the Commission and Council to list in a separate annex the budgetary or financial commitments made by a number of Member States in the framework of reinforced cooperation or of a specific tan overview, with a break down, Member State by Member State, of the budgetary or financial commitments and guarantees undertaken by the Union or by some of its Member States in the framework of the new European stabilisation mechanisms, such as the ESFS, ESM or other projects relaty aimed at reinforcing solidarity within the EUed to the 'banking union';
Amendment 193 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60
Paragraph 60
60. Stresses that a stringent majority is required in both Parliament and Council to adopt the MFF, and points to the importance of exploiting to the full the provisions of Article 312(5), which imposes on the institutions the duty to carry out negotiations in order to reach agreement on a text to which Parliament can give its consentneed to "take any measure necessary to facilitate its adoption";
Amendment 195 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61
Paragraph 61
61. Emphasises that this will be the first time an MFF regulation is adopted under the new provisions of the Treaty of Lisbon, which entail new cooperation arrangements among the institutions combining efficient decision-making and respect for the respective prerogatives as legally defined by the TFEU; welcomes, in this respect, the steps taken by the Hungarian, Polish, Danish and Cypriot Council Presidencies- in-office to establish a structured dialogue and regular information exchange with Parliament;
Amendment 197 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63
Paragraph 63
63. Notes that any political agreement reached at European Council level constitutes no more than a negotiating mandate for the Council; insists that after the European Council has reached a political agreement, fully-fledged negotiations between Parliament and the Council need to take place before the Council formally submits for Parliament’s consent its proposals on the MFF regulation, pursuant to Article 312(5) TFEU, the European Parliament must give its consent by a majority of its components, to a Council Regulation adopted by unanimity, urges therefore the institutions to find a mutually beneficial modus operandi, with a view to ensuring that the Institutions avoid a potentially damaging budgetary crisis;
Amendment 198 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 64
Paragraph 64
64. Reiterates that, according to the TFEU, Parliament and the Council are the legislative bodies and the European Council does not have the role of legislator; stresses that the negotiations between Council and Parliament on the legislative proposals relating to the multiannual programmes wishall be pursued under the ordinary legislative procedure;
Amendment 201 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 67
Paragraph 67
67. Points out, finally, that if no MFF has been adopted by the end of 2013, the ceilings and other provisions corresponding to 2013 will be extended until such time as a new MFF is adopted; notes however, that most spending programmes' legal bases will expire, meaning the Commission will no longer enjoy the legal ability to disperse funds across the MFF; signals that, in this eventuality, Parliament would be ready to reach a swift agreement with the Council and Commission to adapt the internal structure of the MFF to reflect the new political priorities;
Amendment 21 #
2010/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the estimated growth in the global population from 7 to 9.1 billion will require a 70% increase in the food supply by the year 2050, according to the FAO, whilst climate change is reducing the amount of land available for agricultural production,
Amendment 47 #
2010/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Further believes that the member states of the European Union should guaranteseek to achieve an adequate standard of living for every person and particularly for those with insufficient economic resources, who are often children, elderly persons, migrants, refugees and unemployed persons;
Amendment 48 #
2010/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Recognises that the easiest way to achieve this goal is through free and fair global markets and flexible job markets which provide opportunities for growth and employment and allow people to benefit from the opportunities available in the global market place:
Amendment 49 #
2010/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Well functioning global markets are and will become increasingly important to help us mitigate against climate change induced events. Protectionist or isolationist policies such as the recent Russian and Indian export bans exacerbate existing problems and induce further and more extreme price volatility;
Amendment 54 #
2010/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that the member states of the EU should support education and awareness-raising about nutrition, given that informed choices about diet can prevent disease and also reduce the heavy strain on social spending in Europe; also calls for more dietary support programmes, such as the School Fruit and School Milk programmes, and for the budgets for these programmes to be increasedan Union member states;
Amendment 61 #
2010/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 79 #
2010/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers, however, that the increased drive to develop renewables and meet the 2020 targets must not affect the food supply; stresses that more attention should be given to the indirect land use (ILUC) effects of biofuels; in this context stresses that more attention should be given to the development of second- and third- generation biofuels;
Amendment 80 #
2010/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Believes that new agricultural technologies will be vital if we are to meet the global food security concerns of the future and especially within the context of needing to produce more food while using less land, less water and less pesticides.
Amendment 81 #
2010/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Is concerned about the level of reliance on imports of proteins and oleaginous products from third countries, which has negative consequences for the animal husbandry sector when price spikes occur; calls on the Commission to propose an action pl technical solution to the problem of low level presence material in non GM imports and to gradually reduce this dependencypropose a faster approval process within the EU for the importation of new GM feed variant once it has been proved safe;
Amendment 94 #
2010/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Recognises that price volatility is likely to be exacerbated by export bans, climate change and growing global demand; notes that farmers should have the knowledge and tools available to manage the risks they perceive to be most important for their businesses;
Amendment 95 #
2010/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 97 #
2010/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 102 #
2010/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
Amendment 116 #
2010/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21 a. EU food security is best served through a global system in which every country and person has access to enough food, with global supply matching global demand;
Amendment 153 #
2010/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Notes that traditional agricultural practices, including small-scale farming and organic farming, can make a valuable contribution to food security, because they often represent the most effective way of utilising land through methods specifically developed in individual regions over lengthy periods of time; notes additionally, that new technology will be vital to address future food security concerns.
Amendment 163 #
2010/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Highlights the fact that products from small-scale farming supply local markets with fresh food, which is more environmentally sustainable than transported food cand helps to support established farming communities; calls on the Commission to address these agricultural models in its future CAP proposals, including the possibility of creating special financial incentives;
Amendment 178 #
2010/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Stresses the need for fairness in the CAP, which should ensure a balanced distribution of support to farmers from all Member States, greater territorial cohesion, and the phasing-out of export subsidies in parallel with the EU's main trading partners;
Amendment 19 #
2010/2111(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas these imports represent the equivalent of 20 million hectares cultivated outside the EU, or more than 10% of the EU's arable land, which has led to significant rural development and increased the standard of living in some third countries and has led to unsustainable farming on sensitive grassland and deforestation of rainforest areas, with negative effects such as soil erosion and the depletion of water resources and biodiversity,
Amendment 25 #
2010/2111(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the high degree of imports of protein crops for animal feed has made the entire EU livestock sectorin combination with the lack of access for European farmers to much of the feed available on the world market has contributed to the extremely vulnerableility of the EU livestock sector to price volatility and trade distortions, reflecting the consequences of increasingly liberalised agricultural markets,
Amendment 31 #
2010/2111(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. Whereas the EU is highly dependant on soya beans and maize imported from third countries and any interruption of the supply of these products due to a minute presence of non authorized GMOs has a very costly impact for the European feed industry,
Amendment 37 #
2010/2111(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas global trade in cereals, proteins and oilseeds provide benefits for both importers and exporters of these goods and trade imbalances are a natural occurrence in a well functioning market,
Amendment 40 #
2010/2111(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
Ha. whereas farmers in the developing world benefit substantially from the ability to import into the European market,
Amendment 61 #
2010/2111(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
O. whereas, besides using native protein crops, the quality of non-imported compound feed can also be improved through the use of potato starch and by- products of oilseeds such as sunflower and rapeseed, and the quantity can be improved by a swifter approval process for new GM events,
Amendment 74 #
2010/2111(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital U
Recital U
U. whereas, instead of further encouraging cereal and maize monocultures for feed and energy production, the use of extended crop rotation systems, on-farm mixed cropping and grass-clover mixtures hascan have greater environmental and agronomic benefits, since the growing of leguminous crops as part of a rotation system can prevent diseases and regenerate the soil,
Amendment 89 #
2010/2111(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission to ensure that its legislative proposals for CAP reform include adequate measures and instruments which allow the opportunity for farmers to integrate protein crop production into improved crop rotation systems so as to overcome the current protein deficit, improve farmers‘ revenues and address the key challenges agriculture is facing, such as climate change, the loss of biodiversity and soil fertility and the protection and sustainable management of water resources;
Amendment 91 #
2010/2111(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission swiftly to submit to Parliament and to the Council a report on the scope for increasing domestic protein crop production in the EU, including the potential for substituting imports, the potential effect on farmers‘ revenues, the contribution it would make to climate change mitigation, the effect on biodiversity and soil fertility, and the potential for reducing the necessary external input of mineral fertilisers and pesticides;
Amendment 107 #
2010/2111(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission to provide legal certainty for imports of soy and maize from third countries by introducing a pragmatic threshold for the adventitious presence of GMOs which are not yet authorised in the EU but which are under scientific consideration;
Amendment 112 #
2010/2111(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission, in cooperation with the Member States, to revise the definition of good agricultural practices, including the use of mandatovoluntary crop rotation with domestic protein crops as a precautionary measure against crop disease and price volatility in the animal production sector;
Amendment 128 #
2010/2111(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 6 #
2010/2100(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Welcomes the assistance of the food facility established by the EU with a budget of EUR 1 billion to provide, from 2009 to 2011, rapid support to over 50 priority countries worldwide facing soaring food prices with the aim to increase the local food production capacity and supply, thus empowering local farming communities; considers, however, that further extension of this food facility, or additional allocation of funding to it, should not be automatic, but decided based on an independent impact assessment of the funds disbursements' efficiency in improving food security in all the beneficiary countries;
Amendment 47 #
2010/2100(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. BWelieves that price volatility results from the increased unregulated liberalisation of trade in agricultural products, and that it isl functioning global markets are and will become increasingly important to help us mitigate against climate change induced events; protectionist or isolationist policies such as the recent Russian and Indian export bans exacerbate existing problems and induce further and more extreme price volatility, it is therefore, necessary to create regulatory mechanisms that can ensure a degree of market stability and a more transparent food chain, thus responding to the need to guarantee producers a decent standard of living;
Amendment 62 #
2010/2100(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls on the EU and ACP countries to develop joint research and training capacities in sustainable farming methods, including organic farming, notably through public-private partnerships, and joint ventures, or public-private partnerships where applicable, and to adopt a responsible and balanced approach in respect to agrofuels and non-food crop production in developing countries; considers that, if conducted in a sustainable manner, such production can also increase rural household revenues and welfare, while reducing their dependence on fuel imports;
Amendment 224 #
2010/0362(COD)
Proposal for a regulation - amending act
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Regulation (EC) 1234/2007
Article 126 a – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Article 126 a – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
5. By way of derogation from paragraph 2(c)(ii) and (iii), even where the threshold of 33% is not exceeded, the competition authority referred to in the second subparagraph may decide in an individual case that the negotiation by the producer organisation may not take place if it considers that this is necessary in order to prevent competition being excludrestricted or distorted, or in order to avoid serious prejudice to SME processors of raw milk in its territory.
Amendment 63 #
2010/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) The role of groups should be clarified and recognised. Groups play an essential role in the application process for the registration of names of designations of origin and geographical indications and traditional specialities guaranteed, including amendments of specifications and cancellation requests. The group can also develop activities related to the surveillance of the enforcement of the protection of the registered names, the compliance of the production with the product specification, the information and promotion of the registered name as well as in general any activity aiming to improve the value of the registered names and effectiveness of the quality schemes. NeUnder no circumstances should the groups haver theless, right to apply for the authorisation of systems for the management of supply, as these activities shcould not facilitate nor lead to anti-competitive conduct incompatible with Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty, they could also infringe the rights of small producers and new entrants on the market.
Amendment 78 #
2010/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – point 3
Article 3 – point 3
(3) ‘'traditional’' means proven usage on the domestic market for a time period allowing transmission between generations; this time period should be the one generally ascribed to twoone generation, that is, at least 250 years;
Amendment 80 #
2010/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – point 3
Article 3 – point 3
(3) ‘traditional’ means proven usage on the domestic market for a time period allowing transmission between generations; this time period should be the one generally ascribed to two generations, that is, at least 50 years;. However, exemptions should be made for old products and recipes which have been revived in recent times. In these cases, the period will be the one ascribed to one generation, that is, at least 25 years.
Amendment 81 #
2010/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – point 3 - paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 3 – point 3 - paragraph 1 a (new)
Notwithstanding this definition, if a traditional method has been revived in its entirety, and the original method dates from more than 50 years ago, it can also be classified as 'traditional';
Amendment 124 #
2010/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3
Article 12 – paragraph 3
3. In the case of products originating in the Union, marketed under a protected designation of origin or a protected geographical indication registered in accordance with the procedures laid down in this Regulation, the indications ‘protected designation of origin’ or ‘protected geographical indication’ or the Union symbols associated with them shall appear on the labelling. In addition, the corresponding abbreviations ‘"PDO’" or ‘"PGI’" may appear on the labelling.
Amendment 234 #
2010/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 44 – paragraph 1 a (new)
With regard to the Guidelines on the best practices on voluntary certification schemes (2010/C 341/04) and on the labelling of products using PDO-PGI ingredients (2010/C 341/03), after three years following the entry into force of this Regulation, the Commission shall present a report to the European Parliament and the Council, reviewing the guidelines with a view to establishing whether they are appropriate.
Amendment 59 #
2010/0208(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 - point 1
Article 1 - point 1
Directive 2001/18/EC
Article 26 b – paragraph 1 - point a a (new)
Article 26 b – paragraph 1 - point a a (new)
(aa) those measures are adopted and made publicly available to all operators concerned, including growers, at least six months prior to the start of the growing season;
Amendment 62 #
2010/0208(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 - point 1
Article 1 - point 1
Directive 2001/18/EC
Article 26 b – paragraph 1 - point b
Article 26 b – paragraph 1 - point b
(b) that theyose measures are in conformity with the Treaties, in particular with the principle of proportionality, and the Union's international obligations.
Amendment 24 #
2010/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. Each Member State shall produce the structural statistics listed in Annexes II and III on the planted area of permanent crops with a minimum of 5000 ha for each individual permanent crop referred to in Annex I within the territory of that Member State.
Amendment 19 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas, to date, the Common Agricultural Policy has met its goals with regard to achieving better productivity in the food chain, contributing to a fair standard of living for the agricultural community, market stabilisation and the provision of food supplies to EU consumers at reasonable prices, yet at a cost to the taxpayer and the developing world.
Amendment 30 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas agriculture remains an important sector of the economy and at the same time provides essential public goods by maintaining natural resources and cultural landscapes, a precondition for all human activities in rural areas,
Amendment 62 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas price volatility in agricultural markets has increased dramatically and is expected to increase further, leading to extreme booms and busts in agricultural commodity prices on European markets; whereas between 2006 and 2008, the prices of several commodities rose considerably, some by as much as 180%, as was the case for grains; whereas dairy prices collapsed in 2009, falling on average by 40%; whereas extreme fluctuations in prices have had detrimental consequences for producers and have not always benefited consumers,
Amendment 86 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas, as a result of these reforms, the EU has become a net importer of agricultural goods with over €78 billion worth of products being imported each year (around 20% of world agricultural imports); whereas in some cases the balance of trade has steadily shifted in favour of third countries (the EU now imports €19 billion worth of agricultural products from Mercosur countries and only exports under €1 billion worth to the region); whereas the EU continues to experience a widening trade deficit in agricultural products,
Amendment 98 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
O. whereas the EU must continue to ensure food security for its citizens as well as help feed the world's poor; whereas the number of hungry people now exceeds 1 billion and in the European Union today there are over 40 million poor people who do not have enough to eat, believes that all scientific avenues to increase food production should be explored in order to ensure that world hunger is alleviated.
Amendment 109 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital P
Recital P
P. whereas global food demand is expected to double and world population is predicted to grow from 6 billion today to 9 billion by 2050 according to the FAO, and global food production will need to increase accordingly against a background of pressure on natural resources, meaning that the world will need to produce more food whilst using less water, less land, less fertilisers and less pesticides.
Amendment 123 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that the CAP has undergone radical reforms over the last 25 years, in particular bringing about a fundamental shift from production support to producer support3 , endreducing regular intervention buying and the dumping of European surpluses on world markets4 and making the CAP and EU farmers more market- oriented;
Amendment 133 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that CAP market instruments are now used as safety nets to help manage market volatility and ensure a certain degree of stability and that, moreover, since the adoption of decoupled Single Farm Payments there has been a resolute move away from trade-distorting measures in line with WTO requirements; however, there is a need for further reaching reform.
Amendment 138 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the fact that the 2003 CAP reform and the 2008 Health Check have allowed EU farmers to better respond and react to market signals and conditions; and would seek for this trend to continue in further reforms.
Amendment 163 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls that the CAP is the most integrated of all EU policies and therefore logically accounts for the largest share of the EU budget; recognises that its share of the budget has steadily decreased from about 75% of the total EU budget in 1985 to 39.3% by 20135 , representing less than 0.45% of total EU GDP6 , whilst at the same time support is more thinly spread today with 12 new Member States joining the EU;
Amendment 171 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Points out that food security remains the central challenge for EUglobal agriculture as the world population is predicted to growcontinues to grow; having risen from 2.5 billion to 6 billion from 1950 to 2000 and being projected to increase from 6 to 9 billion by 2050 and; demand for food will double by 2050 according to the FAO (especially in emerging economies such as China or India);
Amendment 182 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Urges the Commission to consider the reform of the CAP in the context of future challenges, including food security, climate change, population growth, the integration of markets, and the competition for resources; and considers these challenges the main drivers for the re-design of the CAP;
Amendment 185 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. In respect of food security, insists that the Commission takes due and proper account of the Policy Coherence for Development agenda to ensure that CAP reform is consistent with other EU initiatives with regard to its impact on Developing Countries.
Amendment 187 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Expects the Commission to honour commitments made in the Doha Development Agenda to abolish export refunds as part of CAP reform.
Amendment 189 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 d (new)
Paragraph 8 d (new)
8d. With regard to projections for global population growth, encourages the Commission to pursue CAP reform in tandem with open market policies to ensure that food is not only produced but reaches consumers at the most affordable prices.
Amendment 205 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Believes that agriculture is well placed to make a significant contribution to the fight against climate change by continuing to reduce its Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions, making use of new technologies and increasing carbon sequestration;
Amendment 247 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Is of the opinion that a strongmart, inclusive and green European Common Agricultural Policy is needed to ensure that EU farmers remain competitive on the world market against well subsidised trading partners; believes that the EU cannot afford to rely on other parts of the world toan open international trading environment and a successful conclusion to the Doha development Agenda can help provide for European and global food security in the context of climate change, political instability in certain regions of the world and potential outbreaks of diseases or other events potentially detrimental to production capacity;
Amendment 273 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Recalls, as Article 39 of the Lisbon Treaty rightly suggests, that agriculture is a specific sector which suffers from a long- term production cycle and several types of market failure such as high market volaack of demand elastilcity, great exposure to natural disasters, a high level of risk, lack of demand end a long-term production cycle giving rise to high market volasticlity, and the fact that farmers are 'price-takers' rather than 'price-makers' in the food supply-chainwhich can be problematic for farmers if it affects the volatility of farm income;
Amendment 286 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Points out that there is an urgent need to attract younger generations to rural areas and provide new and alternative economic opportunities for them to ensure a sustainable rural population; however, support mechanisms must ensure young people are able to enter the agriculture industry with relative ease;
Amendment 327 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24 a. Recognises that a greater focus on Pillar 2 can help ensure that the CAP is more targeted and can help deliver the environmental public goods that the public seeks;
Amendment 336 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Amendment 349 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Believes, in line with the latest research available, that without a common agricultural policy, unbalanced modes of production wcould develop across the EU (extreme intensification on the best land and widespread land abandonment in disadvantaged areas), causing serious damage topotentially causing negative consequences for the environment; insists that the cost of support through a strong CAPo provide public goods by delivering non-market benefits is nothing compared to the costs of no action and its negative unintended consequences;
Amendment 378 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32 a. Recognises that consumers should have a choice in the produce they buy and that farmers should be rewarded for providing high quality produce to them;
Amendment 382 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 b (new)
Paragraph 32 b (new)
32 b. Rural development schemes need to be adequately funded. If the current system of using modulated funds from Pillar one to fund rural development persists, modulation should be further increased to ensure that rural development schemes are adequately funded. Modulation should only take place on a compulsory basis across Europe to ensure a level playing field throughout the internal market. There should be no provision for member states to impose additional voluntary modulation
Amendment 387 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Insists that the maintenance of farming activity across the whole of Europe is fundamental to maintain diverse and local food production and prevent the threat of land abandonment across EU territoryMember States;
Amendment 391 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Calls for the guarantee of a fair and stable return for the farming community to remain a primary goal for the new CAP, whilst providing good value for money and a fair return for consumers through increasing competitiveness in the agricultural sector and allowing farmers to respond to market signals;
Amendment 486 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43 a (new)
Paragraph 43 a (new)
43 a. Believes that farmers should be able to take advantage of new technologies which have the potential to allow production to increase whilst reducing the use of pesticides, fertilisers, land and water. Insists however that the use of new technology in agriculture should not undermine the ability of any farmer to choose what production method they use, or the ability of the consumer to choose food produced by different production methods.
Amendment 503 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 a (new)
Paragraph 44 a (new)
44 a. Believes that safeguards need to be introduced to ensure that biotechnology can be further used in agriculture without impacting on existing production methods.
Amendment 511 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. Recognises the wide range of new priorities for the CAP and notes that the new Member States' expectation when they joined the European Union was that CAP support would, over time, reach parity with old Member States; therefore calls for the 2013 CAP budget amount to be at least maintained post-2013 if the EU is to meet its current commitments and successfully deliver the new priorities; in the context of a full reassessment of CAP priorities.
Amendment 527 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a (new)
Paragraph 45 a (new)
45 a. In line with the spring European Council Conclusion on Europe 2020, expects the re-design of the CAP to provide instruments that deliver smart, inclusive, green growth;
Amendment 534 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
Paragraph 46
46. Calls for the CAP budget to have an small end-of-year flexibility mechanism in order to carry over and reallocate under- spends in the following year;, provided any reallocation resides within Heading 2 of the EU budget, however, the majority of the excess funds should be returned to the Member States.
Amendment 536 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46 a (new)
Paragraph 46 a (new)
46 a. Expects the Commission to rigorously enforce financial discipline, in line with annual ceilings, to ensure that state support delivered through the CAP achieves its objectives and delivers value for money for both the citizens who subsidise it and the farmers who benefit;
Amendment 548 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47
Paragraph 47
47. Insists that the CAP should not be renationalised and therefore, however, believes that while core direct support should remain fully financed by the EU budget, hence rejecting any further co- financing which could harm fair competition within the EU Single Marketin the 1st pillar must be explored;
Amendment 550 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 – introductory part
Paragraph 48 – introductory part
48. Calls for a fair distribution of CAP funds to farmers across the EU; recalls that to respect the diversity of farming in the EU, objective criteria must be found in order to define a fair system of distribution which minimises distortions between and within Member States:
Amendment 586 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50
50. Believes that, in the interest of simplification, clarity and a common approach, funding for each of the five building blocks of the CAP must be agreed from the start of the reformas part of negotiations on the financial perspectives and in relation to decisions taken on other Community spending programmes;
Amendment 595 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
Paragraph 51
51. Believes that direct support should move to an area basis in all Member States by 2020, allowing those that are still using the historical payments system the flexibility to phase in the difficult changes at their own speed9 with this being a promary objective of post-2013 reform;
Amendment 615 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
Paragraph 54
54. Considers that there should be no return to coupled payments as a guiding principle of the CAP; however, given the move from a historical to an area support model, takes the view that a limited margin for flexibility should be left to Member States to respond to the specific needs of their territory, in the form of capped coupled payments for vulnerable grassland livestock areas, in compliance with WTO requirements whilst ensuring a free, fair and level playing field for farmers across the EU;
Amendment 672 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 57
Paragraph 57
57. Believes that an EU-funded top-up direct area payment should be made available to farmers through simple contracts rewarding them for reducing their carbon emissions per unit of production and increasing EU agriculture should be put on the same footing as otheir sequestration of carbon; notes that this would have the double benefit of making EU agriculture more environmentally and economically sustainable through improved efficiency and would also ensure that farmers can financially benefit from increased carbon sequestration on their land and put them on the same footing as other industries which are industries which are in the EU ETS; asks for clear and measurable criteria and targets to be defined; calls for consideration to be made into how farmers can be rewarded for reducing the EU ETS; calls for clear and measurable criteria and targets to be defined appropriately to allow these payments to be implemented as soon as possibleir carbon emissions and increasing their sequestration of carbon;
Amendment 6 #
2009/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the climate change caused by the historical build-up of greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere is an irrefutable scientific fact that will have a serious impact on ecosystems,
Amendment 25 #
2009/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the proportion of the Union's GHG emissions produced by agriculture dropped from 11% in 1990 to 9.3% in 2007, inter alia as a result of smaller herds and more sustainable fertiliser use,.
Amendment 54 #
2009/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Affirms that EU agriculture can contribute to the Union's global warming mitigation objectives by finding ways to limit and reduce its GHG emissions, promoting carbon storage in the soil and developing the production of sustainable renewable energies; emphasises that, to this end, it is essential to foster the development of a different kind of agriculture bagriculture and forestry should work togetther able to reconcile economic, social and environmental imperatives with the natural potential of each ecosystemtowards achieving carbon- neutral status;
Amendment 66 #
2009/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Takes the view that organic farming and integrated pest management practices are among the ecologically effective systems needing further development; emphasises, however, the need to find ways to facilitate a transition to more sustainable agriculture in the case of the other systems used on most farmlandAcknowledges the call from the UN to increase agricultural output by 50% by 2030; stresses the importance of achieving this goal whilst also reducing the use of agro-chemicals and cutting green house gas emissions; stresses the need for further research in areas such as precision farming in order to achieve these goals;
Amendment 142 #
2009/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 189 #
2009/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Emphasises that the CAP will have to meet growing public demand for a more sustainable agricultural policy, whilest at the same time increasing yields and bearing in mind that global warming may jeopaapordise world food production capacity, including in Europe;.
Amendment 204 #
2009/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Takes the view that the "new challenges" of climate change, water management, renewable energies and biodiversity were not fully taken on board at the time of the CAP Health Check, and that they should be addressed through all the CAP instruments, not just the "second- pillar" subsidies;
Amendment 214 #
2009/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 bis (new)
Paragraph 16 bis (new)
16a. Recognises that the CAP needs to set world-leading standards in environmental protection; points out that this will mean a level of cost which cannot be recovered from the market, although in part that can be regarded as delivery of public goods, and that European producers will need protection from third-country competition which does not meet EU environmental standards;
Amendment 235 #
2009/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Considers it essential to strengthen risk and crisis management instruments and adapt them to increasing market volatility and growing climatic risks, and to introduce a genuine European policy on preventing and responding to natural disasters;
Amendment 14 #
2009/2156(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Recognises that because of their unique position less-favoured areas have an important role to play in delivering environmental benefits and in maintaining the landscape and stresses that payments under this measure should seek to achieve these goals;
Amendment 19 #
2009/2156(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises that support for areas with natural handicaps is aimed in particular at ensuring that 'extensive farming activity' is maintained, and consequently at countering abandonment of the land and migration;
Amendment 22 #
2009/2156(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 27 #
2009/2156(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 33 #
2009/2156(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that the eight biophysical criteria proposed by the Commission may be suitable for delimiting areas with natural handicaps but recognises that other bio- physical criteria could also be suitable and urges Member States to put forward additional relevant suggestions to the Commission;
Amendment 41 #
2009/2156(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Stresses how important it is that, in line with the Court of Auditors' report and the 2005 reform, socio-economic criteria no longer form part of this measure;
Amendment 67 #
2009/2156(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers fine-tuning of the criteria for support for areas with natural handicaps to be necessary in order to be able to respond appropriately to particular geographical situations and crops grown and to exclude areas in which natural handicaps have been offset by human intervention or further bio-physical conditions; proposes that farm data (such as farm income) be used inter alia for this purpose; emphasises, however, that the decision on the criteria to be used for fine-tuning must lie with the Member States;
Amendment 72 #
2009/2156(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Stresses the importance of appropriate farm-level eligibility criteria in the interests of ensuring proper targeting of payments on those farms affected by natural handicaps, and urges the Commission to develop a common framework of such criteria;
Amendment 8 #
2009/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the objective should be to reduce the implementation costs of the CAP, both direct and indirect,
Amendment 15 #
2009/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas it is necessary to ensure clear and understandable legislation that provides legal certainty for competent authorities and farmers, and to eliminate unnecessary legislation,
Amendment 50 #
2009/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Believes that, where possible, Member States should allow self-certificationbe permitted to make use of independently audited private assurance standards and certification schemes, which might include self-certification, when analysing risk;
Amendment 58 #
2009/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the need for the CAP to be simpler, more transparent and more equitable; in this respect a single flat rate payment would be preferable;
Amendment 107 #
2009/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Considers that the use of statutory management requirements which cannot be simply controlled should be abolished or made optional;
Amendment 174 #
2009/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Considers that the definitions in rural development legislation should be reviewed and, if necessary, expanded in order to ensure consistency with direct payment legislation;
Amendment 230 #
2009/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33a. Calls for an amnesty of three years on cross-compliance penalties relating to electronic identification of sheep and goats, given that this is a new and complex technology and will require some time for farmers to become accustomed to and road-test; further, calls on the Commission to conduct a thorough review of the regulation;
Amendment 1 #
2009/2153(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. If Member States comply with Landfill Directive targets and the revised Waste Framework Directive, there is no need for further directives in this field.
Amendment 2 #
2009/2153(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that bio-waste accounts for more than 30 % of municipal solid waste; is of the opinion that better management of bio- waste will contribute to sustainable resource management and better soil protection on the one hand and combating climate change and meeting recycling and renewable energy targets on the other; nevertheless, expects Member States to be able to manage their own waste;
Amendment 37 #
2009/2153(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Notes that the individual Member States have different waste management systems and that use of landfill continues to be the most common disposal method for municipal solid waste in the European Union; urges the Commission, therefore, to continue its impact assessment with the aim of preparing a Community legislative proposal on biodegradable waste in 2010produce guidelines for Member Staes that will ensure biodegradable waste is prevented from reaching landfill;