6 Amendments of Edit HERCZOG related to 2009/2226(INI)
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that the inadequatesufficient funding for the GNSS programmes led in 2007 to a revision of the current MFF which increased the ceiling for Heading 1a by €2.4 billion for the period 2007-2013; points out that again in 2010 the Commission proposed an MFF revision to increase the ceiling for Heading 1a, owing to a shortage of funding for the ITER project; emphasises that such ad hoc, emergency solutions are likely to jeopardise the success and added value of strategic, large-scale EU projects and undermine the political momentum around them ; considers that sound, global and long-term solutions for their funding must be devised instead;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
Ha. whereas the insufficient funding for the GNSS programmes led in 2007 to a revision of the current MFF which increased the ceiling for Heading 1a by €2.4 billion for the period 2007-2013, and again in 2010 the Commission proposed an MFF revision to increase the ceiling for Heading 1a, owing to a shortage of funding for the ITER project; emphasises that such ad hoc, emergency solutions are likely to jeopardise the success and added value of strategic, large-scale EU projects and undermine the political momentum around them, whereas, therefore, sound, global and long-term solutions for their funding must be devised instead,
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that Galileo is the first EU- owned project and that to avoid uncertainties, reassure market players and bring it to full operability within the shortest possible period its budget must be steadily increased; supports, therefore, the proposal that in the future, where large- scale projects such as this are concerned, a predetermined annual amount should be covered from the EU budget and that the Member States should be responsible for financing any balanceadditional cost;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that the estimated figure (€1.9 billion)s included in the mid-term review for the period after 2013 isremain purely indicative and might represent a low estimate of the actual amount needed to complete, therefore, suggests to have a fix annual amount of €1.1 billion dedicated to Galileo in each year of the next MFF in order to increase the accountability, the predictability and the transparency of the project.
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Stresses that not only is Galileo actually the first major EU-owned project of this type but that it also addresses a requirement that is in the public interest at EU level, thus justifying recourse to public financing; emphasises, therefore, that in the future, where large-scale projects such as this are concerned, a predetermined annual amount should be covered from the EU budget and that the Member States should mainly be responsible for financing any additional cost by making available supplementary funding to the EU budget, meanwhile identifying underspent areas of the EU budget, which could contribute to financing additional needs of such large- scale projects;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Points out that the estimated figures included in the mid-term review for the period after 2013 remain purely indicative; therefore, suggests to have a fixed annual amount of €1.1 billion dedicated to Galileo in each year of the next MFF in order to increase the accountability, predictability and transparency of the project;