BETA

11 Amendments of Ingeborg GRÄSSLE related to 2017/2052(INI)

Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Is of the opinion that EU transparency requirements are met in an ideal manner by regions that draw up their accounts in accordance with European Public Sector Accounting standards; notes furthermore that double- entry accounting would be an ideal way of easing the reporting obligations vis-à-vis the Commission imposed on the regions and promotional institutions; calls, as a further incentive, for the implementation and on-going adaptation of public accounting standards to be co-financed by the EU;
2017/10/30
Committee: CONT
Amendment 243 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
44. Agrees that the search for European added value should be one of the main principles guiding the EU institutions when deciding about the type of spending in the next MFF; points out, however, the existence of multiple interpretations of the concept and calls for a clear definition of the criteria thereof and measurable performance indicators that should take territorial specificities into account;
2018/02/01
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 274 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
50. Advocates also a real simplification of sectoral implementation rules for beneficiaries and a reduction of administrative burdens; calls for a move towards a risk-based evaluation whereby control resources could be focused more on those regions and policy fields where the risks of irregularities have proven to be more significant;
2018/02/01
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 296 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60
60. Recognises the potential of financial instruments to increase the economic and political impact of the Union budget; calls for more flexibility in cross- sectoral use of different financial instruments, so as to overcome the restrictive rules preventing recipients from taking advantage of multiple programmes for projects with matching goals; highlights, however, that they can be applied only for revenue-generating projects and therefore constitute only a complementary rather than an alternative form of funding as compared to grants, as some projects can be financed only through subsidies;
2018/02/01
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 435 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 77 a (new)
77a. Recalls its remarks1a of the unsustainable structure of CAP expenditure: 44.7 % of all Union farms had an annual income of less than EUR 4000, and in 2016 on average the upper 10% of the beneficiaries of CAP direct support received around 60% of the payments1b; points out that in times of volatility or crisis, larger farms do not necessarily need the same degree of support for stabilising farm incomes as smaller farms do, since they often benefit from potential economies of scale that are likely to make them more resilient; considers that the CAP financing schemes could focus more on farmers under special constraints: small farms, in particular those with less than 15ha of land, climatically and geographically challenging areas, and sparsely populated regions, and that for farms with more than 100ha of land there should be a gradual reduction of payments; __________________ 1aSee paragraph 207 of its resolution of 27 April 2017 with observations forming an integral part of the decisions on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2015, Section III – Commission and executive agencies (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0309). 1b See the Indicative figures on the distribution of aid, by size-class of aid, received in the context of direct aid paid to the producers according to Council Regulation (EC) No 1307/2013 (financial year 2016).
2018/02/01
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 436 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 77 a (new)
77a. Recalls its remarks1a of the unsustainable structure of CAP expenditure: 44.7 % of all Union farms had an annual income of less than EUR 4000, and on average 80 % of the beneficiaries of CAP direct support received around 20 % of the payments; points out that in times of volatility or crisis, larger farms do not necessarily need the same degree of support for stabilising farm incomes as smaller farms do, since they often benefit from potential economies of scale that are likely to make them more resilient; considers that the CAP financing schemes could focus more on farmers under special constraints: small farms, climatically and geographically challenging areas and sparsely populated regions __________________ 1aSee paragraph 207 of its resolution of 27 April 2017 with observations forming an integral part of the decisions on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2015, Section III – Commission and executive agencies (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0309).
2018/02/01
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 437 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 77 b (new)
77b. Calls upon the Commission, as it reflects on a simplified and modernised CAP, to assess whether a different policy design, or a different model of distribution of direct payments, could provide a better means of targeting public funds to agri- environment and climate action objectives; stresses, however, the need to provide financial compensation to cover the costs of maintaining high standards in food production, and the high production costs associated with the challenging climate condition in some geographical areas, as the farmers in Europe often struggle with global competition;
2018/02/01
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 446 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 78
78. Expects the global amount of direct payments to be kept intact under the next MFF, as they generate clear EU added value and strengthen the single market by avoiding distortions of competition between Member States; opposeQuestions any renationalisation and any national co-financing in that respectof direct payments; stresses the need to increase funding in line with responses to the various cyclical crises in sensitive sectors, to create new instruments that can mitigate price volatility and to increase funding for Programmes of Options Specifically Relating to Remoteness and Insularity (POSEI); concludes, therefore, that the CAP budget in the next MFF should be at least maintained at its current level for the EU-27;sufficient level to deal with the real needs of European agriculture
2018/02/01
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 450 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 78
78. Expects the global amount of direct payments to be kept intact under the next MFF, as they generate clear EU added value and strengthen the single market by avoiding distortions of competition between Member States; opposes any renationalisation and any national co- financing in that respect; stresses the need to increase funding in line with responses to the various cyclical crises in sensitive sectors, to create new instruments that can mitigate price volatility and to increase funding for Programmes of Options Specifically Relating to Remoteness and Insularity (POSEI); concludes, therefore, that the CAP budget in the next MFF should be at least maintained at its current level for the EU-27;
2018/02/01
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 500 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 82
82. Considers maintaining the financing of cohesion policy post-2020 for the EU-27 at least at the level of the 2014- 2020 budget to be of the utmost importance; stresses that GDP should remain one of the parameters for the allocation of cohesion policy funds, but believes that it should be complemented by an additional set of social, environmental and demographic indicators to better take into account new types of inequalities between EU regions; notes that cohesion expenditure should be bound to the structural reforms outlined in Commission's annual country reports and/or by requiring full compliance with common rules and decisions regarding the use and control of EU funds, and with European values and human rights; supports, in addition, the continuation under the new programming period of the elements that rendered cohesion policy more modern and performance-oriented under the current MFF; notes that more efficient results could be gained with more emphasis on growth, innovation, mobility, climate change, energy and environmental transition;
2018/02/01
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 501 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 82
82. Considers maintaining the financing of cohesion policy post-2020 for the EU-27 at least at the level of the 2014- 2020 budget to be of the utmost importance; sStresses that GDP should remain one of the parameters for the allocation of cohesion policy funds, but believes that it should be complemented by an additional set of social, environmental and demographic indicators to better take into account new types of inequalities between EU regions; considers that "national envelopes" should be abolished under the next MFF, thereby rendering cohesion policy more flexible and more credible; supports, in addition, the continuation under the new programming period of the elements that rendered cohesion policy more modern and performance-oriented under the current MFF;
2018/02/01
Committee: BUDG