8 Amendments of Helga TRÜPEL related to 2008/2025(BUD)
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Cannot always see a clear correlation between the Commission's political priorities, as described in its Annual Policy Strategy (APS) and the PDB, and increases in the corresponding budget lines and policy areas; is not convinced, for example, that the climate change priority really is reflected throughout the budget as proposed by the Commission; wishes to receive more information as to the methodology used to come to the conclusion that over 10%, or EUR 14 billion, of the EU budget is spent on environmental targets;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Deplores that, at the moment, there is no clear indication of the exact changes made in a financial programming document newly presented compared to the previous one, nor of whether, or how, increases in a particular year are being compensated for or how back- and front- loadings are taking place; considers this not in line with the provisions of Point 46 of the IIA and calls on the Commission to fulfil its obligations in this respect;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Welcomes the increase of EUR 20,9 million for LIFE+, but notes with some regret that only part of this increase goes to intensified activities in the area of climate change; considers that the horizontal budgetary priority of combating climate change is not properly reflected in these figures; considers it necessary, therefore, to increase the envelopes of rural development programmes as well as the Life + programme, using part of the remaining margin under heading 2, for climate change adaptation and mitigation measures, covering also actions for disaster prevention, preparedness, response and recovery;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
Paragraph 51
51. While welcoming that the new posts requested by the Commission only concern the previously announced final tranche of 250 for "EU-2", notes that the proposed increase of administrative expenditure is still higher than the average for the whole budget; recognises that this may be largely linked to indexed salary and pension costs, and to some extent buildings policy, but is nevertheless of the opinion that it would be preferable to limit; points out that further modifications may become necessary during the fincrease of administrative expenditure still further; resolves to scrutinise administrative expenditure in order to investigate the possibilitiesancial year 2009 if the Lisbon Treaty enters into force; resolves, in that respect, to scrutinise administrative expenditure in an interinstitutional context in order to investigate the needs of the institutions for 2009 and beyond;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55 a (new)
Paragraph 55 a (new)
55a. Points out that the Commission has indicated that, in 2006, 833,65 administrators and 244,78 assistants, spread over 10 Directorates General, the Legal Service and the Secretariat General, were working on the management and enforcement of Community law; regrets that the Commission has not been able to give details as regards the number of officials working specifically on infringement procedures; notes, furthermore, the reply by the Secretary General of the Commission that the Commission is not in a position to give an overview of spending on "better regulation" because expenditure related to impact assessment, simplification, quality of legislation and evaluation is spread throughout the whole budget both in operational and administrative lines and no posting criteria exist in the Commission's accounting system; points out nevertheless that in its screening report of 24 April 2007 the Commission has indicated that 0,5 % of staff work on evaluation; looks forward to receiving updated and more detailed information from the Commission; furthermore, draws attention to policy area 25 of the budget and observes that the Commission proposes the same amount of expenditure as in 2008 for the impact assessment board ( EUR 0,2 million ), and the "frais de contentieux" (EUR 4,2 million), but a cut of 35,5 % on the line for codification of Community law (2 million as against 3,1 million in 2008);
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63 a (new)
Paragraph 63 a (new)
63a. Insists that the Commission is to implement the pilot projects according to Parliament's wishes and that, as regards the pilot project on sulphur dioxide emission trading in the Baltic Sea, nothing prevents the Commission from launching a call for proposals for a voluntary sea to sea emission trading pilot scheme, especially in view of recent IMO developments; is of the opinion that the Commission has not given convincing arguments as to why it cannot follow through Parliament's wishes in this respect;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63 b (new)
Paragraph 63 b (new)
63b. Wishes to explore with the Commission and the Council how to give effect to Parliament's call for a European envoy on women's rights; will consider proposing a pilot project to that end if no other solution can be found in good time;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63 c (new)
Paragraph 63 c (new)
63c. Welcomes the fact that the Commission has taken up the ideas underlying the Parliament proposal for a preparatory action for a Convention for Urban and Rural Europe within the regular programmes and activities of the Directorates-General concerned; stresses the importance of involving civil society networks in this respect; notes that the Commission report on pilot projects and preparatory actions accompanying the PDB does not describe the actions carried out in this framework and awaits further information on the actions implemented by the Directorates General and funds used;