Activities of Helga TRÜPEL related to 2015/2353(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Preparation of the post-electoral revision of the MFF 2014-2020: Parliament's input ahead of the Commission's proposal (debate) DE
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on the preparation of the post-electoral revision of the MFF 2014-2020: Parliament’s input ahead of the Commission’s proposal
Amendments (8)
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Considers that Erasmus+ would reach its cruising speed only if it takes on board a growing number of smaller projects that allow a larger diffusion of the programme at schools or for youth, an increase of VET mobility, and therefore a better efficiency in realising its educative, social and humanitarian goals; welcomes therefore all efforts made by the EACEA and national agencies to improve not only their financial transparency but the simplification procedures for the project leaders;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Recommends the Commission to pay special attention to the implementation of the financial Guarantee facility tool which is delayed by more than a few months; is concerned that cultural NGOs and small associations will not be eligible for this tool, and only cultural and creative SMEs would be able to participate; recommends a thorough analysis of the experiences done throughout the whole process in order to check the pertinence and sustainability of such a tool, aside COSME;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Urges the Commission and Council to review their position on the "Europe for Citizens" programme, the only programme which involves all citizens directly, and to provide it with a substantial additional budget allowing better implementation of the goals of the programme and avoiding further frustration among participants to the calls; indeed, having been cut beyond any reason, the programme can only accept a dramatically low percentage of projects, a situation that it is not sustainable and defendable towards the EU citizens, even more so in the present social and humanitarian situation in the EU;
Amendment 184 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 c (new)
Paragraph 29 c (new)
29c. Asks for an increased financial support to the three European programmes concerning directly citizens: Creative Europe, Europe for citizens and Erasmus+, as those programmes develop new subvention lines to react to the present situation on refugees integration, education and are on the front of actions lead by the Union and Member States to improve the overall social situation, mutual understanding and the living together in our different societies;
Amendment 185 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 d (new)
Paragraph 29 d (new)
29d. Urges the Commission and Council to review their position on the "Europe for Citizens" programme, the only programme which involves all citizens directly, and to provide it with a substantial additional budget allowing better implementation of the goals of the programme and avoiding further frustration among participants to the calls; indeed, having been cut beyond any reason, the programme can only accept a dramatically low percentage of projects, a situation that it is not sustainable and defendable towards the EU citizens, even more so in the present social and humanitarian situation in the EU;
Amendment 186 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 e (new)
Paragraph 29 e (new)
29e. Considers that Erasmus+ would reach its cruising speed only if it takes on board a growing number of smaller projects that allow a larger diffusion of the programme at schools or for youth, an increase of VET mobility, and therefore a better efficiency in realising its educative, social and humanitarian goals; welcomes therefore all efforts made by the EACEA and national agencies to improve not only their financial transparency but the simplification procedures for the project leaders;
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 f (new)
Paragraph 29 f (new)
29f. Recommends the Commission to pay special attention to the implementation of the financial Guarantee facility tool which is delayed by more than a few months; is concerned that cultural NGOs and small associations will not be eligible for this tool, and only cultural and creative SMEs would be able to participate; recommends a thorough analysis of the experiences done throughout the whole process in order to check the pertinence and sustainability of such a tool, aside COSME;
Amendment 188 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 g (new)
Paragraph 29 g (new)
29g. Notes that the revision of the MFF is a key point in the management of Union spending by ensuring that Union investment programmes remain efficient; insists on a thorough simplification of the application forms and criteria, of reporting and reimbursement, especially for small-scale projects, both in Erasmus+ and in the Creative Europe and Europe for Citizens programmes;