6 Amendments of Jan OLBRYCHT related to 2017/2052(INI)
Amendment 200 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32a. Stresses that revising ceilings should remain an option in the MFF Regulation in the event of unforeseen circumstances, when the financing needs would exhaust or exceed available margins and special instruments; calls for the MFF Regulation to provide for a simplified procedure for a targeted revision under an agreed threshold;
Amendment 201 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 b (new)
Paragraph 32 b (new)
32b. Advocates in favour of maintaining the possibility to front- or backload the financing of any EU programme, in order to allow for countercyclical action that corresponds to the rhythm of the actual implementation as well as to provide a meaningful response to major crises; calls, moreover, for the legislative flexibility -currently enshrined in Point 17 of the Interinstitutional Agreement (IIA)- that allows for an adjustment in the overall envelope of programmes adopted by the ordinary legislative procedure of up to +/- 10 %, to be further increased to +/-15 %;
Amendment 202 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 c (new)
Paragraph 32 c (new)
32c. Points to the flexibility that can be achieved through transfers within the same MFF heading, with the aim of placing the financial resources exactly where they are needed and ensuring a better implementation of the EU budget; considers that a lower number of headings contributes to enhanced flexibility in the MFF; requests, however, the Commission to proactively inform and consult the budgetary authority when adopting significant autonomous transfers;
Amendment 225 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Considers that the Contingency Margin should be maintained as an instrument of last resort; stresses that this is a special instrument that can also be mobilised for payment appropriations only, and that its mobilisation was instrumental in responding to the 2014 payment crisis; calls, therefore, for an upward adjustment of its maximum annual allocation to 0.05 % of EU GNI; considers, however, that no compulsory offsetting for it being mobilised should apply;
Amendment 228 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41 a (new)
Paragraph 41 a (new)
41a. Notes that the current IIA foresees a special majority in Parliament for the mobilisation of three MFF special instruments; considers this provision to be obsolete, reflecting the special majorities needed for the adoption of the EU budget before the Lisbon Treaty; calls for a homogeneous approach as regards the voting requirements for the mobilisation of these instruments, which should be the same as for the adoption of the EU budget;
Amendment 683 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 101 a (new)
Paragraph 101 a (new)
101a. Considers that the unanimity requirement for the adoption of the MFF Regulation represents a true impediment in the process; calls, in that regard, on the European Council to activate the passerelle in Article 312(2)TFEU so as to allow for the adoption of the MFF Regulation by qualified majority; recalls, moreover, that the general passerelle clause of Article48(7) TEU can also be deployed, in order to apply the ordinary legislative procedure; stresses that a shift towards qualified majority voting for the adoption of the MFF Regulation would be in line with the decision-making process for the adoption of virtually all EU multiannual programmes, as well as for the annual procedure for adopting the EU budget;