Activities of Jean-Pierre AUDY related to 2011/2043(INI)
Plenary speeches (2)
Seventh EU programme for research, technological development and demonstration (debate)
Seventh EU programme for research, technological development and demonstration (debate)
Reports (1)
REPORT on the mid-term review of the Seventh Framework Programme of the European Union for research, technological development and demonstration activities PDF (252 KB) DOC (158 KB)
Amendments (58)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2
Citation 2
– having regard to the decision of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the 7th Framework Programme of the European Community (or European Union, since the Treaty of Lisbon) for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013)1 (FP7),
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 3
Citation 3
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 a (new)
Citation 5 a (new)
– having regard to the conclusions of the Interim Evaluation of the Seventh Framework Programme for Research Activities (FP7), including the risk- sharing finance facility, by the 3074th EU Council meeting on competitiveness (Internal Market, Industry, Research and Space) of 9 March 2011,
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 19 a (new)
Citation 19 a (new)
– having regard to Council Joint Action 2004/551/CFSP of 12 July 2004 on the establishment of the European Defence Agency, which in Article 5(3.4.1) confers on the Agency the task of ‘promoting, in liaison with the Community’s research activities where appropriate, research aimed at fulfilling future defence and security capability requirements and thereby strengthening Europe’s industrial and technological potential in this domain’,
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 19 b (new)
Citation 19 b (new)
– having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 15 September 2010 on the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions ‘Simplifying the implementation of the research framework programmes’,
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the Treaty of Lisbon makintroduces achievement of the European research area as a specific objectivemedium of European policy,
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the Innovation Union will be the strategic reference framework for research activities and funding programmes starting from 2011,
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas ‘An Innovation Union’ affirms the need to develop a European innovation policy,
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the EU and its Member States must give themselves the means to respond jointly to the major societal challenges facing the peoples of Europe, such as demographic ageing, health, food supply, sustainable development, the major environmental challenges etc.,
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas investment in RDI is the best possible long-term response to the current economic and financial crisis, enabling the EU to become a society with skills that are competitive at world level,
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas Europe is in competitiong with ‘Continent States’ (economic powers such as China, India, Brazil, Australia, United States of America, and Russia) but Europe is not a nation, rather a Union of States, and, and whereas our capacity to unite and coordinate our efforts, particularly in research, between the European Union and the Member States very largely determines our economic competitiveness, and hence the possibility of financing our social ambitions and meeting our environmental commitments,
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas only a relatively low level of public investment in RDI is the subject of European cooperation,
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas complexity of administrative management remains a major handicap for FP7, to the extent that its simplification is a major challenge for the future of the programme, and whereas many improvements that do not require a change of regulation can be made midway through the FP7 while respecting stability, general consistency and legal certainty, the basis for mutual trust between the parties involved;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the quality of the expert reports on the interim evaluation of FP7 and of the risk-sharing finance facility, covering the quality of activities, implementation and the results obtained, despite the general nature of the remit given to the expert groups; regrets, however, that the evaluation did not cover the overall picture made up of the actions of the Member States and those of the Union;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Fails to understand the delay on the part of the Commission, which published its communication on 9 February 2011 although it had an obligation to do so no later than 2010, and regrets the weakness of the Commission communication in view of current challenges, particularly the current economic crisis situation, the sums remaining to be committed under the FP7 etc.;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on the Commission to provide a more specific follow-up on the ten recommendations put forward in the experts’ reports;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Underlines the relative nature of the conclusions drawn by the interim evaluation, seeing that the majority of FP7 funds have not yet been allocated, projects that have been initiated are still under way and others funded under the FP7 will run beyond its term;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to tighten up their methods of communication on the framework programmes, thus facilitating access to the information required for the participation of the various parties involved;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Takes the view that the results achieved by FP7 do not demonstrate sufficient European added-value with regard to RDItend to show European added- value with regard to RDI; regrets, however, that the Commission has done little to inform the Member States, scientific communities and the European public in general about what has been achieved;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Deplores the lack of a method for evaluating how far projects funded by FP7 have advanced scientific knowledge;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the level of participation and excellence in project selection; regrets, however, that the success rate under this programme generally remains quite low and is a disincentive, particularly for SMEs, which play a particularly important role in capitalising on the developments in research and innovation within the framework programme;
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Considers that in order to increase the human resources dedicated to research and innovation in Europe, it is necessary to make professional careers in this field more attractive by eliminating administrative barriers and recognising merit and training time and work at any research centre; to this end, calls on the European Institutions to establish the criteria in order for universities or centres dedicated to research to implement a system which evaluates the researches' excellence and career;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Approves the strengthening of the ‘Cooperation’ chapter, which remains relevant given current scientific and technological challenges; stresses its role in developing RDI critical mass of a kind not achievable at national/regional level, thus demonstrating European added-value; recommends implementation of the ‘Future and Emerging Technologies’ scheme and extension of the use of ‘roadmaps’ to all thematic areas; asks for more flexibility in setting call themes and financial thresholds and ceilings, making a distinction between large and small projects, and stresses the importance of setting up the European Research Area, including its on-line version;
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Proposes that research be accelerated, in line with the Europe 2020 Strategy priorities, in the sectors identified in the ‘Cooperation’ chapter of FP7: health, medicine, food, biotechnology, ICT, nanosciences and nanotechnologies, materials, pollution, energy (particularly intelligent networks), environment (including climate change, woods and forests), ecotechnologies, CO2 capture, transport, socio-economic sciences and humanities, space and security; water research should also be a priority;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Welcomes, in the ‘Ideas’ chapter, promising results obtained by the European Research Council (ERC) and its role aimed at enhancing the visibility and attractiveness of European research bodies; stresses, however, that the ERC alone cannot provide for all the needs of upstream research; regrets the lack of participation by industry in the ERC; stresses the need to make the ERC an independent legal entity with decision- making power, directly responsible for its own scientific strategy and administrative management;
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Supports, within the framework of the ‘People’ chapter, the Marie Curie Actions, which are of great value to researchers in their career, and calls for its funding to be increased in view of its high success rate;
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Voices concerns regarding the heterogeneous nature of the objectives of the ‘Capacities’ chapter and the difficulties that result, notably with regard to international cooperation and; considers that actions in favour of SMEs and innovative SMEs meet a real need, and calls on the Commission to maintain these actions and the budget associated with them, while taking steps to improve their implementation; considers, however, that the ERA- NET and ERA-NET+ ‘Infrastructure’ projects and the initiatives based on Article 185 fulfil their role aimed at structuring the European Research Area (ERA);
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Considers that the ERA-Net scheme should be strengthened as a tool to support excellence and the development of criteria for quality indicators which constitutes the basis for the coordination between programmes or joint ventures; for this reason, believes that incentives should be given to programmes and joint projects which apply selection criteria based on the merit of the researchers and the quality of its scientific results;
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Acknowledges that ‘Joint Technological Initiatives’ (JTIs) assist the competitiveness of European industry; regrets, however, the legal and administrative obstacles (legal personality, intellectual property, financial rules) and also the high operating costs specific to start-up ofwhich risk deterring a large number of key players in research and SMEs; regrets the high operating costs specific to start-up of JTIs; calls on the Member States to honour their budgetary commitments with regard to nationally co-funded JTIs; asks to be more closely involved in political control of these instruments;
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Commission to carry out an analysis to improve the link between European and national actions when the calls for proposals are formulated and also when the projects are evaluated; asks that calls for proposals, including those of July 2011, be issued in consultation with the Member States, not duplicating or competing with national initiatives but complementing them; suggests that FP7 should complement the efforts of actors managing national programmes involved in joint programming in order to move the RDFPs away from project management thinking towards programme management thinking, but without neglecting the management of small projects; asks that the last three years of FP7 be devoted to helping structure the European Research Area;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Stresses that in order to support the balanced development of the Joint Programming, the European Institutions should be committed to accept excellence criteria for the selection of projects and to draw up proposals for the evaluation of the results tailored to the characteristics of each sector;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Calls for all the official documents on European research and innovation policies to be linked, in line with the global approach of the Europe 2020 Strategy;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Underlines the importance of the direct actions of the Joint Research Centre and their contribution to sustainable development, competitiveness and the security and safety of nuclear energy;
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 c (new)
Paragraph 13 c (new)
13c. Stresses that, based on Art. 185 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and in order to avoid duplicity on research and innovation and to achieve a greater diffusion of the results, it would be necessary to strengthen the coordination tasks of the Commission inside the joint programming;
Amendment 159 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Proposes that an ambitious European research plan for technology and defence be adopted between the Union and, the Member States and receive significant initial financing from FP7 and the European Defence Agency on the basis of Article 45(d) of the EU Treaty, with a view to enhancing the industrial and technological base of the defence sector while at the same time improving the efficiency of military public spending;
Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Notes the hesitant progress seen with regard to women’s participation in the FP7; welcomes the Commission’s proposed follow-up measures and calls on the Member States to take specific steps in this direction;
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Calls for the Commission and the Member States to take specific measures designed to increase the participation of young researchers in the framework programmes;
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Welcomes the results of FP7 in favour of SMEs, as regards both the 15% target set in the ‘Cooperation’ chapter and the ‘Eurostars’ programme; is of the opininon ethat better coordination between FP7 and the Structural Funds could facilitate the participation of under-represented Member Stateseless recommends launching more than one call per year for specific activities for SMEs, or launching a continuous call with several deadlines each year;
Amendment 184 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Stresses that one of the best qualities of the 7th Framework Programme is that there exists a sole management and coordination through the European Commission; therefore believes that it should only be possible to territorialise the structural funds, providing that the quality criteria established in the common programme are followed;
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Is of the opinion that better coordination between FP7 and the Structural Funds could facilitate the participation of under-represented Member States;
Amendment 195 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
Amendment 204 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Proposes that research and development policies be territorialised, to express the territorial dimension as well as possible, synergies between research and development policy and the Structural Funds should be developed further;
Amendment 211 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Welcomes the development of a stairway to excellence through dedicated actions in order to foster capacity building in research and innovation across Europe;
Amendment 222 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Takes the view that the level of financing of FP7 mu, which is adequate and credible, must at least be maintained; and recalls that investment in RDI is long-term investment and is key to achieving the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy;
Amendment 229 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Recommends that the current instruments be adjusted to fit the specific mechanisms of innovation, with its time constraints and requirements for placing on the market;
Amendment 230 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Stresses that financing of research infrastructures should be better coordinated between FP7, EIB instruments, the Structural Funds and national and regional policies; endorses the recommendation by the expert group on the potential to be drawn from synergies between FP7 funds and cohesion policy, and welcomes the constitution of the Synergies Expert Group (SEG);
Amendment 235 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Considers that financing of research infrastructures should include public or private funding, including the provision of laboratory equipment and instruments, as well as their maintenance;
Amendment 237 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Proposes that the concept demonstration phase be funded in future calls for projects under FP7 in the field of innovation ;
Amendment 238 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)
Paragraph 20 b (new)
20b. Considers that the beneficiaries of research infrastructure financing should clearly justify their role and their use of the equipment, laboratories and research or technical staff; to this end, believes that a monitoring and inspection system which verify compliance of the agreements should be created;
Amendment 241 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Calls on Member States taking part in joint programming initiatives to honour their financial commitments;
Amendment 248 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. INotes that the ‘innovation’ aspect has become stronger in future work programmes; is of the opinion that commercialisation should be included in the parameters of future calls for projects under FP7 in the field of innovationand be one of the evaluation criteria in the field of innovation; calls on the Commission to start funding demonstration and pilot projects in FP7’s last few years;
Amendment 255 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Acknowledges that European Technology Platforms, ICT and PPPs contribute towards greater industry participation; supports consolidation of this approach in future EU programmes, as recommended by ‘Innovation Union’; reiterates the need to adopt rules on participation (particularly with regard to intellectual property) and attractive funding rates, to encourage SMEs to take part in JTIs and PPPs;
Amendment 260 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Is of the opinion that the key players in the value chain should be considered in future calls for projects under FP7 in the field of innovation;
Amendment 269 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Stresses that boosting the importance of research and innovation in Europe requires making every effort in order to attract private companies, foundations or non-profit organizations that participate in projects and will ensure mobility of technical researches between the public and private sector;
Amendment 272 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 b (new)
Paragraph 24 b (new)
24b. Proposes that in order to achieve better coordination of research among Member States, the Commission and the Council should draft a comparative study in order to conduct an approach of procedures for the simplification; in this regards, believes that it is necessary that each Member State identifies internal rules or laws that hinder international cooperation and financial management of projects involving partners from different states;
Amendment 283 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Asks the Commission to give Parliament clear and detailed information on the functioning of JTIs, stating in each case their legal status, the people who make up the governing board, and activities undertaken;
Amendment 285 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Takes the view that the RSFF has acted as a decisive lever in both qualitative and quantitative terms in increasing investment in RDI at a moment of crisis when the banking sector was no longer in a position to play this role, its first years resulting in EUR 8 billion in loans, generating more than EUR 20 billion in investment;
Amendment 288 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Recommends that application of this innovative financial instrument be continued and intensified in FP8, since it contributes to improving access to finance and encouraging private investment and making more use of financial engineering to support innovation;