João FERREIRA, Inês Cristina ZUBER, Jacky HÉNIN, Willy MEYER, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD, Patrick LE HYARIC, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Sabine LÖSING, Paul MURPHY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Consen~~Rejects to the draft Council regulation laying down the Mmultiannual Ffinancial Fframework for the years 2014-2020;

2013/09/19
Committee: BUDG

2010/2291(ACI)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 6 – point b

(b) the scope of the register, which covers all relevant actors but excludes, among others, social partners as actors in the social dialogue~~, as well as c~~. Churches, and political parties and local, regional and municipal authorities; are likewise exempted from the register. However, their representation offices or legal bodies, offices and networks created to represent them towards the European institutions, as well as their associations, are expected to register.

2011/04/01
Committee: AFCO

2010/2291(ACI)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 6 – point d

(d) the demand for relevant financial information;, while being of the opinion that all interest representatives, including consultancies and law firms when their purpose is to influence policy rather than case-law, must declare their clients' expenditure in the same way with reference to bandwidths of EUR 10,000.

2011/04/01
Committee: AFCO

2010/2291(ACI)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 6 – points d a, d b and d c (new)

(da) the establishment of a 'joint Register Secretariat' which must scrutinise and ensure the accuracy of the information in the register, while considering it important that sufficient resources (staff and money) be granted for that purpose; (db) the suggested sanctions in the case of non-compliance with the rules such as suspension or exclusion from the register or withdrawal of the access badges to the European Parliament , while believing that a decision to apply such sanctions must be published on the register's website; (dc) the requirement for interest representatives always to declare the entity or entities for which they work or which they represent in accordance with the code of conduct, while believing that , if applicable, interest representatives should reveal by whom their clients are funded;

2011/04/01
Committee: AFCO

2010/2291(ACI)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Proposal for a decision
Paragraphs 7 a and 7 b (new)

7a. Calls on the Bureau of the Parliament to establish a triviality limit for the requirement on Members to register gifts, services and the like rendered to them; 7b. Further believes that interest representatives should be obliged to disclose the same information on lobbying expenditure spent on Members as Members are obliged to disclose in their financial declarations, applying the same triviality limit;

2011/04/01
Committee: AFCO

2010/2291(ACI)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 7 c (new)

7c. Recalls the importance of a thorough review of the common register no later than two years following its initial entry into force; considers that that review should be used to move towards mandatory registration and improve the quality of data in the register (e.g. financial information);

2011/04/01
Committee: AFCO

2010/2144(DEC)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 – indent 2 a (new)

- The questions the Parliament wants written answers to are: 1. With regard to the discharge procedure: does the Council agree to replace the informal practices of the so- called 'gentlemen's agreement' by formal and official bilateral meetings between the Council and Parliament's competent committee? 2. With regard to previous Council discharge debates in Parliament's competent committee, the Council did not attend these meetings regularly; however, it is considered of utmost importance that the Council attends in order to reply to committee members' questions referring to the Council discharge. Does the Council agree to attend future debates in Parliament's competent committee on the Council discharge debates? 3 . What is the understanding of the Council of "sufficient degree of financial and administrative autonomy across the full spectrum of the budgetary cycle" in order to reach a possible future agreement with the Parliament? 4. What timetable does the Council envisage considering the difficulties related to the deadlines of the discharge procedure? 5. Why does the Council change the presentation/the format of the internal audit every year? Why is the internal audit so short, generic and unclear every year? Will the Council for the 2010 discharge onwards please present the internal audit in (an) other language(s) than French? 6. Has an external audit been carried out? If so, may Parliament's competent committee see it? If an external audit does not exist, why has the Council chosen not to make one? 7. Until now, the activity of the Council implied co-financing with the Commission, which has experienced an increase after the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon. What audit and control systems have been put in place to ensure full transparency? Given that the Treaty of Lisbon increased the co-financing with the Commission, what is the Council understanding of "respond to the appropriate enquiries"? 8. The Court of Auditors in its Annual Report 2009 found that, in two out of six procurement procedures audited, the Council did not respect the rules of the Financial Regulation for the publication of the outcome of the procedure. Has the Council scrutinised more samples of similar procurements? Has the internal procedure been streamlined in order to avoid similar cases in the future? 9. Staff of European Union Special Representatives (EUSR): Please indicate the staff (all staff, establishment plan and others) - number of posts, grade - for the EUSR in the Council for 2009. In which way and when will the EUSR-staff posts be allocated between the Council and the European External Action Service (EEAS)? What was the budget for travelling for each individual EUSR? How many EUSR staff were transferred on 1 January 2011 to the EEAS? How many will remain with the Council and why? 10. Invites the Council to provide a written statement on the Council's mission expenses as carried out by the special representatives. 11. The Council highlights budgetary questions concerning the consequences of the Treaty of Lisbon in point 2.2 in the financial activity report – 11327/10, FIN 278. Has the Council solved the problems concerning Mr. Solana's expenditures? What part of the expenditures falls under the Council budget and what part falls under the Commission budget? 12. What were the operational expenditures, administrative expenditures, staff, buildings, etc envisaged by the Council for 2009 in order to set up the High Representative/Vice President of the Commission (HR/VP)? 13. The HR/VP came into office on 1 December 2009. How was the cost distributed between the Council and the Commission (for staff, travel, etc.)?How did the Council prepare the budget for the HR/VP for 2010? Which budget lines and sums were reserved for her activities? 14. How will office space released in the process of staff transfer to the EEAS influence Council's plans on buildings? Have arrangements been made for the subsequent use of such office space? What is the anticipated cost for removal? When were calls for tenders for the removals (if any) published? 15. What was the administrative and operational expenditure related to the Common Foreign and Security Policy/Common Security and Defence Policy (CFSP/CSDP) tasks, which were at least part-financed from the Union budget in 2009? What was the total amount of Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) expenditure in 2009? Could the Council identify at least the main missions and their cost 2009? 16. What was the cost of meetings for Council working groups on CFSP/CSDP in Brussels and elsewhere and where did these meetings take place? 17. What was the administrative expenditure relating to the implementation of the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP)/CSDP military operations? What share of the total amount of expenditures arising from military operation has been charged to the Union budget? 18. What was the administrative expenditure implemented for the operation of the "ATHENAE" mechanism, how many posts were needed for that mechanism, will any of the posts in question be transferred to the EEAS? To whom will the postholders report? 19. There is a low occupation rate of posts in the Council's establishment plan (91 % in 2009, 90 % in 2008). Does this consistently low rate cause any repercussions on the functioning of the Council's General Secretariat (CGS)? Can CGS perform all its functions with the current occupation rate? Are lower occupation rates specific to any particular services? What are the reasons of the persistent discrepancy? 20. What is the total number of posts assigned to the task of 'policy coordination' and administrative support (as defined in the Commission's annual staff screening reports)? What is its percentage in relation to the overall number of posts? 21. To achieve the administrative objectives in 2009 the Council added teleworking to its working procedures. With what measurements does the Council prove the efficiency of this working procedure? 22. The Council increased its posts by 15 (8 AD and 7 AST) to cover the staffing requirements of the Irish language unit. How many staff are occupied by the other languages (staff per language)? Are there already staff employed for and from the applicant countries? If the answer is in the affirmative - how many posts are concerned (separated per country and language)? 23. The Reflection Group was established on 14 December 2007, and its members appointed on 15-16 October 2008. What were the reasons why the necessary financing could not have been envisaged and included in Budget 2009? Is a transfer in Budget 2009 from the contingency reserve to a budget position financing a structure conceived in 2007 strictly budget neutral? 24. The Council earmarked EUR 1°060°000 for the “Reflection Group”. How many posts can be allocated to this group? May the Parliament receive the report of the “Reflection Group” in order to understand why such a report costs EUR 1° 060°000 (cf. the financial activity report – 11327/10, FIN 278 - point 2.2)? 25. The expenditures concerning travel delegations still seem to be problematic, (cf. Council note 15 June 2010, SGS10 8254, II bullet, page 4). Why do these expenditures appear in so many different budget lines? 26. Why does the internal audit still find it necessary to add “les frais de voyage des délégués et les frais d’interprétation” (delegates travelling expenses and interpretation expenses) - after strong criticism in the last two resolutions from the Parliament on the Council discharge? 27. The Council again has used underspending on interpretation to provide extra financing for delegations' travel expenses. As a result, actual 2009 commitments for travel expenses amounted to considerably less than the initial budget, and less than a half of the amount available after the transfer (EUR 36.1 million initial and EUR 48.1 million available after transfer against EUR 22.7 million committed).What were the reasons for this EUR 12 million transfer (cf. the financial activity re-port – 11327/10, FIN 278 -point 3.3.2-VI bullet)? Why is the transfer from interpretation to delegates travelling estimated at EUR 12 million by the Council at page 12 and at EUR 10°558°362 at page 13? What has the remaining amount transferred from interpretation been spent on (the total amount transferred from interpretation is EUR 17°798°362)? 28. In 2009 the Council, as it did in 2008, reallocated a considerable amount of its budget to buildings, in particular, more than doubling the initial allocations to the acquisition of the Residence Palace (reallocated EUR 17.8 million in addition to EUR 15 million earmarked in Budget 2009). What are the reasons for this? Can CGS provide concrete figures of the savings achieved as a result of this? What does the Residence Palace Building cost? Does the Council think the envisaged amount will be reached or could the cost be higher than estimated? What steps are foreseen to finance the building? 29. Implementation of the Council budget - appropriations carried over: Could the Council present the estimated amount and subject of the invoices which were not received by June 2010 for the year 2009 and therefore carried over? 30. The carryover to 2010 of the appropriations of assigned revenues accrued in 2009 amounted to EUR 31.8 million. This is about 70 % of the assigned revenue for 2009. What are the reasons for this high carryover ratio? What will happen/has happened to this revenue in 2010? 31. What does “technical provision of EUR 25 million for the launch of the European Council 2010” mean? (cf. the financial activity report – 11327/10, FIN 278 - point 3.1, IV bullet) 32. What is the level of confidentiality of the Council budget specified by the different budget lines? 33. Will the Council give the Parliament the Members States' declaration for 2007 (cf. the financial activity report – 11327/10, FIN 278 - point 3.2.2, II bullet)? 34. Can the Council point out the specific measures taken to improve the quality of the Council's financial management, in particular as regards the points raised in paragraph 5 of Parliament's resolution1 of 25 November 2009 accompanying its decision on discharge to the Council for the financial year 2007?

2011/02/21
Committee: CONT

2010/2143(DEC)

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Jens GEIER, Bart STAES, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD, Ryszard CZARNECKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46

46. Notes that Article 12(9) of the Parliament's Internal Rules for the implementation of the budget, adopted on 27 April 2005, provide that the Internal Auditor's area of competence does not include the appropriations from Parliament's budget managed by political groups; further notes that the specific rules on the use of those appropriations require each political group to establish its own internal financial rules and to implement an internal control system ~~but no mention is made of the internal audit function~~;

2011/02/22
Committee: CONT

2010/2143(DEC)

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Jens GEIER, Bart STAES, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD, Ryszard CZARNECKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47

47. Observes that only the rules of one out of seven political groups provide for the appointment of an internal auditor; agrees with the Court of Auditors that the functional independence of groups does not justify the non-application of regulatory provisions on the inStresses that all political groups have to have a yearly external audit and have to present an external audit ~~function~~certificate;

2011/02/22
Committee: CONT

2010/2143(DEC)

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Jens GEIER, Bart STAES, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD, Ryszard CZARNECKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48

48. Stresses that it is the responsibility of the political groups to put in place their internal ~~audit~~control system and that this should not be the responsibility of Parliament's Internal Auditor and calls on the Bureau to ~~integrate, as a matter of priority, this obligation in the rules following after consulting the political groups~~consult the political groups on how further audit provisions can be developed;

2011/02/22
Committee: CONT

2010/2143(DEC)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 67

67. Deplores the fact that EuroparlTV cannot be considered to be a success story in view of its very low number of direct users (excluding viewers through partnership agreements with regional TVs) in spite of the considerable annual appropriations that it receives, amounting to some EUR 9 000 000; requests an in- depth analysis of how to reach a broader audience, including a critical examination of the content, in order to transform EuroparlTV into a medium that will reach out to and inform the public objectively of politics in Parliament in a cost-efficient and attractive way;

2011/02/22
Committee: CONT

2010/2143(DEC)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68

68. Observes that, in the last few years, Parliament has greatly increased the number of and the budget for its prizes; ~~expresses doubts as to wheth~~does not consider those prizes ~~represent at their best~~to be part of Parliament's core competences and the tasks which stem from its legislative, budgetary and budgetary control prerogatives; calls on its Bureau to refrain from initiating the funding of new prizes;

2011/02/22
Committee: CONT

2010/2143(DEC)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 70

70. Notes with concern the overall decline in turnout in the 2009 European Elections to 43,2%, in spite if the considerable efforts made to reinforce Parliament's institutional election campaign which cost some EUR 5 676 000; deplores the fact that Parliament's election campaign was rendered totally partial by its glorification of the current policy of the Union; is of the opinion that such a campaign should be absolutely neutral;

2011/02/22
Committee: CONT

2010/2143(DEC)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 71

71. Notes that the total cost of setting-up the European Parliament Congressional Liaison Office in Washington in 2009 and 2010 is estimated to be some USD 400 000 annually as a result of an administrative arrangement with the Commission; notes that setting up the Office has not entailed the creation of any new posts, the postings being the result of redeployments, long- term missions and a system of one-year missions; is concerned about the possible future cost and requests that its competent committees be informed regularly and duly about any future plan having significant financial implication concerning this Office;

2011/02/22
Committee: CONT

2010/2143(DEC)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 78

78. Is of the opinion that facilities within Parliament's buildings which are not required in connection with the Institution's activities must be economically self- supporting and should not be financed with subsidies from Parliament's budget; any exceptions for imputed costs must be shown separately; is concerned about the worsening working conditions and of the bad system of remuneration of the employees in these facilities; considers it important that the situation of the employees is prioritised in calls for tenders in this area;

2011/02/22
Committee: CONT

2010/2001(BUD)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Points out the importance of the budgetary allocation in chapter 02 03 of the Commission's dDraft bBudget, believing that a better functioning of the internal market, without in any way limiting the possibility for Member States to take the lead in setting compulsory standards in areas such as food safety, animal welfare, environmental protection and social rights, can be achieved by improvements in the fields of notification and certification; is furthermore of the opinion that the budgetary allocation in the fields of standardisation and approximation of legislation is justified, as these measures will facilitate the operation and competitiveness of enterprises, while providing European consumers with safer products and services;

2010/08/16
Committee: IMCO

2010/0821(NLE)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Citation -1 (new)

– having regard to Article 48(2) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU),

2011/03/03
Committee: AFCO

2010/0821(NLE)

Lothar BISKY, Jürgen KLUTE, Helmut SCHOLZ, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Draft decision
Article 1

The following paragraph shall be added to Article 136 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union: "3. The Member States whose currency is the euro may establish a stability mechanism to ~~be activated if indispensable to~~ safeguard the stability of the euro area as a whole~~. The granting of any required financial assistance under the mechanism will be made subject to strict conditionality~~ or of Member States whose currency is the euro.".

2011/02/04
Committee: ECON

2010/0821(NLE)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – introductory wording

9. States that, in order for the proposed draft European Council decision to be properly scrutinised, supplementary information is needed, notably concerning the envisaged design of the stability mechanism and the relations which it is intended to have with the Union institutions, with the proposed European Monetary Fund and with the International Monetary Fund; ~~accordingly, makes its support for the draft European Council decision dependent on fulfilment of the following conditions:~~

2011/03/03
Committee: AFCO

2010/0821(NLE)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – point a

(a) a redrafting of the European Council draft decision as proposed in the amendments annexed hereto1, it being understood that, by shifting the proposed provision from Article 136(3) to Article 136(1) TFEU, the stability mechanism, notwithstanding its initial intergovernmental character, would be placed in a perspective of possible future incorporation into the framework of the Union, e.g. in the form of a special kind of agency, making use of the institutional patterns of enhanced cooperation;deleted

2011/03/03
Committee: AFCO

2010/0821(NLE)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – word separating points a and b

ordeleted

2011/03/03
Committee: AFCO

2010/0821(NLE)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – point b – introductory wording

~~(b) a clear declaration by the European Council ensuring that:~~deleted

2011/03/03
Committee: AFCO

2010/0821(NLE)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – point b – indent 1

– the operational features of the permanent stability mechanism and the conditionality measures (a stringent programme of economic and fiscal adjustment) will be decided on the basis of a recommendation by the Commission, after consulting Parliament, and that the Commission will be responsible for ensuring full respect of these measures and for the precautionary use of the mechanism, regularly reporting back to Parliament;deleted

2011/03/03
Committee: AFCO

2010/0821(NLE)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – point b – indent 2

– the Commission will carry out all the necessary tasks in implementing and monitoring the permanent mechanism and in assessing the financial situation of the Member States, regularly reporting back to Parliament;deleted

2011/03/03
Committee: AFCO

2010/0821(NLE)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – point b – indent 3

– the financial assistance under the mechanism will be subject to rigorous analysis and to a programme of economic and financial recovery; those Member States whose currency is the euro will act, when deciding to grant financial assistance, on the basis of an evaluation provided by the Commission, the European Central Bank and, in so far as it may be involved, the International Monetary Fund; andeleted

2011/03/03
Committee: AFCO

2010/0821(NLE)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – point b – indent 4

~~– the secretariat of the permanent stability mechanism will be provided by the Commission;~~deleted

2011/03/03
Committee: AFCO

2010/0821(NLE)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Points out that the strict conditionality for granting financial assistance under the European Stability Mechanism gives Member States whose currency is the euro the power to take competences from the Member States of the Union in the field of economic, financial and social policy, which essentially means an extension of the competences conferred on the Union; consequently, does not agree that the simplified Treaty revision procedure should be used and calls, in accordance with Article 48(2) TEU, for the ordinary Treaty revision procedure to be used;

2011/03/03
Committee: AFCO

2010/0821(NLE)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9b. Insists on a broader debate concerning any Treaty change, involving all persons affected by future integration, through the convening of a convention, as a persuasive democratic option designed to address growing scepticism about the European Union within the 27 Member States;

2011/03/03
Committee: AFCO

2010/0821(NLE)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Underlines that any future Treaty changes must be adopted in accordance with the ordinary Treaty revision procedure;

2011/03/03
Committee: AFCO

2010/0821(NLE)

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13b. Calls on the Member States to allow referenda in all 27 Member States on proposals for Treaty change;

2011/03/03
Committee: AFCO

2010/0816(NLE)

Sabine LÖSING, Willy MEYER, Takis HADJIGEORGIOU, Nikolaos CHOUNTIS, Sabine WILS, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Proposal for a decision
Recital 5 a (new)

(5a) Binding agreements should be made with regard to access for Members of all political groups of European Parliament to classified documents and information in the area of CFSP and ESDP.

2010/07/01
Committee: AFET

2010/0816(NLE)

Sabine LÖSING, Willy MEYER, Nikolaos CHOUNTIS, Sabine WILS, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Proposal for a decision
Recital 6

(6) The High Representative, or her representative, should exercise vis-à-vis the European Defence Agency, the European Union Satellite Centre, the European Union Institute for Security Studies and the European Security and Defence College the responsibilities provided for in their respective founding acts. The EEAS should provide these entities with the support currently provided by the General Secretariat of the Council.deleted

2010/07/01
Committee: AFET

2010/0816(NLE)

Sabine LÖSING, Willy MEYER, Nikolaos CHOUNTIS, Sabine WILS, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Proposal for a decision
Recital 7

(7) Provisions should be adopted relating to the staff of the EEAS and their recruitment. For matters relating to its staff the EEAS should be treated as an institution within the meaning of the Staff Regulations. In accordance with Article 27(3) of the TEU, the EEAS will comprise officials from the General Secretariat of the Council and the Commission as well as personnel seconded from the diplomatic services of the Member States. The High Representative will be the Appointing Authority, in relation both to officials subject to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities ("Staff Regulations") and agents subject to the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants. The High Representative will also have authority over the Seconded National Experts ("SNEs") in post in the EEAS. ~~The number of officials and servants of the EEAS will be decided each year as part of the budgetary procedure and will be reflected in the establishment plan.~~

2010/07/01
Committee: AFET

2010/0816(NLE)

Sabine LÖSING, Willy MEYER, Takis HADJIGEORGIOU, Nikolaos CHOUNTIS, Sabine WILS, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Proposal for a decision
Recital 8 a (new)

(8a) The establishment of the EEAS and its implementation shall not lead to any additional costs, neither within the EU budget nor within the national budgets.

2010/07/01
Committee: AFET

2010/0816(NLE)

Sabine LÖSING, Willy MEYER, Takis HADJIGEORGIOU, Nikolaos CHOUNTIS, Sabine WILS, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Proposal for a decision
Article 1 – paragraph 2

2. .The EEAS, which has its headquarters in Brussels, shall be a functionally autonomous body of the European Union, separate from the Commission and the General Secretariat of the Council, with the legal capacity necessary to perform its tasks and attain its objectivesnot be a sui generis institution.

2010/07/01
Committee: AFET

2010/0816(NLE)

Sabine LÖSING, Willy MEYER, Takis HADJIGEORGIOU, Nikolaos CHOUNTIS, Sabine WILS, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Proposal for a decision
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. The parliamentary control concerning the EEAS has to be entirely ensured. Therefore the European Parliament's right of scrutiny must be guaranteed to its full extent. This has to be assured for the national parliaments as well, especially in terms of the CSFP and ESDP.

2010/07/01
Committee: AFET

2010/0816(NLE)

Sabine LÖSING, Willy MEYER, Nikolaos CHOUNTIS, Sabine WILS, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Proposal for a decision – amending act
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – indent 2

- a directorate general for administrative, staffing, budgetary, ~~security~~ and communication ~~and information system~~ matters under the direct authority of the Secretary-General;

2010/07/01
Committee: AFET

2010/0816(NLE)

Sabine LÖSING, Willy MEYER, Nikolaos CHOUNTIS, Sabine WILS, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Proposal for a decision – amending act
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – indent 3

- the crisis management and planning directorate, the civilian planning and conduct capability, the European Union Military Staff and the European Union Situation Centre, placed under the direct authority and responsibility of the High Representative in her capacity as High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy; the specificities of these structures, as well as the particularities of their functions, recruitment and the status of the staff shall be respected.deleted

2010/07/01
Committee: AFET

2010/0816(NLE)

Sabine LÖSING, Willy MEYER, Nikolaos CHOUNTIS, Sabine WILS, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Proposal for a decision – amending act
Article 5 – paragraph 10

10. The Union delegations shall have the capacity to, upon request by Member States, support the Member States in their diplomatic relations ~~and in their role of providing consular protection to Union citizens in third countries~~.

2010/07/01
Committee: AFET

2010/0816(NLE)

Sabine LÖSING, Willy MEYER, Nikolaos CHOUNTIS, Sabine WILS, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Proposal for a decision – amending act
Article 6 – paragraph 1 (b)

(b) ~~if necessary, and on a temporary basis, specialised seconded national experts (SNEs)~~The establishment and the implementation of the EEAS shall not include any additional posts.

2010/07/01
Committee: AFET

2010/0816(NLE)

Sabine LÖSING, Willy MEYER, Sabine WILS, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD, Nikolaos CHOUNTIS

Proposal for a decision
Article 7 – paragraph 3

3. As regards operational expenditure arising from the implementation of the CFSP budget, the Instrument for Stability, the Instrument for Cooperation with Industrialised Countries, the Communication and Public Diplomacy as well as the Election Observation Missions, the Commission shall be responsible for their financial management under the authority of the High Representative in her capacity as Vice-President of the Commission.1 1 The Commission will make a declaration to the effect that the High Representative will have the necessary authority in this area, in full respect of the Financial Regulation.deleted

2010/07/01
Committee: AFET

2010/0816(NLE)

Sabine LÖSING, Willy MEYER, Nikolaos CHOUNTIS, Sabine WILS, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Proposal for a decision
Article 8 – paragraph 1

1. In the framework of the management of EU external cooperation programmes, which remain under the responsibility of the Commission, the High Representative and the EEAS shall contribute to the programming and management cycle for the following geographic and thematicThe planning, programming, management and implementation of operational expenditure of all financing instruments, o~~n the basis of the policy objectives set out in the said instruments:~~f EU external action, namely - the Development Cooperation Instrument, - the European Development Fund, - the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights, - the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument, - the Instrument for Cooperation with Industrialised Countries, - the Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation. - the Instrument for humanitarian aid shall not be transferred to the EEAS. The European Parliament must have the full budgetary and parliamentary control over these instruments.

2010/07/01
Committee: AFET

2010/0816(NLE)

Sabine LÖSING, Willy MEYER, Nikolaos CHOUNTIS, Sabine WILS, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Proposal for a decision
Article 8 – paragraph 3

3. The EEAS shall in particular have responsibility for preparing the following Commission decisions on the strategic, multi-annual steps within the programming cycle: (i) country allocations to determine the global financial envelope for each region (subject to the indicative breakdown of the financial perspectives). Within each region, a proportion of funding will be reserved for regional programmes; (ii) country and regional strategic papers (CSPs/RSPs); (iii) national and regional indicative programmes (NIPs/RIPs).deleted

2010/07/01
Committee: AFET

2010/0816(NLE)

Sabine LÖSING, Willy MEYER, Nikolaos CHOUNTIS, Sabine WILS, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Proposal for a decision
Article 8 – paragraph 4

4. With regard to the European Development Fund and the Development Cooperation Instrument, any proposals, including those for changes in the basic regulations and the programming documents in paragraph 3 above, shall be prepared by the relevant services in the EEAS and in the Commission under the direct supervision and guidance of the Commissioner responsible for Development Policy and then jointly submitted with the High Representative for decision by the Commission.deleted

2010/07/01
Committee: AFET

2010/0816(NLE)

Sabine LÖSING, Willy MEYER, Nikolaos CHOUNTIS, Sabine WILS, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Proposal for a decision
Article 8 – paragraph 5

5. With regard to European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument, any proposals, including those for changes in the basic regulations and the programming documents in paragraph 3 above, shall be prepared by the relevant services in the EEAS and in the Commission under the direct supervision and guidance of the Commissioner responsible for Neighbourhood Policy and then jointly submitted with the High Representative for decision by the Commission.deleted

2010/07/01
Committee: AFET

2010/0816(NLE)

Sabine LÖSING, Willy MEYER, Nikolaos CHOUNTIS, Sabine WILS, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Proposal for a decision
Annex – paragraph 1 (new)

1. General Secretariat of the Council 1.The military structures of the EU, located in the General Secretariat of the Council, as well as the civilian-military structures such as the European Union Military Staff, the European Defence Agency (EDA), the Crisis Management Planning Directorate (CMPD) and the European Union Satellite Centre (EUSC), shall neither be part of the EEAS nor institutionally connected to it. Furthermore the EU intelligence structures in particular the EU Situation Centre (SitCen) shall not be part of the EEAS. The European Parliament calls on the Council to stop the development of and abolish all military and civil-military structures under its competence, as well as stop the financing of military and civil- military activities.

2010/07/01
Committee: AFET

2009/2134(INI)

Ashley FOX, Morten MESSERSCHMIDT, Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD

Motion for a resolution
Recital V

V. Parliament has previously resolved to study the possibility of electing some MEPs on pan-European lists, considering that this would impart a genuine European dimension to the campaign, particularly by entrusting a central role to European political parties1,deleted

2011/11/10
Committee: AFCO

2009/2134(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Is shocked at the conclusions in the Court of Auditors’ Special Report No 16/2009 on the European Commission’s management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey, in which the Court of Auditors criticises the fact that the Commission did not ensure that there was an effective system for assessing individual projects in the period 2002-2008 and that it is therefore not easy to assess how the funds were managed, including whether value for money was obtained;

2010/03/03
Committee: CONT

Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD, Eva-Britt SVENSSON, Kartika Tamara LIOTARD, Erik MEIJER, Věra FLASAROVÁ

Proposal for a decision
Annex – Action 1 – Section B – paragraph 2 – point j

(j) shall res~~tablish a joint tuition fee regardless of the actual place of study of the students within the masters programme~~pect the right of the Member States to decide the model of financing in education;

2008/05/29
Committee: CULT

257 Amendments of Søren Bo SØNDERGAARD