27 Amendments of Geoffrey VAN ORDEN related to 2011/2177(INI)
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Emphasises that the EU should not create structures or processes which duplicate similar activity already well-established in NATO;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Warns that uncoordinated budget cuts threaten to result in the complete loss of certain military capabilities in Europe, at a time when the intervention in Libya clearly demonstrated that European countries are already lacking a number of capabilities vital to mounting an operation of that kind and could hardly do so without US support, which emphasises the continuing importance of NATO;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that the existe continuing disproportionate reliance on the United States in defence matters, as symbolised by the factgiven that the US share of all defence spending in the North Atlantic Alliance has risen to 75 %, can no longer be acceptable either for Europe or for the USd the need therefore for European allies to increase their share of the defence burden;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Member States to accept that increased cooperation is the only way forward and that, in particular through (A) better coordination of defence planning, which includes harmonisation of military requirements, (B) pooling and sharing of certain functions and assetsrecognise the importance of increased cooperation among allies, in particular through (A) better coordination of defence planning through NATO, (CB) enhanced cooperation in research and technological development, (DC) facilitating industrial collaboration and consolidation,where this can be cost-effective; and (EC) optimisation of procurement and removing market barriers, the Member States can develop capabilities in a more cost- efficient way, and this without adverse effects for their sovereignty;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that the EU has at its disposal tools and mechanisms that can assist the Member States in achieving this, as set out below, including through the identification of areas where more funding could be provided at European level (F), provided this is found from savings elsewhere in the EU budget;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Reiterates its call on the Member StatEuropean allies to conduct more systematic security and defence reviews according to common criteria and a common timetable; suggests that this could be developed into a regular exercise which is linked to budgetary procedures, a sort of ‘European semester’ of security and defence reviews through NATO;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Stresses that the point of such coordinated reviews would be to end the culture of isolation NATO already provides a means for improving national defence planning and to establish a platform for structured discussion, allowing the Member States to consider the bigger picture before they take key strategic decisions on their defence capabilitiecoordination through its Defence Planning Process;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Suggests that the Member States askmost of the functions of the European Defence Agency (EDA) to examine how toconcerning improved coordination of defence planning in Europe; recalls that the Treaty tasks the Agency to evaluate the and observance of capability commitments and to promote the harmonisation of operational needs, and calls for better implementation of these tasks; recommends that, as a first step in the exercise, the Member States could submit their draft national security and defence reviews to the EDA for advice, to assess them in particular in the light of the Capability Development Plan, as well as of the plans of the other Member States and of relevant NATO initiatives; believes that, in the very short term, the EDA could also play an important role in defining capability priorities and identifying redundancies in Member States' capabilitiesre already carried out in NATO; the EDA should therefore be absorbed into the NATO structure;
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Takes the view that, as the next step, the Member States should go through a process of mutual consultations in order to harmoniseidentify their military requirements and examine all options for increasing cost- efficiency through EU-level, regional, bilateral or other arrangements;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Is firmly convinced that pooling and sharing of capabilities is not an option anmay be a useful way mfore, but a necessityward; supports the Member States in their efforts to identify the most promising projects, as part of the process initiated at the September 2010 ministerial meeting in Ghent and in line with the November 2010 German-Swedish initiative; recalls the mandate given to the EDA in May 2011 for submitting proposals in the autumn; and urges proper coordination of this within the NATO processes;
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. First, on ‘joint ownership’, calls on the Member States to explore the possibilities for certain equipment to be jointly acquired by consortia of participating countries or by the EU itselfNATO, taking inspiration from initiatives such as the Strategic Airlift Capability already implemented under NATO, the NATO AWACS programme or the EU's Galileo; stresses the potential of joint ownership for the most expensive equipment, such as for space capabilities, UAVs or strategic transport aircraft;, such as for space capabilities
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Recalls the important role of the EDA, as defined by the Treaty,Notes the role of the EDA in proposing multilateral projects, coordinating Member States' programmes and managing R&T cooperation programmes; highlights the EDA-run projects that are already operational, such as the Helicopter Training Programme and the deployable forensic laboratory to counter IEDs and its application in Afghanistan, and calls for more progress on other initiatives such as the European Air Transport Fleet (EATF); urges the Member States to use the potential the Agency offers in terms of administtake steps to integrativeng and legal support and to entrust it with the management of their cooperation initiativesy added value from the EDA into the well-established NATO system;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Recognises bilateral and regional initiatives such as the 2010 UK-French defence agreements and the Nordic Defence Cooperation as important efforts to rationalise the use of resources and fill short-term capability gaps; encourages further progress in promising cooperation projects in other regions, such as among the Visegrád Group countries; takes the view, however, that significant structural gaps remain which need to be addressed in a coordinated fashion at EU level, and that the EDA should be given a role in ensuring overall coherence; encourages further reflection on how the Treaty provisions on the Permanent Structured Cooperation could be used to provide an overall coordination framework, building also on the ‘European semester’ exercise as proposed under (A)U may have a role in this;
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Takes note of the ‘Smart Defence’ initiative within NATO and highlights the importance of continuous coordination and deconfavoiding any unnecessary duplication between the EU and NATO at all levels to avoid unnecessary duplicationthrough parallel EU structures;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Stresses, however, that no resources must be transferred from civilian research and that the new theme must be funded entirely from additional resources allocated to the Framework Programme; recommends that the theme be managed by the Commission and the EDA; notes that any EU-funded defence research activity should first of all follow the objective of the development of EU crisis management capabilities and focus on research with dual applications which are covered by compensating reductions elsewhere in the EU budget;
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Points out the provision of Article 185 TFEU allowing an EU contribution to existing research and development programmes undertaken by a group of Member States; takes the view that EU co- financing based on this article should be used to speed up the development of capabilities needed for CSDP missions and operationscomplement national spending;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Recalls the need to progress in the consolidation of the European defence technological and industrial base, as, in the face of increasing sophistication of technologies, growing international competition, and decreasognises that a very small number of European countries are involved ing defence budgets, in no EU Member State can the defence industry any longer be sustainable on a strictly national basis; deplores the fact that, while a certain level of concentration has been achieved in the European aerospace industries, the land and naval equipment sectors are still overwhelmingly fragmented along national lineR&D and that everything necessary should be done to improve their international competitiveness;
Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Believes that collaborative armaments programmes, such as those initiated by the EDA and for example those managed by the Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation (OCCAR), may represent a vital tool for reducing development costs, supporting industry consolidation,and fostering standardisation and interoperability, and boosting global competitiveness; highlights the EDA's role in facilitating the translation of capability needs into cooperative programmes and identifying opportunities to cooperate early in the life cycle; calls on the EDA to continue work on the Collaborative Database for matching national projects as cooperative opportunities and encourages the Member States to populate this database; calls on the EDA to present a Guide to Armaments Cooperation Best Practice, as provided for in its European Armaments Cooperation Strategyowever more research is required on the cost-effectiveness of such projects;
Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 40 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Notes that if the main aim of collaboration is to reduce the unit cost to each partner nation in designing, producing or supporting what are usually complex systems, the experience of the Eurofighter Typhoon Programme highlights that collaborative commercial and managerial arrangements are not necessarily either cost-effective or swift;
Amendment 168 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55
Paragraph 55
Amendment 200 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58
Paragraph 58
Amendment 208 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61
Paragraph 61