BETA

9 Amendments of Alexandru NAZARE related to 2008/2054(INI)

Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Criticises the fact that, as regards the Union’s own resources, the Member States have failed to take the opportunity to establish a system of genuine own resources which is fairer, more transparent, more readily understandable to the public and subject to a more democratic decision-making procedure;Deleted
2009/02/02
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Criticises, in particular, the fact that no progress has been made in involving Parliament in the process of determining the limits to and the nature of the own resources available to the Union; points out that decision-making on revenue and decision-making on expenditure remain separate;deleted
2009/02/02
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Council to employ that arrangement wherever possible in order to make the decision-making procedure more flexible and to ensure that the decision on own resources reflects the truly essential aspects of the Lisbon Treaty;deleted
2009/02/02
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the formal status granted in the Lisbon Treaty to the MFF, which will becomes a legally binding act when the Treaty enters into force; points out that the MFF establishes expenditure programming for the Union and places a ceiling on Union spending over a given period, thereby helping to strengthen budgetary discipline;
2009/02/02
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Criticises, further, the fact that under the new procedure Parliament has only a right of approval and no genuine power of codecision; however, emphasises the fact that the Lisbon Treaty stipulates that the institutions must take any measure necessary, throughout the procedure, to ensure that is ultimately successful; calls on the Council, therefore, to demonstrate its willingness, from the start of the procedure, to develop a structured political dialogue with Parliament in order to take full account of the latter's priorities;deleted
2009/02/02
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Supports, therefore, the switch to a five-year MFF, but calls for a negotiating period of at least one yearsix months maximum so that each new Parliament and each new Commission can take fundamental financial policy decisions during their terms of office;
2009/02/02
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Takes the view, in that connection, that agreement will have to be reached as to which of the provisions which currently form part of the interinstitutional agreement should be switched to the MFF, which should be incorporated into the future Financial Regulation and which might justify the retention of an interinstitutional agreement - possibly incorporating new provisions - on budgetary cooperation; points out that this process of dividing up the provisions of the current interinstitutional agreement will have to take account of the criteria laid down in the Lisbon Treaty itself;deleted
2009/02/02
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
33. Points out that these priorities will also be of great value to Parliament both as guidelines for its reading of the draft budget and as a negotiating mandate for its delegation to the Conciliation Committee;deleted
2009/02/02
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
49. Regards it as vital that the institutions should reach a political agreement on these matters before the end of 2008 so that, once the Lisbon Treaty has entered into force, the requisite changes to the Financial Regulation can quickly be made using the new procedure;
2009/02/02
Committee: BUDG