10 Amendments of Morten MESSERSCHMIDT related to 2014/2040(BUD)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. StressBelieves that the low turn-out at recent European elections shows the need to continue during allcannot be attributed solely to a lack of awareness of the elegislature, and not only wction or the activities of then European elections are approaching, to invest in campaigns to inform citizens on the impact of the Union on their daily liveUnion; considers crucial to have an assessment of the recent EP institutional communication campaign; furthermore, believes that serious reflection is needed as to whether the deeper centralisation of power in Brussels away from the citizens and of the prole of the EP; considers crucial to have an assessmentgrammes contained in the 2015 Budget directed towards this aim are a true reflection of the precent EP institutional communication campaigferences indicated by European citizens in the 2014 European Parliament election;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Takes the view that communications projects can struggle to demonstrate effectiveness when evaluated, primarily due to a lack of agreed or appropriate metrics upon which their performance can be judged; believes that for all spending directed towards improving awareness and communicating European issues to the public it is necessary that such metrics are established at an early stage; in this regard, observes that figures such as raw numbers of visitors to websites are often used, which without comparative figures from similar organisations are largely meaningless and only speak to one aspect of communications (availability) and not for example quality of content or ease of use.
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Believes in the importance of instruments of participatory democracy, as defined in the Lisbon Treaty, for citizens; regrets, in this context, the difficulties related to the implementation of the European Citizens' Initiative and emphasises the need for providing adequate funding not only for the initiatives themselves, but also for their communication, in order to improve the popularvisibility and the trustworthiness of the ECI; underlines that any such funding is independent of the subject matter of the ECI and all qualifying ECIs irrespective of their content are treated equally;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. StresRecognises the need for adequate funding of throle various instruments of e-democracy with a view to intensifyinghave to open participatory democracy processes through the use of information and communication technology; calls upon the Commission to identify more clearly in the following budgets how it intends to reflect the growing importance of e-democracy;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that, in view of the entry into force of the Regulation on European political parties and foundations, adequate and fair funding is needed to enable its effective implementation.; believes that a high-level evaluation of expenditure by political parties and foundations in connection with their activities to promote participation in European political life is warranted; expresses concern that significant public funding is given to such organisations, believes a private funding model of political parties is necessary to best stimulate democratic participation;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Requests that budget lines concerning the European Parliament's infrastructure, expenses and other items which correspond to the Parliament's places of work are broken down to reflect where expenses occur (Brussels, Luxembourg and Strasbourg).
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Believes that the highest levels of transparency and accountability to which this institution aspires demands that allowances paid to Members are not paid en bloc, but rather are reimbursements on production of receipts for actual expenditure and all claims paid are individually published; requests that the budgetary rules and the working practices of the Parliament are amended to that effect;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 c (new)
Paragraph 9 c (new)
9c. Expresses regret, once again, that the negative comments received from the Court of Auditors are still not acted upon, and the financial management of the Budget by the European institutions remains wholly unsatisfactory;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 d (new)
Paragraph 9 d (new)
9d. Regards the Lisbon Treaty as having invested powers in the European Parliament to reflect its standing as an elected chamber capable of reflecting the views of citizens from across the Union and from a variety of social and economic spheres; believes therefore that the role of the Committee of the Regions and the European Economic and Social Committee to have been subsumed within the role of the European Parliament and the Council, whose members are accountable to their domestic electorates already; instructs the Commission to establish the costs and savings to be accrued from their closure, and for the Council and Parliament to begin the legal process to phase out the CoR and EESC;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 e (new)
Paragraph 9 e (new)
9e. Notes the decrease in expenditure on relations between the European institutions and national parliaments, and expresses regret that more is not done to prioritise the involvement of national legislatures; considers that expenditure elsewhere could be revisited ahead of this budgetary element, particularly in the context of previous Parliamentary resolutions which have called for greater attention to be paid to how this relationship may function more effectively;