19 Amendments of Rolandas PAKSAS related to 2011/2107(INI)
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the Commission’s proposals on extending the use of innovative financial instruments to strengthen the leverage of the EU budget while fully respecting the rights of the budgetary and discharge authorities; asks the Commission to improve access for primary target groups such as SMEreduce administrative burdens and improve access to sources of funding for small and medium-sized enterprises ( SMEs), scientists, civil society organisations and other target groups; demands that any SME-specific bank should function under the umbrella of the EIB; expresses its reservations about so- called ‘soft loans’ blurring the distinction between grants and loans;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that agriculture will need to respond to specific challenges in the coming decades: catering for the food needs of a growing population, with more resource-efficient and environmentally sustainable practices in response to growing scarcities (water, energy, soil depletion, etc.), taking into account the need to mitigate, and adapt to, climate change; calls for the use of biotechnologies and genetic engineering to be restricted in agriculture;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Takes the view that specific budget allocations for calls for proposals within the new Framework Programme and actions deriving from it would help to combat many of the sector’s weaknesses and would also help build a stronger position for fisheries researchers. Stresses also that building a strong research base would help to further develop a sustainable fisheries and aquaculture sector; considers that more funds should be allocated to training in vocational training centres and establishments, and to introducing or improving the system of further training for current and future fisheries workers; stresses also that building a strong research base would help to further develop a sustainable fisheries and aquaculture sector; stresses that since the European Commission represents the position of the Member States within regional fisheries management organisations, the adoption of unilateral decisions without seeking the Member States’ opinions is unacceptable;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for more research to enhance the smart use of biological (animal and plant production and health and their inputs, biomass availability, forestry management, waste) and physical (land use, soil integrity, water availability, climate change) resources, and the development of economically and environmentally sustainable economic activities;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers that the regions should act as a testing ground for the work of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology and the ‘living labs’, and that local and regional authorities should consequently invest more in regional development and play an active part in implementing policy on science, technology and innovation;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes it will be crucial to EU competitiveness to increase the participation of enterprises in the next Framework Programme; is of the opinion that entrepreneurs, especially owners of micro- and small enterprises such as small- scale coastal fishing enterprises, might be encouraged to participate in European programmes by the establishment of a transparent and easily accessible system; suggests exploring the possibilities for creating poles, as pooled activity guarantees innovation, competitiveness and development in the sector; believes that fishermen’s organisations and Regional Advisory Councils should also be able to apply for small, practically oriented projects; considers it necessary to promote cooperation between fishing areas to share best practice and knowledge;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that framework investigation programmes are primarily focused on fundamental investigation, which requires research programmes provided with specific funds for fisheries and aquaculture research in order to sustain the sector and the environmental and sanitation conditions of the fisheries products introduced into the food chain; considers that more funds should be allocated to financing fisheries research.
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Reiterates its position that, with regard to the MFF post-2013, the financial resources dedicated to large-scale projects such as ITER and Galileo should be fixed for the whole programming period and ring-fenced so that any cost overrun must be financed with fresh money through employing budgetary flexibility, as opposed to the redeployment of funds at the expense of other programmes such as research and innovation; considers that the funding of major strategic EU projects should take account of technical constraints and of the timetable for such projects, so as to help ensure that they are relevant and feasible; proposes that every major EU project should set up a reserve fund to compensate for unforeseen expenditure, without compromising other existing programmes;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers it crucial that the investment in science should be coupled with investment in the skills of people., with a view to promoting modern farming, organic farming and the diversification of rural activities; Education, training and advisory services are essential components driving knowledge-based growth of rural businesses. It is therefore necessary to focus advisory and training services on the drive for innovation at every level (product innovation, process innovation and management innovation);
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Insists on using the Cohesion Funds to finance initiatives aimed at increasing female employment in technology and innovation and educating female researchers; recalls that the EU should not provide support for any research involving the destruction of human embryos or the use of parts of human embryos whose harvesting would result in their death;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Strongly supports – while still concentrating on three interdependent objectives, namely creating the world’s best scientific basis within the European Union, promoting global competitiveness and responding to major challenges such as climate change, the effective use of resources, security of energy supplies and food security, health and the ageing of the population – a further increase in the EU’s annual budgets for research and innovation, as these have been proven to deliver excellent European added value and to aid recovery from the economic crisis; emphasises that the Europe 2020 strategy for growth and jobs, adopted by the Council, clearly states the need for additional funds for research and innovation.
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that existing and prospective public policies should contribute to innovation. A bolder approach with emphasis on critical goals and a considerable simplification of administration should be adopted. Possible changes in the administrative and financial system should support multidisciplinary cross-policy and -fund financing of innovation; considers that steps should be taken to establish uniform and non- discriminatory economic and competition conditions with a view to ensuring that all farmers in EU Member States receive aid for agricultural research and innovation; .
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas there are still inequalities within the EU in terms of national levels of R&D funding capacities, industrial structures and higher education systems; whereas the increase in the cost of funding research means that more financial resources are required in order to achieve the same goal, which is that of developing new fields of research,
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls for enhanced priority funding to develop the knowledge triangle and ‘living labs’ concepts, given the importance of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology in implementing new concepts and in order to stimulate innovation at local and regional levels;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Draws attention to the importance of maintaining convergence policies, and asks the Commission to build stairways to excellence for those MS and regions that are economically weaker and socially more vulnerable and are underrepresented in the FP by developing appropriate instruments to intensify cooperation between MS with a strong participation and those with a weaker participation, and to substantially increase human capacity building and infrastructure in the latter;
Amendment 214 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls that the European Research Council (ERC) has proved to be successful and a strengthening element of the European Research Area (ERA); stresses the need to increase the proportion of the budgetresearch grants and of the budget which are dedicated to grants to young researchers, as well to strengthen Marie Curie actions and initiatives, thus reinforcing mobility, by fostering competition and career progression; calls for the implementation of the necessary measures to cope with the precarious conditions of scientific workers in the EU as a means to attract and retain researchers, bearing in mind that precarious working conditions (which are still more prevalent for women) constitute a bottleneck on the way to achieving excellence in Europe;
Amendment 235 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Recognises that particular attention should be devoted to SMEs’ involvement, in order to enable the exploitation of new ideas and opportunities in a flexible and effective way as they emerge, opening new avenues for innovation; also emphasises the fact that the volume of innovation activity shapes the innovation climate, which confirms the idea that innovative activities should be concentrated in small clusters; notes, moreover, that the success of innovation activities depends to a great extent on the skills and experience of management staff;
Amendment 297 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Favours the idea that innovation should meet consumers’ needs and the idea of moving towards a ‘science- based’ approach, and calls for a trust-based and risk-tolerant attitude towards participants at all stages of the funding system;
Amendment 315 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Calls for the Cooperation Programme to be kept at the heart of the FP, reinforcing collaborative transnational research and the effective dissemination of research findings;