8 Amendments of Rolandas PAKSAS related to 2011/2177(INI)
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines that the European defence industry is characterised by varying national policies, which could further aggravate the adverse effects on the industry; stresses therefore that the competitiveness and resilience of the defence industry need to be increased to minimise the adverse effects; calls on the EU institutions and Member States to radically review, and improve the coordination of, the EU’s defence strategies and defence-related instruments, to improve cooperation between the relevant stakeholders and to ensure all participants in the European Union’s defence market enjoy equal rights;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes with grave concern the unprecedented cuts in the defence budgets of the majority of EU Member States in the wake of the financial crisis and the potential negative impact of these measures on their military capabilities; underlines that defence constitutes a public good that affects the security of all European citizens and that all Member States need to contribute in a spirit of burden-sharing; notes that lack of investment in the defence sector could, in the future, reduce the EU’s influence in world;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that the absence of a common defence industrial policy has led to a deeper fragmentation of the defence market in terms of demand, regulations, standards and supply; recognises that a common defence industrial policy makes sense economically, but also threatens to undermine the sovereignty of the individual state; believes therefore that European defence industrial policy should promote multidimensional cooperation for the benefit of the EU, outlining the main industrial objectives, mapping the comparative advantages and strategic industrial sectors and emphasising the role of the EDA and NATO bodies in supporting cooperation among Member States; notes that competition between cross-border and Transatlantic industrial consortia can facilitate access to new technologies, encourages the development of innovative products and provides incentives to seek efficiency gains that enable costs and cycle times to be reduced;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Commission to take measures to strengthen Europe’s technological and industrial base and promote the cross-border consolidation of the defence industry – including Transatlantic connections – and thereby prevent the European defence industry from further shrinking and declining in importance, as well as reducing the financial burden imposed by developing and producing new systems, and helping to develop defence-related employment;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the directives on procurement and transfers, which aim to increase competition and facilitate the circulation of defence-related products; encourages, based on pooling and sharing initiatives, greater consolidation of demand through joint R&T projects or through bundling demand for shared capabilities taking into account the concerns of the defence industry; notes that on the supply side, less competitive companies that cannot implement an export-led growth strategy should pursue portfolio diversification, although some degree of supply consolidation is unavoidable; notes that the fragmentation of the market is detrimental not only to big arms companies and countries with huge defence budgets, but also to countries with small defence industries; .
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Third, with respect to the ‘pooling of procurement’, such as in the A400M programme, highlights the potential benefits – to security, EU Member States’ sovereignty and EU autonomy – of joint procurement in terms of economies of scale, building a viable industrial base, interoperability, and subsequent possibilities of pooling and sharing in in- service support, maintenance and training; deplores the fact that these benefits are often lost due to differences in requirements and work-share agreements; in order to realise fully the potential savings, stresses the importance of maintaining a common configuration of jointly procured equipment through its entire life cycle in order to facilitate joint in-service support; invites the Member States also to consider the pooling of outsourced services;
Amendment 171 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Recalls that, in order to create an open and competitive market for purchases in the sphere of European defence and security and to increase the competitiveness of the European defence industry, as well as to make sure that the interests of the taxpayer are adequately safeguarded and that suppliers from all Member States have equal access to the market, Member States urgently need to improve the transparency and openness of their defence markets; recalls that the deadline for the transposition of Directive 2009/81/EC on defence and sensitive security procurement expired on 21 August 2011; points out that by transposing the directive’s provisions properly into national law and implementing them, transparency and openness in military and security procurement procedures as well as more effective use of Member States’ budgets will be ensured, small and medium-sized companies’ participation in public procurement for defence and security will be facilitated, and innovation, with a view to strengthening the defence industry, will be fostered; therefore, calls on the Commission to report in due time on the transposition measures taken by the Member States, and to take all necessary action to ensure correct implementation;
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Stresses that the directive is tailor-made to the specificities of defence and security procurement contracts, and that, consequently, any exemption of contracts from EU law on the basis of Article 346 TFEU can be deemed legal only in exceptional and duly substantiated cases in order to safeguard essential national security interests; calls on the Commission to ensure that the directive, as well as the derogation under Article 346 TFEU, are correctly applied;