23 Amendments of Monika HOHLMEIER related to 2015/2353(INI)
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that, in light of the unprecedented migratory emergency, the current ceilings of the MFF 2014-2020 – in particular heading 3 – have proven to be too tighinsufficient; recalls that the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) is already virtually exhausted; recalls that the available MFF flexibility mechanisms have already been extensively used;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Notes that the higher need for ensuring internal security in the EU and fight against terrorism should be reflected in all budget projections. In this context the increased need for sufficient and permanent data exchange between Member States via European Agencies, such as Europol and Frontex, requires an adequate staff level for those Agencies. Furthermore considers it necessary to fund the development of smart (IT-) security tools with the MFF review in order to ensure an increased level of security while eliminating eventual burdens increased security measures could impose upon the freedom of movement;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Deems substantial additional financial resources at EU level to be necessary to address external border and coastal protection, humanitarian challenges, develop a new Common European Asylum System, foster integration and prevent discrimination, racism and xenophobia; an adequate staff level also has to be provided for the European Agencies dealing with the migratory pressure, especially EASO and FRONTEX;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls for the AMIF to be revised and allocated more resources; stresses that the budget and staff of EUROPOL, FRONTEX and the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) must be markedlyfurther increased to enable it to provide Member States with real support; believes that funds dedicated to search and rescue are erroneously included in the Internal Security Fund (ISF); calls for the establishment of a dedicatedthe EU Agencies and Member States should be provided with adequate resources for search and rescue fundoperations;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that the Commission recently signed a Common Understanding with Member States on a three-billion-euro Facility for Refugees in Turkey; expresses concern about the establishment of financial instruments outside the EU budget as they threaten its unicity; stresses that these funds should provide direct support to refugees and host communities; calls on the Commission to establish a mechanism toclosely monitor the use of these funds and to inform the European Parliament regularly;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Expects the migratory emergency to continue due to sustained political instability and conflict in many regions and the lack of legal means of access to the EU; considers that a genuine MFF revision is essential by the end of 2016 at the latest; requests an updated estimation of budgetary needs to respond to the challenges expected until the end of the MFF; in the course of the MFF review in 2017 calls for additional flexibility in the MFF as well as adequate upwards revision of Headings 3 and 4.
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that the above-mentioned budgetary decisions have completely exhausted the small margin available under this heading and have led to a de facto revision of the ceilings of Heading 3; furthermore draws attention to the new Commission proposals which are expected to have an impact on the EU budget, notably the proposal for the establishment of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, with an overall budget of EUR 1 212 million for the remainder of the MFF perioda recast of the 'Dublin III' Regulation, with a total budgetary impact of EUR 1 829 million for the remainder of the MFF period, the proposal for the establishment of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, with an overall budget of EUR 1 212 million for the remainder of the MFF period, the proposal for an amending 'EASO' Regulation, with a budgetary implication amounting to EUR 364 million, the proposal for a recast of the 'Eurodac' Regulation, with an estimated cost of EUR 30 million, and the new emergency support mechanism, with an estimated impact of minimum EUR 700 million in the period 2016 to 2018; stresses that the situation is so critical that the additional appropriations authorised for the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) in November 2015 had to be reduced in March 2016 so as to finance even more pressing needs, such as the need to provide humanitarian aid in the EU, addressed by the above- mentioned new emergency support mechanism;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Believes that the solution of the European migration and refugee crisis requires a European approach based on solidarity and fair burden-sharing; stresses, in this context, that the EU budget should support member states to alleviate the burden of the costs related to the reception of the refugee as this will relieve the pressure on the budgets of those member states facing a particularly high influx of refugees; emphasizes that this approach will create synergies, and is furthermore efficient and cost effective for all Member States;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Concludes that the activities planned by the Commission to cope with the migrant and refugee crisis could not have been foreseen at the time of the conclusion of the MFF 2014-2020; highlights the fact that owing to the lack of sufficient resources the EU has had to set up ad hoc, ‘satellite’ instruments such as EU trust funds and the Refugee Facility for Turkey; stresses, however, that Member States have not yet delivered on their without an overall budgetary strategy to address the migrant and refugee crisis, which has led to the European Parliament being side-lined as regards the decision on the use of EU budget funds; deplores that Member States have as yet failed by far to deliver the expected contribution pledges to the trust funds, i.e. amounting to the same level as the contributions from the EU, thus undermining the success of those funds;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Recalls that, in order to secure this additional funding, the financial allocation for two significant EU programmes, Horizon 2020 and the Connecting European Facility (CEF), has had to bewere finally reduced by EUR 2.2 billion and EUR 2.8 billion respectively, while the remaining EUR 3 billion are covered by unallocated MFF margins; stresses Parliament’s commitment during the EFSI negotiations to reduce as much as possible the impact on these two programmes, whose financial envelopes were decided only in 2013 and which are key for supporting research, innovation and competitiveness and thus for future growth and the long-term prosperity of the Union;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Underlines that the EU budget makes a significant contribution to the fight against unemployment, especially through the European Social Fund and the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI); stresses that despite the initial delays in the designation of national authorities and the implementation of the YEI, the current figures indicate full absorption capacity; notes that an evaluation of this initiative will soon be concluded, and expects that the necessary adjustments will be introduced to ensure its successful implementation; the full absorption capacity indicated by the current figures has been achieved in part through a significant increase in the pre-financing rate of this programme; points to the indication of the Commission that the designation of implementing authorities has constituted a key challenge for the financial flows of the programme; notes that an evaluation of this initiative will soon be concluded, and expects that the necessary adjustments, in particular with regard to the setting-up appropriate administrative structures, will be introduced to ensure its successful implementation; considers the legislative proposal for a Structural Reform Support Programme1a to be a valuable initiative to address the issue of insufficient administrative capacity; __________________ 1aProposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the establishment of the Structural Reform Support Programme for the period 2017 to 2020 and amending Regulations (EU) No 1303/2013 and (EU) No 1305/2013 COM(2015) 701 final – 2015/0263 (COD)
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Recalls the recent terrorist attacks in France and Belgium and the increased threat levels in other Member States, which call for more coordinated and reinforced action at EU level; underlines that the Union already has the Internal Security Fund as an appropriate instrument and has several agencies operating in this field facing increased pressure; considers that more European action, and therefore funding, will be needed in this area to provide an adequate response to this threat; recalls furthermore the limited reinforcement of staffing levels of the European Counter- Terrorism Centre in Europol financed by redeployment from the Internal Security Fund; stresses that increased cooperation in the area, in line with the actions currently proposed by the Commission on the table, as well as a fully operational European Counter-Terrorism Centre, Internet Referral Unit, EC3 and joint investigation teams will require increased levels of staffing for the concerned agencies, which may further increase pressure on the EU budget;
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 19 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Stresses that given the current actions and legislative proposals aimed at increasing judicial cooperation, additional financial and human resources will be progressively required for Eurojust which will impact the Union budget;
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Stresses that the fixed ceilings for the CAP until 2020 entail much lower margins than in the previous MFF, while the sector faces more challenges; stresses in this regard, that any use of the margin must be exclusively to address the needs of the agricultural sector; warns that the current margin within the agriculture budget may prove insufficient, with market volatility, veterinary and phytosanitary risks and other unforeseen events making increasing demands on the budget to such an extent that the margin is expected to be depleted at the end of this planning period;
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Notes, in particular, that the special instruments were mobilised to tackle the refugee and migration crisis (full amount of the Flexibility Instrument exhausted in 2016 - EUR 1 530 million; Emergency Aid Reserve in 2016 - EUR 150 million), the payments shortage problem (Contingency Margin activated in 2015 - EUR 3.16 billion), and the financing of the EFSI Guarantee Fund (full use of Global Margin for Commitments 2014 - EUR 543 million); recalls that the decision to mobilise the Contingency Margin in payments is coupled with a decrease in the already tight payment ceilings for the years 2018 to 2020, which will put additional pressure on the budget towards the end of the period;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Anticipates that any further needs that arise with relation to the migration and refugee crisis in 2016, including the tranche of EUR 200 million for the new instrument to provide emergency support within the Union, the necessary staff increases for the migration-related agencies required in order to tackle the on-going refugee and migration crisis and implement the measures reforming the Common European Asylum System, as well as the proposal for the establishment of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, should result in the mobilisation of the Contingency Margin as soon as necessary; recalls that no more margins are available under Heading 3, while the Flexibility Instrument has already been used up in its entirety for this year;
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Insists that the amounts for direct payments in Heading 2 should be left untouched; points out that this is crucial for the income situation of many farmers, particular in times of crises, and that the absorption rate per year is almost 100%;
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Is convinced that, while fully confirming the notion of large-scale political and financial support for EFSI, the EU budget should not be financing new initiatives to the detriment of existing Union programmes and policies; intends to deliver on its commitment to fully offset the EFSI-related cuts affecting Horizon 2020 and CEF while maintaining the funding level of the other programmes in Subheading 1a, in order to allow them to accomplish their objectives as agreed only two years ago;
Amendment 205 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Expects that concerted action to effectively respond to the external dimension of the migration and refugee crisis will intensify, notably the political stabilisation of the European neighbourhood and Sub- Saharan Africa and the tackling of humanitarian and economic causes of migration, will require a substantial reform of the European Neighbourhood and development policy as well as humanitarian assistance over the coming years, and will be accompanied by increased requests for funding under Heading 4 (Global Europe); underlines that such requests for additional funding should not be deployed to the detriment of the EU’s existing external action, including its development policy; calls, therefore, for a significant reinforcement of appropriations under this heading;
Amendment 265 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 43 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Expects targeted actions aimed at optimising and simplifying the rules of procedure applicable to the use of EU programs, required in order to decrease considerably the administrative burden for beneficiaries; stresses furthermore, the necessity for a strict application and interpretation of the principle of subsidiarity, in order to achieve better efficiency of EU intervention and transition from a system of mistrust of EU institutions to a system of confidence and transparency for Member States and their citizens;
Amendment 284 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. Recalls that according to Article 25 of the MFF regulation, the Commission shall present a proposal for a new multiannual financial framework before 1 January 2018; stresses, therefore, that a number of key elements for the next MFF should already be debated in the framework of the upcoming review/revision to set the stage for the negotiations and to allow for good progress and a timely conclusion;
Amendment 294 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. Underlines that an essential element of the difficulties in agreeing on a multiannual financial framework between Member States is their primary focus on net balances; reiterates its position that the Union budget is not a simple zero-sum game but, rather, an important trigger for convergence and the expression of common policies which create collective added value; urges the Member States, therefore, to change their perception of and approach to the Union budget, that is to establish the size of the budget based on a thorough assessment of the financial needs deriving from the Union's legal obligations, its political objectives set out in its programmes and policies as well as international commitments, in order to ensure that the outcome is not another stalemate that will only further disconnect the Union from its citizens;
Amendment 355 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61 a (new)
Paragraph 61 a (new)
61a. Recalls that the Treaty does not assign the European Council the right to exercise legislative functions; reiterates, in this context, its strong objection to the European Council's interference in legislation during the last MFF negotiations; demands from the European Council that it limits itself to its tasks defined by the Treaty and to refrain from pre-empting policy changes which are to be decided under the ordinary legislative procedure, thereby respecting Parliament's legislative prerogatives under co-decision;