571 Amendments of Petru Constantin LUHAN
Amendment 9 #
2013/2134(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Is concerned at the continued massive deindustrialisation of certain regions in Europe, leading to excessive unemployment and numerous demographic problems;
Amendment 16 #
2013/2134(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Considers that, now more than ever, structural reforms at regional, national and EU level are necessary to create employment opportunities targeted at the young workforce; stresses that these efforts should focus in particular on aligning EU employment strategies and the future requirements of the European economy;
Amendment 17 #
2013/2134(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Stresses the need to continue with programmes designed to encourage entrepreneurship among young people through the creation of special business start-up opportunities for them, accompanied by increased access to European funding and business advice;
Amendment 18 #
2013/2134(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Considers it necessary to take urgent measures to make the EU more competitive at international level and generate sustainable internal growth; stresses that efforts must be focused on the creation of innovatory schemes involving cheaper and more accessible credit for SMEs and improving the business climate by promoting new sources of capital, including business-to- business lending, and facilitating access to venture capital;
Amendment 176 #
2013/2134(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Considers it necessary to take urgent measures to make the EU more competitive at international level and generate sustainable internal growth; stresses that efforts must be focused on the creation of innovatory schemes involving cheaper and more accessible credit for SMEs and improving the business climate by promoting new sources of capital, including business-to-business lending, and facilitating access to venture capital;
Amendment 178 #
2013/2134(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17b. Stresses the need to continue with programmes designed to encourage entrepreneurship among young people through the creation of special business start-up opportunities for them, accompanied by increased access to European funding and business advice;
Amendment 13 #
2013/2073(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that cities and regions are the best governmental level toalongside the Community employment strategies, cities and regions play an important role in assessing local employment markets and tailoring programmes for young people, and emphasises the importance of young people in their communities;
Amendment 14 #
2013/2073(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Highlights that the EU programmes and especialy structural and cohesion funds are the most efficient instruments for creating new jobs and for supporting entrepreneurship among young people;
Amendment 21 #
2013/2073(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Considers that through intensive national and regional strategies of stimulating companies to hire youth workforce, the high unemployment rates of certain Member States could have been avoided;
Amendment 25 #
2013/2073(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Stresses that more support should be given to developing the entrepreneurial spirit among young people through access to EU funds and business advice;
Amendment 27 #
2013/2073(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Considers that new programmes should be drawn up with a view to providing young people with a high- quality technological education and promoting opportunities for them to specialise or to work in another Member State;
Amendment 28 #
2013/2073(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7 c. Recognises that social enterprises can play an important role in promoting high quality jobs, fighting poverty and social exclusion, by investing in education and training of young Europeans;
Amendment 5 #
2013/2061(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Considers that, given both the impact of demographic changes and the fall in the number of healthcare staff, the European Union and the Member States must adopt major structural reforms so as to ensure the sustainability of health systems and public access to high-quality services in all EU regions without exception;
Amendment 11 #
2013/2061(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers that the Commission must facilitate the use of EU structural funds to implement e-health infrastructure in Europe while developing guidelines for interoperability of these systems on an EU wide basis;
Amendment 12 #
2013/2061(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Considers that, for all its shortcomings, eHealth has great potential and could be of benefit to the general public, patients, medical staff and the authorities themselves;
Amendment 14 #
2013/2061(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Considers that providing the necessary tools for the harnessing of public and real-time data for better understanding of benefit risk, prediction of adverse events, and improving the efficiency of HTA assessment;
Amendment 15 #
2013/2061(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Stresses the need for sustained effort in terms of cohesion policy and regional policies to eliminate regional disparities, particularly with regard to the accessing of ICT services;
Amendment 20 #
2013/2061(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Notes that, in view of the very substantial differences between the EU regions, eHealth could prove to be an outstanding advantage for those resident in less developed regions, providing them with better, more transparent and lower- cost access to high-quality services;
Amendment 9 #
2013/2045(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Highlights the fact that the youth unemployment reached unimaginable levels and this requires more efficient actions at EU, national and regional level; therefore considers that at a time when the European Union is facing many difficulties and challenges, the need for strong and innovative youth, ready to face the challenges presented to them, is greater than ever;
Amendment 30 #
2013/2045(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Amendment 39 #
2013/2045(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls the Member States to avoid major cuts in important areas such as education and innovation because together with the other negative effects of the economic and financial crisis, these cuts represent a serious barrier in combating youth unemployment;
Amendment 42 #
2013/2045(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Highlights that the EU programmes and especially structural and cohesion funds were the most efficient instruments for creating new jobs among young people and therefore further additional attention should be given to these programs and each region should make full use of the available EU funding to the benefit of young people;
Amendment 58 #
2013/2045(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Considers that new programmes should be drawn up with a view to providing young people with a high- quality technological education and promoting opportunities for them to specialise or to work in another Member State;
Amendment 5 #
2013/2042(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
Ha. whereas major budget cuts in important fields and sectors are one of the biggest problems facing local and regional authorities in the current period;
Amendment 13 #
2013/2042(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Believes Cohesion Policy, as the main tool for investment aimed at convergence and sustainable development in the European Union, to constitute one of the EU’s main channels of support for its regions;
Amendment 24 #
2013/2042(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Believes that austerity measures, along with other adverse effects of the economic and financial crisis, constitute a serious impediment to implementing the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy and to the development of Europe’s regions, and for that precise reason should be avoided;
Amendment 41 #
2013/2042(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Believes that urban and regional authorities should play a more prominent role in assessing local employment markets and in adjusting programmes to ensure increased employment;
Amendment 12 #
2013/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas cutting consumption by means of energy efficiency is the most sustainable way of reducing dependence on fossil fuels, leading to a reduction in imports of around 25 %;
Amendment 48 #
2013/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. points out that the potential for energy efficiency is not yet being effectively realised in certain economic sectors such as building and transport and that Structural Fund, Cohesion Fund or other investment in greater energy efficiency should help to increase employment opportunities in this sector;
Amendment 53 #
2013/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Acknowledges that one of the greatest obstacles to realising energy savings at local and regional level is the need to invest upfront; is convinced that any measure taken at EU level should take due account of the implications for, and budgetary restrictions of, municipalities and regions; recommends, therefore, that local and regional representatives be consulted when development guidelines are being established in the field of energy, and that financial support be provided for local and regional level programmes for the use of existing energy resources;
Amendment 87 #
2013/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20 a. Believes that one of the main pillars of freedom, security and justice lies in Article 2 of the UN Charter of Human Rights which places race first in its enumeration string of possible basis of discrimination.
Amendment 90 #
2013/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)
Paragraph 20 b (new)
20 b. Notes that the Stockholm Programme rightfully aims at combating xenophobia inviting the Commission to report on forms and expressions of such and that the financing programmes should aims at prevention and not only intervention, based on susceptible discrimination tendency areas;
Amendment 116 #
2013/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24 a. Believes that the exchange of best practices should be followed or preceded by an expert diagnostic body that will further provide with a personalized recovery plan instead of referring to only common standards which may or may not be realistic in a given country.
Amendment 184 #
2013/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Acknowledges that cross-border crime is on the increase in the EU and therefore underlines the importance of European law enforcement information exchange; believes that the current ‘landscape’ of the different instruments, channels and tools is complicated and scattered, leading to inefficient use of the instruments available and to inadequate democratic oversight at EU level; calls for a future-oriented vision on how to shape and optimise law enforcement data sharing in the EU while guaranteeing a robust level of data protection; providing identity confidentiality
Amendment 186 #
2013/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34 a. Welcomes the European Council's initiative to have COSI recurrently informed, however, considers crucial the formation of a communication channel easily accessible and secure to EU citizens that will facilitate unveiling cases of human trafficking and child slavery.
Amendment 189 #
2013/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 b (new)
Paragraph 34 b (new)
34 b. Calls on the Commission to encourage member states to set up aid centres in notorious areas of prostitution in order to provide victims with psychological and physical immediate recovery.
Amendment 2 #
2013/2017(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is concerned that the uncertainty linked to the adoption of the MFF constitutes an obstacle for any serious budgetary planning, which is quite worrying as 2104 is the start of the new programming period and affects Cohesion Policy in particular, as well as compromising the hoped-for results in connection with these objectives;
Amendment 4 #
2013/2006(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Takes the view that industry is unquestionably one of our main assets at international level, without which the EU would not play such an important role in the global balance of economic forces;
Amendment 5 #
2013/2006(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Is concerned at the massive deindustrialisation affecting many of Europe’s traditional industrial heartlands in recent years, leading to excessively high unemployment and numerous demographic problems;
Amendment 23 #
2013/2006(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Considers that the reindustrialisation of Europe must be accompanied by efforts to generate employment for young people, for which purpose it is necessary to ensure that Community employment strategies are tailored to the future needs of European industry, launch regional and national programmes to provide young people with a high-quality technological education and foster entrepreneurship among young people through access to European funds and business advice;
Amendment 8 #
2012/2302(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses that the main problem encountered by SMEs in the cultural and creative sector continues to be lack of easy access to funding;
Amendment 26 #
2012/2302(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Points to the fact that the cultural and creative industries contribute to maintaining Europe’s immense cultural, historical and architectural heritage; highlights that the cultural and creative sectors are of huge interest to tourists from both the EU and non-EU countries; believes that, in view of this added value, the cultural and creative sectors should be consulted when Country Strategy Papers are drawn up for the period 2014-2020 and should also be strongly supported by the future EU budget as they bring with them important economic opportunities;
Amendment 5 #
2012/2298(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Believes that European strategy in the field of transport technologies should cover all the regions of the EU in order to ensure the efficient circulation of people and goods and hence the creation of a genuine European single market;
Amendment 13 #
2012/2298(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Believes that in future greater importance and increased financing should be awarded to the Connecting Europe Facility to ensure that this programme targets investment in key facets of infrastructure that can stimulate the competitiveness of Europe and its regions;
Amendment 17 #
2012/2298(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Believes that, in order for it to be more efficient, technological research should factor in all regional specificities and the different requirements that may be encountered across the EU in the field of infrastructure;
Amendment 22 #
2012/2298(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Believes that in the interests of sustainable transport mobility, safety standards and smart transport systems should be standardised as swiftly as possible throughout the EU;
Amendment 24 #
2012/2298(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Believes that in order to ease traffic congestion in urban areas and heavily built-up regions, it is important not only to increase the efficiency of existing means of transport but also, through technological progress, to pinpoint alternative transport solutions and promote their use;
Amendment 6 #
2012/2297(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Takes the view that the role played by the regions in drawing up Community strategies needs to be strengthened in order to develop a solid and sustainable blue economy;
Amendment 27 #
2012/2297(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls for tourism to be promoted and sustained as a driver for growth and jobs in coastal areas; highlights the need to provide infrastructuretakes the view that a healthy environment is fundamental to any form of tourism in coastal regions and every effort must therefore be made to protect it; highlights the need to provide infrastructure for the development of new forms of tourism, in particular for tourism sectors with high growth potential, such as water sports; welcomes initiatives to promote crossborder tourism strategies on a sea- basin basis.
Amendment 15 #
2012/2295(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that regional economies have a central role to play in achieving smart, sustainable, and inclusive growth; maintains that the regions themselves have the knowledge and know-how necessary to mobilise actors according to their specific characteristics; reiterates that it is vital to integrate innovation and sustainability plans at regional, national, and European level; urges the regions to develop strong regional and national bioeconomy strategies and research and innovation strategies aimed at smart specialisation; considers that solid growth in this area can only be achieved through substantial public and private investment and hence supports the Commission’s proposal to establish public-private partnership (PPP) schemes for the bioeconomy sector;
Amendment 23 #
2012/2295(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Believes that, owing to the complex and fragmented nature of European, national and regional bioeconomy policies, there is a need for a common strategy through which to disseminate good practices and scientific advances and facilitate better interaction between the players in this field;
Amendment 29 #
2012/2295(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. believes that in order for an efficient and sustainable bioeconomy to be developed, all types of infrastructure will need to be continually modernised, and that rural areas should not be excluded from that modernisation;
Amendment 20 #
2012/2293(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Encourages the Member States to cooperate withgrant local and regional authorities, in accordance with the principle of multi-level governance, to establish priorities and more flexibility in establishing priorities and to cooperate with them in establishing methods of using – on a joint basis, wherever possible – the ERDF, the ESF, and, in the case of social housing in rural areas and small and medium-sized towns, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD); considers that greater integration of the Structural Funds could encourage the sustainable development of disadvantaged areas, thus avoiding the pernicious effects of segregation and promoting social homogeneity and cohesion; hopes that technical assistance programmes and specialised funds will be maintained and extended;
Amendment 45 #
2012/2293(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Recommends that the Member States should make every effort both to eliminate discrimination in the distribution of social housing and to simplify the procedures for applying for and allocating such housing, taking account of the particular situation affecting disadvantaged persons;
Amendment 4 #
2012/2290(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Takes the view that, if the harmonious development of the Union and the smooth functioning of Community programmes is to be ensured, the Member States require modern administrative and management capacities;
Amendment 5 #
2012/2290(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Stresses that, despite the progress achieved in reducing inequalities in development between regions, there remain major differences in terms of their level of economic and social development, and these differences can also be found in the quality of public services offered to citizens;
Amendment 8 #
2012/2290(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Takes the view that the most disadvantaged regions lack the financial and human resources and administrative support needed to make good use of the EU funds allocated to them;
Amendment 12 #
2012/2290(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that a well-developed administrative capacity, particularly as regards project planning and implementation, plays a crucial part in relation to the capacity to absorb European funds and should be strengthened; takes the view that particular attention should be paid to Member States which record delays and low absorption rates over the programming period 2007-2013;
Amendment 46 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the adoption by the Commission of an action plan on unaccompanied minors; deplores, however, the fact that the Commission's approach is not based more on protecting the fundamental rights of such minors and of the Mid- term report on the implementation of the Action Plan on Unaccompanied Minors' (COM(2012)0554;
Amendment 47 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Deplores the fragmentation of the European provisions concerning unaccompanied minors and; urges the Commission to compile a manual drawing together these various legal basesacts in order to facilitate the correct application by Member States; considers that EASO should be involved in compiling this manual;
Amendment 54 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Deplores the lack of reliable official data on unaccompanied minors; calls on the Member States and the European Union to establish a coordinated method for gathering information in each Member State, while ensuring that personal data is protected, by means of platforms bringing together all parties involved in the problem of unaccompanied minors, and to draw up a list of national contact points;
Amendment 56 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Deplores the lack of reliable official data on unaccompanied minors; calls on the Member States and the European Union to establish a coordinated method for gathering information in each Member State, by means of platforms bringing together all parties involved in the problem of unaccompanied minors, and to draw up a list of national contact pointsand sharing information, and to make better use of the existing tools available to collect statistics data at the European level, such as Fronted and EASO;
Amendment 65 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Recalls that the European Union and Member States ought to step up their cooperation with third countries of origin and transit concerning the problem of unaccompanied minors, preventing their arrival, combating trafficking, irregular immigration, restoration of family ties, return and readmission, including in the context of the regular dialogues conducted between the European Union and these States and the European External Action Service (EEAS);
Amendment 70 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Recalls the important role of civil society in the readmissions of unaccompanied minors in third countries; calls thus on Member States to increase cooperation also with local and international non governmental partners in the Country of origin in order to ensure safe returns for children.
Amendment 72 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recalls that combating trafficking in human beings is a necessary first step, as minors are particularly confronted with the risks of trafficking and exploitation and because; underlines the importance of prevention by strengthening police and judiciary cooperation between Member States. Calls on the Member States to effectively implement Directive 2011/36/EU on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims and Directive 2011/92/EU on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography; considers also that action should be taken in third countries to tackle the root causes of trafficking;
Amendment 82 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Is concerned about the situation of many unaccompanied minors who live in hiding in the EU and who are particularly vulnerable to exploitation and abuse; calls on Member States' authorities and civil society organisations to work together and take all the necessary measures to ensure their protection and dignity.
Amendment 95 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Commission to draw up binding strategic guidelines for use by all Member States, which should draw inspiration from their best practices, take the form of common minimum standards and detail each stage in the probuilding on the follow-up of the Action plan and on best practicess, from the arrival of a minor in European territory until an appropriate solution has been found for him;
Amendment 116 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Considers that each Member State has a responsibility to identify unaccompanied minors; calls on Member States to direct them immediately to specialist services which must, on the one hand, assess the individual circumstances and needs of each minor and, on the other hand, provide them with all the information they need, in a language and form they can understand; calls on Member States to share best practices on child friendly tools to clarify to the children the procedures and their rights;
Amendment 128 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Deplores the unsuitable and intrusive nature of the medical techniques used to ascertain age in some Member States; recommends that the Commission establish a common methodinclude in the strategic guidelines best practices for ascertaining age, consisting of a multidisciplinary assessment, performed by independent, trained practitioners, and with minors always being given the benefit of the doubt; considers that it should be possible to appeal against the results of this assessment; welcomes the work of the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) on this subject, which should be taken as a basis for dealing with all minors;
Amendment 135 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on Member States, as soon as a minor arrives within their territory and until a lasting solution has been found, to appoint a person responsible for accompanying, assisting and representing him in all procedures; calls furthermore for this person to have specific training in the problems associated with unaccompanied minors and to act completely independently; such guardians should receive regular training and undergo regular and independent check-ups/ monitoring; calls on the Commission to establish common standards concerning the mandate, functions, qualifications and skills of this person;
Amendment 136 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on Member States, as soon as a minor arrives within their territory and until a lasting solution has been found, to appoint a person responsible for accompanying, assisting and representing him in all procedures; calls furthermore for this person to have specific training in the problems associated with unaccompanied minors and to act completely independently; calls on the Commission to establish common standardinclude in the strategic guidelines best practices concerning the mandate, functions, qualifications and skills of this person;
Amendment 145 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 – introductory part
Paragraph 16 – introductory part
16. CIn order to ensure consistency and equal standards in the protection of unaccompanied minors within the EU, calls on Member States to give unaccompanied minors, irrespective of their status and under the same conditions as children who are nationals of the host country:
Amendment 176 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Welcomes the progress which has been made in asylum legislation; recalls, however, that unaccompanied minors should always be exempted from expedited procedures and from procedures at the border; recalls also that the State responsible forpackage concerning unaccompanied minors; calls on Member States to make the necessary legislative and asylum application by an unaccompanied mdministrative reforms in or should always be the State of the most recent asylum applicationder to implement it effectively;
Amendment 181 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Underlines that any decision concerning unaccompanied minors should be on the basis of an individual assessment and in respect of the best interest of the child;
Amendment 183 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Condemns the very precarious circumstances with which these minors are suddenly confronted when they reach the age of majority; calls on Member States to share best practices and institute procedures for assisting these minors in their transition to adulthood; welcomes the work of the Council of Europe on this subject and calls on the Commission to propose common standardinclude in its strategic guidelines best practices for the planning of ‘individualised life projects’ for, and with, the minor;
Amendment 191 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Stresses firmly that the ultimate aim, once an unaccompanied minor has arrived in European territory, must be to seek an appropriate solution for him, which respects his best interests; recalls that efforts to achieve this must always begin with an examination of the possibilities of family reunification; calls on Member States to improve cooperation on family tracing and share best practices;
Amendment 201 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the Commission to proposeinclude in its strategic guidelines a common reference framework outlining a series of conditions to be met before a minor can be returned, respecting the overriding interests of the child; reiterates in the strongest terms that no decision to return a minor may be taken if it endangers the minor's life, security or fundamental rights or those of his or her family, and that the individual circumstances of each minor must be taken into account; calls on Member States to establish monitoringcooperation arrangements to ensure the protection of minors after their return, in cooperation with countries of origin and transit;with countries of origin and transit and with international and local NGOs in order to ensure the protection of minors after their return.
Amendment 205 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. calls on the Commission to set up improved trans-national mechanisms for dealing with child-protection issues given that unaccompanied children move across Europe, including when they disappear from reception centres.
Amendment 208 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Strongly urges the Member States to guarantee a social grant for unaccompanied minors above the age of 18 if they intend to continue studying at university; (All unaccompanied minors have a right to a decent life and social assistance, both up to the age of 18 and up to the end of university studies.)
Amendment 209 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 b (new)
Paragraph 22 b (new)
22b. Calls on the Commission to expand the criteria for defining unaccompanied children, so that a child whose parents are unidentified or whose parents are identified but, following an inquiry, are found not to be carrying out their parental duties would be considered as an unaccompanied minor. (It is unacceptable that a child should be considered accompanied if both parents are alcoholics, beggars or are failing to carry out their parental duties.)
Amendment 210 #
2012/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 c (new)
Paragraph 22 c (new)
22c. Calls on the Member States to introduce an obligation for public authorities to take action with regard to unaccompanied minors who are victims of begging; (The exploitation of minors in relation to begging should be prevented at all costs.)
Amendment 3 #
2012/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Believes that good governance of the internal market and further development of the regions complement each other and jointly create a powerful Europe characterised by cohesion and competitiveness;
Amendment 6 #
2012/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Believes that effective governance of the single market must take equal account of the interests of all regional stakeholders, and that this is the only way of ensuring that the internal market will operate at its optimum and consumers will show increased confidence in the bodies governing it;
Amendment 15 #
2012/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Believes that the provision of high- quality public services for people living in every single region in the European Union is an absolute prerequisite for a dynamic and powerful single market;
Amendment 18 #
2012/2259(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Considers that in order for full advantage to be derived from the benefits offered by renewable energy sources, there is a need for close cooperation in the field of energy infrastructure and for additional European funding for new technologies;
Amendment 19 #
2012/2259(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers that intelligent use of Community funding for the next programming period, 2014-2020, will enable the target of increasing the proportion of renewable energy sources to 20% to be achieved and, along with this, the objectives of sustainability and competitiveness in the European Union;
Amendment 29 #
2012/2259(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Believes that in order to enable further integration of renewable energy sources, some adaptations of the European energy infrastructure at both transmission and distribution levels will be required; recommends that the future scheduling of infrastructure investment, from both national and Community sources, take into account the long-term scenario and cover estimated results and additional needs in the field of the technical development of infrastructure for renewable energy sources;
Amendment 3 #
2012/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Considers that the recently ended European semesters have highlighted the necessity for the European Union to fight the consolidation of inequalities among regions and the macro-economical imbalances based on an symmetric approach and based on more democratic legitimacy, as well as on interconnected policies at European level that target the achievement of the objectives established in the Europa 2020 Strategy;
Amendment 7 #
2012/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Considers that the regional policy will continue to play a very important role in the development of national programs within the European semester and, at the same time, will represent a key instrument for achieving the established objectives on medium and long- term;
Amendment 10 #
2012/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Highlights that a strong and well- financed cohesion policy can prevent in the future economic and financial crises in Europe and can protect especially the less developed regions;
Amendment 71 #
2012/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls for sufficient flexibility as regards the types of attacks and disasters for which the clause may be triggered, to ensure that no significant threats, such as attacks in cyberspace, pandemics, maritime spills, immigration flows or energy shortages, are overlooked;
Amendment 78 #
2012/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Takes the view that the solidarity clause should be invoked in situations that overwhelm the capacities of the affected Member State or require a multi-sector response involving a number of actors; stresses that solidarity also means the obligation to invest in adequate national capabilitiesat national governments enhance capacities for providing and receiving assistance;
Amendment 86 #
2012/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22 a. Considers that in order to further encourage fluid European cooperation, there could be put in place trainings and exercise programmes, especially for the political-administrative level of disaster and crisis management personnel in member states.
Amendment 99 #
2012/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Recalls that the solidarity clause requires the European Council to regularly assess the threats facing the Union; takes the view that such assessments need to be made at least at two distinct levels: on a more long-term basis in the European Council, in a process which should also feed strategic thinking to be reflected in future updates of the European Security Strategy and the Internal Security Strategy, as well as through more frequent comprehensive overviews of current threats by the Council's Situation Centre in cooperation with the Commission;
Amendment 100 #
2012/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Considers that the annual threat assessments must be complemented with risk assessments, analysing threats in the light of existing vulnerabilities, thus identifying the most pressing capability gaps to be addressed; recalls that within the implementation of the Internal Security Strategy, the EU should establish by 2014 a coherent risk management policy linking threat and risk assessments to decision making; reminds also that by the end of 2012, the Commission should prepare, on the basis of national risk analyses, a cross- sectoral overview of the major natural and man- made risks that the EU may face in the future; encourages the Member States to share their national risk assessments and risk management plans to enable a joint appraisal to be made of the situation;
Amendment 71 #
2012/2138(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Considers that on the basis of the experience in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the role of the Special Representative must be strengthened and integrated into the chain of command for missions under ‘Europe of defence’ auspices.
Amendment 127 #
2012/2138(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 a (new)
Paragraph 44 a (new)
44a. Recommends that each mission should have "best practice" officers reporting directly to the EUSR, who will draft reports on how to avoid past mistakes. Also, a "lessons - learnt" unit should be set up in the Council Secretariat to synthesise reports from the field.
Amendment 6 #
2012/2134(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. AcknowledgesPoints out that it is the SMEs, the economic backbone of the European Union, which have unfortunately been hardest hit by the economic and financial crisis; acknowledges accordingly that ensuring sufficient and timely access to finance for SMEs stimulates and reinforces economic growth, job creation and labour productivity;
Amendment 17 #
2012/2134(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that SMEs play a major role in regional development and that future provisions governing the financial services sector should accordingly take account of their funding requirements;
Amendment 18 #
2012/2134(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Takes the view that cohesion policy resources for SMEs should be channelled towards risk capital financing so as to ensure greater banking sector involvement and more effective structural fund deployment;
Amendment 25 #
2012/2134(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls for measures to promote innovatory financial solutions for SMEs, especially those newly created, with a view to boosting their performance and, by extension the development of all EU regions;
Amendment 1 #
2012/2132(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that concentration of media ownership may undermine freedom of information, and in particular the right to receive information, and could lead to corruption and manipulation of public opinion; therefore requests the Commission to specify the ownership relations existing among the 7 500 broadcasters it has identified in the EU, with the aim of singling out the potential challenges relating to plurality in these media services; moreover, suggests a standardisation of provisions for regulators for the audio visual sector in all Member States;
Amendment 5 #
2012/2132(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 10 #
2012/2132(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Reaffirms the importance of protecting minors in television broadcasting; recommends Member States to consider prohibiting any commercial communications in children's programmes, inter alia in order not to exhort minors to buy a product or a servtake into consideration the importance of protecting minors in television broadcasting, in accordance with Article by exploiting their inexperience or credulity9 (1)(g) of the Audiovisual Commercial Communications;
Amendment 14 #
2012/2132(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Commission to maintain, in the EU's external trade agreements, the definitionsconcept of audiovisual media services of the Directive, thus ‘carving out’defining those services.
Amendment 17 #
2012/2132(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Highlights the need of a pan- European comparative study in order to further understand how children's, adolescents' and adults' media consumption behaviour is evolving; such a study would be beneficial to audiovisual policymakers at EU level and in the Member States;
Amendment 18 #
2012/2132(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Recommends the strengthening of the role of the European Audiovisual Observatory as this would be an appropriate solution for collecting data concerning the promotion of European audio-visual works;
Amendment 19 #
2012/2132(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Asks the Commission to take into consideration the following aspects when launching the public consultations on connected or hybrid television : standardisation, technological neutrality, the challenge of personalised services, especially for persons with disabilities, problems related to multi-cloud security, accessibility to users, protecting children and human dignity;
Amendment 114 #
2012/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Suggests that the Commission should envisage a special regulatory framework for media opinion makers in order to encourage a diverse, objective and professional media.
Amendment 18 #
2012/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. It is counterfactual to present new immigration as something which only confers benefits. Recent research in the Netherlands1 estimates the cost of immigration to be at least €7 billion per annum. The arrival of unskilled new immigrants, in particular, imposes a heavy burden on social security systems. Meanwhile, such schemes as family reunification and immigration for purposes of study are clearlyoften abused to provide an extra channel for immigration, thus closer monitoring from competent authorities is necessary.
Amendment 25 #
2012/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. It cannot be the intention that people from outside the EU should have the opportunity to use study here as a means of immigration, or that the EU should deprive third countries of their educated people. The EU should ensurge that people who study here subsequently place the knowledge they have gained at the service of the development of their country of origin.
Amendment 32 #
2012/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. It is necessary to distinguish clearly between legal and illegal immigration. IMost illegal immigrants voluntarily opt to ignore the law, and should therefore be identified, questioned and deported while respecting their fundamental and human rights. Any attempt to argue in favour of supporting and regularising illegal migrants undermines democratic acceptance of the presence of migrants in the EU.
Amendment 6 #
2012/2103(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that all future energy action must apply fair burden-sharing between European regions, taking into account their specific circumstances;
Amendment 8 #
2012/2103(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Believes that special attention must be given to those regions where coal is currently the predominant source of energy and/or where coal production and coal- powered electrical production are vital regional sources of employment; believes additional EU-supported social measures will be requiredthat the Member States must take additional social measures with firm EU support if the Energy Roadmap 2050 scenarios are to be accepted bynot to affect the populations of these regions;
Amendment 12 #
2012/2103(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Believes that, in order to ensure security of energy supply, special attention should be given to EU external border regions by supporting the networking and development of new energy infrastructures in cooperation with neighbouring countries;
Amendment 2 #
2012/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas industry is unquestionably one of our main assets at international level, without which the European Union would not play such an important role in the global balance of economic forces;
Amendment 6 #
2012/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas industry is the main destination for private investment in research, development and innovation;
Amendment 24 #
2012/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point 3 a (new)
Paragraph 5 – point 3 a (new)
– the need for vocational retraining and lifelong learning,
Amendment 56 #
2012/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Takes the view that, alongside the vocational retraining of jobless workers, the development of the industrial sector should be accompanied by efforts to create jobs focusing on the young workforce;
Amendment 57 #
2012/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)
Paragraph 19 b (new)
19b. Takes the view that Community employment strategies should be tailored to the future needs of European industry;
Amendment 58 #
2012/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 c (new)
Paragraph 19 c (new)
19c. Takes the view that programmes should be drawn up aimed at providing young people with a high-quality technological education and promoting opportunities for them to specialise or work in another Member State;
Amendment 59 #
2012/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 d (new)
Paragraph 19 d (new)
19d. Takes the view that more support should be given to developing the entrepreneurial spirit among young people through access to EU funds and business advice;
Amendment 10 #
2012/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the European Union’s energy markets are increasingly extending beyond national borders and this trend is set to gain considerable pace in the period ahead;
Amendment 13 #
2012/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas the price of energy has risen significantly in recent years and has now reached historic levels, posing major problems for European industries;
Amendment 43 #
2012/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Recommends taking into account the fact that Europe’s energy markets are organised in regional groups and takes the view that greater attention should continue to be paid to the specific features of national and regional markets so that the proper enforcement of legislative regulations can be guaranteed;
Amendment 44 #
2012/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Takes the view that the European Union should act as quickly as possible to secure its energy future and protect its interests in this field, which will entail exerting additional pressure on local and regional representatives to comply with EU guidelines; takes the view that they should at the same time be offered substantial financial support for drawing up projects;
Amendment 88 #
2012/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Takes the view that consistent rules are needed at European level along with a mechanism for authorities to access information from across the Union to fully understand energy market developments;
Amendment 90 #
2012/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Takes the view that cohesion policy can play a key role in exploiting the potential offered by innovation, research and development, so that future challenges in the field of energy can be turned into an opportunity that will revitalise the Union's economic strength;
Amendment 111 #
2012/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Takes the view that, by making intelligent use of Community funds for the forthcoming programming period 2014-2020, it will be possible to achieve the 20% target for energy efficiency and thus the sustainability and competitiveness objectives in the European Union; stresses that cutting consumption by means of energy efficiency is the most sustainable way of reducing dependence on fossil fuels, leading to a reduction in imports of around 25%;
Amendment 113 #
2012/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17b. Takes the view that the European Union requires close cooperation in the field of energy infrastructure, as well as appropriate European funding; stresses the need to stimulate investment in the energy sector, including private sector investment, by offering the necessary political and administrative support, a certain level of funding, and some public guarantees or other innovative forms of funding;
Amendment 41 #
2012/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas building trust and confidence between the private sector and law enforcemcompetent authorities is of utmost importance in the fight against cybercrime;
Amendment 82 #
2012/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. emphasises that CSDP must ensure that forces on EU military operations and civilian missions are protected against cyber attacks. Underlines that cyber defence should be made an active capability of CSDP.
Amendment 85 #
2012/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. recommends the Commission to analyse the possibility of incorporating "white hat" hacker recruitment programmes to public cyber-security policy. (The practice already exists in the private sector where hackers are hired to deliberately intrude in a company's system in order to find weaknesses that can be thus avoided.)
Amendment 106 #
2012/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. calls on the Council to consider the inclusion of cyber security as a subject area within the European External Acton Service, either as a part of the existing attache structure or with its own dedicated attache.
Amendment 111 #
2012/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission to explore the necessity and feasibility of an EU Cyber Coordination post to help integrate the various initiatives, programs and activities across the EU institutions;
Amendment 136 #
2012/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22 a. Calls on the private sector partners to consider security by-design solutions when designing new products, devices, services and applications. Also, there should be created incentives for those designing new products, devices, services and applications having as central point security-by-design;
Amendment 142 #
2012/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Is of the view that Member States, EU institutions and the private sector, in cooperation with ENISA, should take steps to increase the security and integrity of information systems, to prevent attacks and to minimise the impact of attacks; Supports the Commission in its efforts to come forward with minimum cyber security standards for companies as well as providing the right incentives to stimulate private sector efforts to improve security;
Amendment 42 #
2012/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Recognises the importance of critical infrastructure which provides support for CSDP;
Amendment 65 #
2012/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Points out that the EU should further engage with the UN, AU and OSCE, including in the context of ENVSEC (Environment and Security Initiative), in order to share analysis and cooperatively address the challenges of climate change;
Amendment 83 #
2012/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Calls for a new international agreement to address the problem of climate migrants; the new agreement should provide a mechanism for governments to act together, plan and prepare for the impacts of large-scale displacement, and establish a fund to help pay for resettlements; the document could also include a limited range of human rights provision, such as protection against forcing people to return to high- risk areas1; 1 Global warming will force up to 150 million people to move to other countries in the next 40 years, according to a report from the Environmental Justice Foundation.
Amendment 126 #
2012/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Recommends the creation of an Information Sharing Network for Critical Infrastructure, which will allow owners and operators of critical infrastructure to share information on a broad range of threats and hazards, including pandemics, negligence, accidents, criminal activity, cyber attack and natural disasters, given that a disruption to critical infrastructure in one sector could have severe cascading impacts on critical infrastructure in other sectors;
Amendment 1 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Considers that the reprogramming of EUR 82 billion in unallocated Structural Fund appropriations in favour of SMEs and youth employment is a major boost to EU economic recovery and achievement of growth and employment objectives and asks the Commission to consider closely the budgetary impact of this initiative and the way in which it is being implemented at national level;
Amendment 2 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. CStresses the outstanding importance of pilot projects, preparatory actions and technical assistance measures as key tools for the formulation of priorities and paving the way for new initiatives and calls on the Commission to support and implement all the pilot projects, preparatory actions and technical assistance measures as proposed by the Committee on Regional Development for heading 1b.
Amendment 3 #
2012/2075(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. PConsiders that the time currently taken to mobilise the fund is unacceptably long and accordingly points to the need to improve the effectiveness and speed of the administrative procedures required for its mobilisation, which entail intervention by three European institutions before approval can be granted, with the result that these procedures excessively delay and prolong the time taken to assist Member States affected by a disaster, thereby falling short of the results hoped for;
Amendment 8 #
2012/2075(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. RegretConsiders that opposition from a number of Member States, fearing that significant changes to the legal basis of this instrument would entail higher financial outgoings, is unjustified and has restricted the adjustment of the 2002 Regulation1 to a number of clarifications and an attempt to improve its operability; points out that, regrettably, disasters in the European Union's regions have increased significantly in number, nature, severity and intensity since the Fund was created;
Amendment 10 #
2012/2075(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 1 #
2012/2060(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Special Report No 2/2012 of the Court of Auditors on financial instruments (FI) for small and medium- sized enterprises (SMEs) co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF); is of the opinion that such an audit report would be of great value also at the end of the legislative period 2007 - 2013, enabling further conclusions regarding performance of FI for SMEs co- financed by the ERDF; considers also that the drafting of such a report at the end of this legislative period will make it possible to avoid repeating errors, while at the same time increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of future financial engineering measures co-funded by the ERDF;
Amendment 3 #
2012/2060(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recognizes that at the time of fiscal constraint and reduced lending capacity of the private sector, SMEs shouldand in particular micro-enterprises have been the most affected and should accordingly be targeted with strengthened European support to continue generating employment, innovation and growth; notes that cohesion policy, as the major investment instrument for convergence and sustainable development of the whole European Union, is one of the two main EU support channels for SMEs; stresses, therefore, that the use of FI in cohesion policy in relation to the SMEs should be reinforced in the future as it can guarantee revolving funds, foster public-private partnerships and achieve a multiplier effect with the EU budget;
Amendment 4 #
2012/2060(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses that lack of access to finance has led to a fall in the number of start- ups, which means that the role of financial instruments co-funded by the ERDF in stimulating entrepreneurship is assuming ever increasing importance;
Amendment 12 #
2012/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Highlights the need to promote entrepreneurship and increase the support given to SMEs, recognising the key role they play in fostering economic competitiveness;
Amendment 23 #
2012/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that the Structural Funds should continue to provide financing to SMEs by means of equity, guarantees and loans, and underlines that complex administrative procedures, as well as should be avoided, through an on-going process of simplification, and by avoiding significant differences between the provisions applied respectively by managing authorities and intermediate bodies, should be avoided;
Amendment 29 #
2012/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Stresses that, in terms of supporting SMEs, the efficient implementation of cohesion policy largely depends on how it is conceived, and that it is therefore crucial to involve local and regional authorities at an early stage in shaping and implementing operational programmes for the next programming period;
Amendment 3 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is also concerned that these shortfalls are likely to worsen in 2013, whilst implementation under heading 1b is expected to accelerate further; calls on the Council and the Commission to immediately analyse and assess, along with Parliament, the figures and requirements in order not to jeopardise implementation for 2013; points out that a lack of payment appropriations could put in danger currently well-functioning programmes and could limit attainment of the objectives of those programmes;
Amendment 3 #
2012/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that, while military expertise is present at different levels within the various stakeholder institutions such as the Single Sky Committee, Eurocontrol and the SESAR Joint Undertaking, there is still a need for coordinated and comprehensive military analysis of the implications of SES/SESAR; notes the need to include the European Union Military Committee (EUMC) in the process, as this will ensure that defence chiefs are adequately informed; notes also that the involvement of EUMC would be useful when assessing the impact of SES at an operational level;
Amendment 9 #
2012/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Requests type-approval, insofar as this is possible, for existing military technologies that meet SES requirements, since this would generate major savings for defence ministries; points, therefore, to the importance of identifying solutions that would reduce the financial impact on defence ministries, while keeping to the objectives pursued through the implementation of SES;
Amendment 258 #
2012/0366(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
in order to meet commitments under the WHO Framework Convention for Tobacco Control, taking into account future health research that will be developed under Horizon 2020 tackling the health consequence of tobacco consumption, and in order to facilitate the functioning of the internal market in tobacco and related products, taking as a basise a high level of health protection, especially for young people.
Amendment 374 #
2012/0366(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 22 to adaptreduce the maximum yields laid down in paragraph 1, taking into account scientific development, health burden on citizens for treatments, and internationally agreed standards.
Amendment 440 #
2012/0366(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Proportionate fees may be charged by Member States for personalised medicines that will be needed for patients that suffer from diseases such as cancer, respiratory, cardiovascular and rare diseases submitted to them under this Article.
Amendment 599 #
2012/0366(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that the health warnings and health costs of the main surface of the unit packet and any outside packaging are fully visible, including not being partially or totally hidden or interrupted byand shall adopt the necessary rules to prevent the placing on the market of any type of wrappers, pouches, jacket, boxes or other devices when tobacco products are placed on the marketich partially or entirely hides or interrupts the health warnings.
Amendment 730 #
2012/0366(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. The combined health warnings and information on tobacco related diseases shall be divided into three sets rotating on an annual basis. Member States shall ensure that each combined health warning is displayed as nearly as possible on equal numbers of each brand.
Amendment 4 #
2012/0309(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Exemption from the visa requirement for nationals of Dominica, Grenada, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, the United Arab Emirates and Vanuatu should not come into force until bilateral agreements on visa waiver between the Union and the countries concerned have been concluded in order to ensure full reciprocity.
Amendment 6 #
2012/0309(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 1 – point a
Article 1 – point 1 – point a
(a) in point 1, the references to Dominica, Grenada, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, the United Arab Emirates and Vanuatu are deleted and a reference to South-Sudan is inserted;
Amendment 7 #
2012/0309(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 2 – point a – two last references
Article 1 – point 2 – point a – two last references
"Tuvalu*", "United Arab Emirates*" and "Vanuatu*"
Amendment 117 #
2012/0295(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) Exchanges of experience and best practices have a significant added value and the Commission should facilitate such dissemination, including by organising training schemes and developing a platform for cooperation at Union level covering all interested parties.
Amendment 213 #
2012/0295(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Member States may submit a requests for amendment of the operational programme. IThe request shall be accompanied by the revised operational programme and the justification for the amendment.
Amendment 23 #
2012/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Where pasture or agricultural land previously destined for the food, feed and fibre markets is diverted to biofuel production, the non-fuel demand will still need to be satisfied either through intensification of current production or by bringing non-agricultural land into production elsewhere. The latter case represents indirect land-use change and when it involves the conversion of high carbon stock land it can lead to significant greenhouse gas emissions. Directives 98/70/EC and 2009/28/EC should therefore include provisions to address indirect land use change given that current biofuels are mainly produced from crops grown on existing agricultural land. Owing to the specific features of European regions, these changes may have a strong impact at regional level, and it is therefore recommended that an impact assessment be carried out as soon as possible on the economic and social effects that this directive may have at regional level.
Amendment 25 #
2012/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Based on the Union's objectives to increase the overall share of energy from renewable sources to 20% by 2020, and to 10 % in the transport sector, forecasts of biofuel demand provided by the Member States and estimates of indirect land-use change emissions for different biofuel feedstocks it is likely that greenhouse gas emissions linked to indirect land use change are significant, and could negate some or all of the greenhouse gas savings of individual biofuels. This is because almost the entire biofuel production in 2020 is expected to come from crops grown on land that could be used to satisfy food and feed markets. In order to reduce such emissions, it is appropriate to distinguish between crop groups such as oil crops, cereals, sugars and other starch containing crops accordingly.
Amendment 28 #
2012/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Liquid renewable fuels are likely to be required bywill become increasingly important in the transport sector in order to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. Advanced biofuels, such as those made from wastes and algae, provide high greenhouse gas savings with low risk of causing indirect land use change and do not compete directly for agricultural land for the food and feed markets. It is appropriate, therefore, to encourage greater production of such advanced biofuels as these are currently not commercially available in large quantities, in part due to competition for public subsidies with established food crop based biofuel technologies. Further incentives should be provided by increasing the weighting of advanced biofuels towards 10% target for transport set in Directive 2009/28/EC compared to conventional biofuels. In this context, only advanced biofuels with low estimated indirect land use change impacts and high overall greenhouse gas savings should be supported as part of the post 2020 renewable energy policy framework, in the event that an impact assessment carried out when the post-2020 policy is being defined recommends such a measure.
Amendment 31 #
2012/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a) Similarly, more support is required both from public funds and European research, regional and structural programmes and from attracting private investment through public-private partnerships, which will help ensure greater coherence between research and innovation efforts and the future needs of European industry.
Amendment 37 #
2012/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) The Commission should review the effectiveness of the measures introduced by this Directive and their impact at all levels, based on the best and latest available scientific evidence, in limiting indirect land-use change greenhouse gas emissions and addressing ways to further minimise that impact, which could include the introduction of estimated indirect land- use change emission factors in the sustainability scheme as of 1st January 2021.
Amendment 38 #
2012/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) It is of particular importance that the Commission in application of this Directive carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert levelwith researchers, end users, policy-makers and civil society. The Commission, when preparing and drawing up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and to the Council.
Amendment 39 #
2012/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 a (new)
Recital 21 a (new)
(21a) It is also recommended that regional working parties be set up, which will help to improve synergies, ensure greater coherence among regional policies and promote examples of best practice in the Union.
Amendment 47 #
2012/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3
Article 3
The Commission shall, before 31 December 2017, submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council reviewing, on the basis of the best latest available scientific evidence, the effectiveness of the measures introduced by this Directive and their impact at all levels in limiting indirect land- use change greenhouse gas emissions associated with the production of biofuel and bioliquids. The report shall, if appropriate, be accompanied by a legislative proposal based on the best available scientific evidence, for introducing estimated indirect land use change emissions factors into the appropriate sustainability criteria to be applied from 1st January 2021 and a review of the effectiveness of the incentives provided for biofuels from non- land using feedstocks and non-food crops under Article 3(4)d of Directive 2009/28/EC.
Amendment 132 #
2012/0199(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The European panel shall consist of 10 members. They shall be citizens of the Union. They shall be independent experts with substantial experience and expertise in the cultural sector, in the cultural development of cities or in the organisation of a European Capital of Culture. They shall also be able to devote an appropriate number of working days per year to the European panelexperts appointed by the Union institutions and bodies and up to two national experts appointed by each Member State for its own competition.
Amendment 149 #
2012/0199(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts,uncil shall officially designate the European Capitals of Culture, having due regard to the recommendations of the European panel. The Commission shall inform the European Parliament, the Council and the Committee of the Regions of its designation.
Amendment 19 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 a (new)
Article 36 a (new)
Article 36a Personal data of patients shall be processed in the database described above in a manner that it shall not permit the direct identification of the patient (without patients name or address). However, persons who need to know to identity patient for the purposes of protecting his or her vital interest shall have the possibility to do so (via an appropriate key).
Amendment 20 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 41 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Personal data processed in the electronic database set up by the Agency shall be stored as long as any of the active substances of any of the IMPs tested is in development or on the market within EU.
Amendment 22 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 78 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 78 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. EU database shall not contain any personal data of trial participants.
Amendment 23 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 78 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 78 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Personal data of subjects processed in the EU database shall be stored for a maximum period of 5 year after the end of a clinical trial. Upon expiry of this period any question relative to the clinical trial shall be addressed to the general contact provided by the sponsor.
Amendment 81 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) In order to allow for independent control as to whether these principles are adhered to, a clinical trial should be subject to prior authorisation which should include review by an Ethics Committee.
Amendment 112 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 a (new)
Recital 10 a (new)
(10a) Experience with Directive 2001/20/EC has also shown that 60% of clinical trials are sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry and 40% by other stakeholders, such as academics. The value of academic contribution should be duly recognized by member states. Academic sponsors frequently rely on funding which partly or entirely comes from the public funds or charities. In order to maximize the use of this valuable contribution and to further stimulate academic research but without any discrimination towards the quality of trials, measures should be put in place by member states to make appropriate exemptions from fees (application fees, inspection fees etc...) for trials conducted by academic sponsors.
Amendment 167 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) The database should contain all relevant information as regards the clinical trial. All clinical trials should be registered in the database prior to being started. The start and end dates of the recruitment of subjects should also be published in the database. It should be possible for sponsors to enter this information directly into the database without the need to further notify Member States. No personal data of data subjects participating in a clinical trial should be recorded in the database. The information in the database should be public, unless specific reasons require that a piece of information should not be published, in order to protect the right of the individual to private life and the right to the protection of personal data, recognised by Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
Amendment 196 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 – point e
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 – point e
(e) diagnostic or monitoring procedures in addition to normal clinical practice are applied to the subjects, unless the additional diagnostic or monitoring procedures do not pose more than minimal additional risk or burden to the safety of the subjects compared to normal clinical practice in any Member State concerned.
Amendment 251 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – sub-paragraphs 1 a and 1 b (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – sub-paragraphs 1 a and 1 b (new)
Without prejudice to Article 87 and the contractual aspects which may need to be considered separately, the authorisation as mentioned in this chapter shall be sufficient to start a clinical trial in the Member States concerned. For clinical trials which also fall under the scope of the relevant part of [the regulations on medical devices and in vitro medical devices], no additional submission or notification procedure shall be required.
Amendment 294 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i – indent 3
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i – indent 3
– the reliability and robustness of the data generated in the clinical trial, taking account of appropriate statistical approaches, designstate of the trial and methodology (including sample size and randomisation, comparator and endpoints); art of clinical trial design and methodology (including when relevant sample size allowing for a stratified analysis by age and gender and randomisation, comparator and endpoints); the extent to which the clinical trial addresses issues identified as a priority by patients (including the extent and nature of patient involvement in the trial design);
Amendment 350 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Conditions to authorisation can only be related to aspects covered by Article 7 (1). Without prejudice to Article 87, no additional submissions or approvals may be requested.
Amendment 376 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. In the assessment, the view of at least one person whose primary area of interest is non-scientific shall be taken into account. The view of at leastn Ethics Committee shall be taken into account. Procedures shall be put in place to allow the sponsor to appeal. The Commission shall develop guidelines one patient shall be taken into accountinvolvement based upon existing good practices.
Amendment 410 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
For the substantial modifications as defined by Article 35, the sponsor shall submit the application dossier within 15 days from the decision of the sponsor to temporarily halt or terminate the trial.
Amendment 471 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 3
Article 29 – paragraph 3
3. The subject shall be provided with a contact point where he or she may obtain further informationinformation on the results of the clinical trial that he or she has participated in, once it has come to an end, unless the subject specifies at any point of his/her participation that he/she does not wish to be informed. In case it is no longer possible to contact the subject, the making publicly available of the results by means of appropriate databases or publications shall be considered sufficient.
Amendment 494 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) some direct benefit for the group of patients is obtainthe goal of the clinical trial is to improve the management of a subject's condition or related fprom the clinical trialblems (e.g. improved quality of life).
Amendment 524 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
That notification shall be made within 1590 days from the end of the clinical trial in relation to that Member State.
Amendment 525 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
That notification shall be made within 1590 days from the end of the clinical trial.
Amendment 541 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 34 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. In the event of non-compliance by the sponsor with the obligation referred to in paragraph 3, and in the absence of prospective and appropriate justification provided to the Member States concerned through the portal , financial penalties shall be imposed by the Member States concerned.
Amendment 544 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 4
Article 34 – paragraph 4
4. For the purpose of this Regulation, if a suspended or temporarily halted clinical trial is not restarted, the date of the decision of the sponsor not to restart the clinical trial shall be considered as the end of the clinical trial. In the case of early termination, the date of the early termination shall be considered as the date of the end of the clinical trial. After 12 months of temporary halt, and in the absence of appropriate prospective justification provided to the Member States concerned, the data from the clinical trial shall be submitted to the EU database, even if incomplete. The reasons for early termination of a clinical trial shall be published in the EU database.
Amendment 23 #
2012/0169(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – subparagraph 2 – point f a (new)
Article 2 – subparagraph 2 – point f a (new)
(fa) officially recognised social security schemes subject to Union or Member States law.
Amendment 99 #
2012/0169(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Investment product manufacturers – such as fund managers, insurance undertakings, issuers of securities, credit institutions or investment firms – should draw up the key information document for the investment products they manufacture, as they are in the best position to know the product and are responsible for idrawing up the key information document and are responsible for its content. Investment product manufacturers make the key information document available to the persons selling the investment product. The document should be drawn up by the investment product manufacturer before the products can be sold to retail investors. However, where a product is not sold to retail investors, there is no necessity to draw up a key information document, and where it is impractical for the investment product manufacturer to draw up the key information document, this may be delegated to others. In order to ensure widespread dissemination and availability of key information documents, this Regulation should allow for publication by the investment product manufacturer by means of a website of their choice.
Amendment 104 #
2012/0169(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) A key information document must be produced by one party, if not, there would be legal uncertainty. Every key information document should carry the name of one person or entity that clearly declares that he or she is liable for the key information document's content. In principle this should be the investment product manufacturer.
Amendment 238 #
2012/0169(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
The investment product manufacturer shall draw up a key information document in accordance with the requirements laid down in this Regulation for each investment product it produces and shall publish the document on a website of its choice before the investment product can be sold to retail investors. The investment product manufacturer is responsible for the contents of this key information document. It can be the responsibility of the person selling to pass this information on to the retail investor.
Amendment 279 #
2012/0169(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The title ‘Key Information Document’ shall appear prominently at the top of the first page of the key information document. The key information document must be produced by one party. Every key information document must carry the name of the person or entity that clearly declares that it is liable for the key information document content. An explanatory statement shall appear directly underneath the title. It shall read:
Amendment 519 #
2012/0169(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. A person selling an investment product to retail investors shall provide them with the key information document, that has been made available by the investment product manufacturer, in good time before the conclusion of a transaction relating to the investment product.
Amendment 11 #
2012/0102(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) To ensure certain and uniform treatment andhave a fully functioning internal market and thus to avoid inconsistencies, distortion of competition, double or non- taxation and to reduce the risk of tax avoidance, there is a need for specific rules applying to the VAT treatment of vouchers.
Amendment 16 #
2012/0102(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) In so far as the goods or services supplied upon redemption of a voucher are taxed, the taxable person is entitled to deduct the VAT incurred on expenditure in relation to the issue of the voucher, in accordance with the Union legislation in force. It should be clarified that this cost of VAT is deductible even if those goods or services are supplied by someone other than the issuer of the voucher.
Amendment 82 #
2012/0036(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to enable it to confiscate, either wholly or in part, all instrumentalities and proceeds following a final conviction for a criminal offence.
Amendment 98 #
2012/0036(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall adopt the necessary measures to enable it to confiscate, either wholly or in part, all property belonging to a person convicted of a criminal offence where, based on specific facts, a court finds it substantially more probable that the property in question has been derived by the convicted person from similar criminal activities thand not from any other activities.
Amendment 713 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘data subject’ means an identified natural person or a natural person who can be identified, directly or indirectly, by means reasonably likely to be used by the controller or by any other natural or legal person, in particular by reference to an identification number, location data, online identifier or to one or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural or social identity of that person and who is not acting in his/her professional capacity;
Amendment 772 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10
(10) ‘genetic data’ means all data, of whatever type, concerning the characteristics of an individual which are inherited or acquired during early prenatal developmentinformation on the hereditary characteristics, or alteration thereof, of an identified or identifiable person, obtained through nucleic acid analysis;
Amendment 2428 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 42 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) standard data protection clauses adopted by a supervisory authority in accordance with the consistency mechanism referred to in Article 57 when declared generally valid by the Commission pursuant to point (b) of Article 62(1); or
Amendment 2432 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
Article 42 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
(da) for historical, statistical or scientific purposes, the measures referred to in Article 83(4);
Amendment 2442 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 3
Article 42 – paragraph 3
3. A transfer based on standard data protection clauses or binding corporate rules as referred to in points (a), (b) or (c) or (e) of paragraph 2 shall not require any further authorisation.
Amendment 3062 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 83 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Further processing of data for historical, statistical or scientific purposes shall not be considered as incompatible under point (b) of Article 5(1) provided that the processing: (a) is subject to the conditions and safeguards of this Article; and (b) complies with all other relevant legislation.
Amendment 3075 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 83 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. A controller or processor may transfer personal data to a third country or an international organisation for historical, statistical or scientific purposes if: (a) these purposes cannot be otherwise fulfilled by processing data which does not permit or not any longer permit the identification of the data subject; (b) the recipient does not reasonably have access to data enabling the attribution of information to an identified or identifiable data subject; and (c) contractual clauses between the controller or processor and the recipient of the data prohibit re-identification of the data subject and limit processing in accordance with the conditions and safeguards laid down in this Article.
Amendment 2 #
2011/2312(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas, despite significant progress towards convergence in the European Union, the most recent cohesion reports highlight a trend towards widening territorial disparities between EU regions, for instance in terms of accessibility, especially in the case of structurally disadvantaged EU regions, but also at an intra-regional level and within EU territories, which could lead to spatial segregation and widen the differences in the levels of prosperity of the EU regions;
Amendment 6 #
2011/2312(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Emphasises that the objective of territorial cohesion remains indissociable from the challenges of economic and social cohesion and strengthens the European added value of cohesion policy;
Amendment 9 #
2011/2312(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Is of the opinion that ‘concentration, cooperation and connection’ are the key coordinates of territorial cohesion with a view to more balanced territorial development in the EU;
Amendment 14 #
2011/2312(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recognises the increased focus on cities and urban areas as a driver of economic growth; at the same time considers it necessary to foster partnerships and networks, thereby creating the specific conditions enabling rural settlements to participate in integrated activites of a given functional geographical entity;
Amendment 15 #
2011/2312(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Highlights the need to link territorial cooperation programmes more effectively with territorial strategies;
Amendment 24 #
2011/2312(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Points out that territorial cohesion has a horizontal, multi-sectoral character and that Union policies must accordingly contribute to its achievement; reiterates that this concept is not limited to the effects of regional policy but also presupposes coordination with other Union policies that are targeted at sustainable development and offer tangible results at regional level, in order to develop and fully exploit the specific areas of regional potential and increase their impact on the ground, boosting regions’ competitiveness and attractiveness and achieving territorial cohesion;
Amendment 15 #
2011/2311(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Emphasises the key role that urban areas have to play in achieving the economic, social and environmental objectives of the Europe 2020 Strategy, and supports the dynamic development process of the integrated urban programmes, stressing the importance of the pilot schemes currently in progress;
Amendment 18 #
2011/2311(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Emphasises the fact that the Union can only be globally competitive if the cohesion policy fully harnesses the development potential of all its regions and urban areas, and if it is fit to face the challenges and difficulties identified in the Europe 2020 Strategy;
Amendment 49 #
2011/2311(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. HAlthough urban areas can make a vital contribution as growth centres and growth drivers in some regions, highlights the importance of involving rural areas, and integrating their needs with those of the urban areas, to promote a relationship that is not in conflict but is complementary and synergetic;
Amendment 56 #
2011/2311(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Stresses the need to call on past experience and examples of good practice when designing a framework for balanced and integrated urban-rural development based on the needs of individual regions;
Amendment 57 #
2011/2311(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Calls on the Commission to examine and propose working methodologies that promote urban-rural partnerships, stem the depopulation of rural areas and, at the same time, stimulate sustainable urban development, since nearly 80% of the EU population lives in urban areas;
Amendment 63 #
2011/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Calls for the operational programmes to be closely geared to the corresponding priorities of the macro-regional strategies in order to ensure the best possible coordination of objectives and means; takes the view that exploiting the potential offered by the specific features of the regions will result in the structural funds being used much more efficiently and added value being created at regional level;
Amendment 75 #
2011/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Calls on the Commission to study the possibility of also drawing up similar macro-regional strategies in other regions where such a measure would lead to lasting and sustainable economic growth;
Amendment 6 #
2011/2307(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recognises that infrastructure building and urbanisation are the most significant drivers of the fragmentation of ecosystems and habitats; asks local and regional governments to consider this threat to ecosystems and habitats in their planning and development projects on both a large and a small scale; recognises the pressures and needs that exist at local and regional levels to provide substantial economic development and jobs, but also balanced biodiversity; supports further reform and use of regional and local development policies to deliver biodiversity benefits and to halt further loss of habitats;
Amendment 18 #
2011/2307(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Recognises the importance of green purchasing and believes that more attention should be focused on its use, especially by public authorities in receipt of EU funding; recommends that the authorities responsible for the management and control systems created in the Member States to manage structural and cohesion funding support projects which provide for such procedures;
Amendment 23 #
2011/2292(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls therefore on the Commission to ensure that the future European Maritime and Fisheries Fund earmarks a specific percentage for artisanal fishing, shell- fishing and extensive aquaculture, and that a specific programme to support small- scale fishing, geared to coastal communities that depend on fishing, is established, giving priority access to these resources to those who fish and shellfish in the most environmentally and socially sustainable manner; believes that public funding for this fishing activity should be fully aligned to the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy and be simplified so as to make funding more accessible for the coastal communities that depend on this activity.
Amendment 14 #
2011/2290(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that the regions must assume greater responsibility in fisheries management, without detracting from the principles of subsidiarity and regionalisation, and encourage dialogue among the various entities involved in the sector, both upstream and downstream, by providing incentives and support to establish international clusters; estimates that the necessary funding may exceed the resources of the regions and that national and European support will therefore be needed;
Amendment 19 #
2011/2290(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that fisheries management should be based on scientific knowledge and expert advice, making use of partnerships between the research field and the fisheries sector, and calls for regional data collection programmes and national research programmes providing for regional coordination among Member States; believes that Member States should be encouraged to support research projects that could facilitate the realisation of such regional or national programmes;
Amendment 43 #
2011/2288(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5a (new)
Paragraph 5a (new)
5a. Believes that a prerequisite for attracting investors is the existence of competitive infrastructures in the context of the new challenges facing us; stresses that to maintain the growth of investments and implicitly of the European economy there is an ongoing need to modernise the infrastructures, and this is where the cohesion policy has a very important role to play, especially in the case of the new Member States;
Amendment 44 #
2011/2288(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5b (new)
Paragraph 5b (new)
5b. Believes that besides the existence of a good infrastructure, the main premise of competitiveness and attractiveness of the regions is promoting research, innovation and technological development, and the availability of appropriate high-quality professional training programmes for people in the European regions;
Amendment 55 #
2011/2288(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6a (new)
Paragraph 6a (new)
6a. Believes that in the coming period, the Member States and the regions should set their objectives in such a way as to prioritise the needs of investors and simultaneously to guarantee adequate and accessible funding, attributing a key role to the Structural Funds;
Amendment 57 #
2011/2288(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6b (new)
Paragraph 6b (new)
6b. Believes that underdeveloped regions should continue to benefit from substantial Community funding to provide investors with other local competitive advantages in addition to reduced labour costs;
Amendment 59 #
2011/2288(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6c (new)
Paragraph 6c (new)
6c. Emphasises that reducing the administrative burden for financial operators plays an extremely important role in increasing the attractiveness of the regions, and it is necessary to impose and abide by specific minimum standards as regards services provided by local and regional public administrations throughout the European Union;
Amendment 117 #
2011/2246(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Suggests that the Fundamental Rights Agency be mandated to monitor issues of press freedom and be entitled to receive claims from journalists who feel their freedom of expression rights have been unduly restricted;
Amendment 146 #
2011/2246(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Underlines that the fundamental right to freedom of expression and freedom of the media is not only reserved for traditional media but also covers social media and other forms of new media.
Amendment 15 #
2011/2196(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission, Member States and regional authorities to take greater account of the fact that good air transport connections are often decisive for the development of tourism or in attracting investors and fundamental to the rapid transportation of passengers and goods, bearing in mind that airports are a major driving force behind economic and regional development;
Amendment 35 #
2011/2196(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Stresses that the modernisation and development of airports is extremely expensive and that the amounts earmarked for this purpose are generally far from sufficient to stimulate the competitiveness of European airports, eliminate capacity bottlenecks and hence increase air transport efficiency and improve the quality-price ratio for passenger and goods transport.
Amendment 42 #
2011/2196(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Takes the view that the building and expansion of regional airports and related infrastructure should be properly supported by national and regional authorities and receive appropriate financing under the TEN-T Networks, the Cohesion Fund and the ERDF, as well as other EU-funded financial engineering instruments;
Amendment 28 #
2011/2194(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Underlines the need for EU financial support at local and regional level to address the complex environmental challenges and risks; considers that special attention should be given to the regions located at the EU external borders;
Amendment 39 #
2011/2177(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Stresses the need to assess other methods of resolving conflicts, such as support for education and job creation; considers that investing in these areas would be of benefit and help reduce defence expenditure;
Amendment 94 #
2011/2177(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Emphasises that closer cooperation between NATO/EU missions on the one hand, and national, regional and local authorities on the other, could increase the efficiency of such interventions and help secure their objectives;
Amendment 119 #
2011/2177(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Considers that the EDA should promote good practices from existing cooperation projects and help the Member States identify possibilities for cooperation;
Amendment 21 #
2011/2157(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Considers that in order to promote a business- and investment-friendly environment, the partner countries need to continue to improve the regulatory environment for businesses, to fight corruption and to encourage entrepreneurship, innovation and partnerships with organisations from neighbouring EU Member States;
Amendment 15 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. In the light of the future gearing of cohesion policy to the Europe 2020 Strategy, calls for the ‘innovation’ priority to be binding on the regions, which must also be reflected in the funding allocated at all levels;
Amendment 24 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the regions, in line with the ‘smart specialisation’ approach, to develop tailored innovation strategies; stresses that territorial cooperation must be optimised with a view to greater complementarity between regions; calls on the Member States to support such moves on the part of the regions and create the necessary framework for realising such strategies;
Amendment 36 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Points out that innovation above all lies at the interface with practice; recommends, therefore, as the necessary complement to excellence in research, placing the focus of regional support on support for applications, without preventing research capacity from being built up, in order above all to enable companies to develop innovative methods; advocates developing initiatives in fields having a practical applicability for the benefit of the community;
Amendment 54 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. In the light of the need to improve the extent to which SMEs are benefiting from support for research and innovation, considers that this should be made a focus of cohesion policy, for example in relation to internationalisation or promotion of entrepreneurship; calls for greater flexibility in the funding programmes with a view to involving SMEs;
Amendment 7 #
2011/2096(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that large divergences exist in terms of transport infrastructure and geographical accessibility on the one hand between the eastern and western parts of the EU and on the other hand between central and peripheral regions, which need to be tackled; takes the view that the transport system of the EU should support balanced regional development and territorial cohesion, which will lead to the creation of a Single European Transport Area; stresses that improving infrastructure accessibility and facilities will help make the regions more competitive and hence increase the external competitiveness of the whole EU; considers that bolstering cooperation in the transport sector will play a decisive role by helping to make all regions economically stronger and more attractive for direct investment;
Amendment 25 #
2011/2096(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Considers that an efficient European transport network requires substantial financing and the availability of a wide range of public and private sources of financing; to that end, calls for emphasis to be placed on the importance of public- private partnerships; considers that the EIB should be more closely involved in the financing of TEN-T infrastructure;
Amendment 26 #
2011/2096(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Stresses that EU citizens and enterprises are direct beneficiaries of a single European transport area, which has as its objective the reduction of times and of the resources allocated to goods and passenger transport, and a closer integration of the markets;
Amendment 33 #
2011/2096(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. considers that the conversion of ports into genuine comodal hubs for transport by land and water will lead to regional business platforms springing up which, besides their logistics functions will become an ideal location, in the respective regions, for enterprises and industries seeking to be close to their market and European sea transport corridors;
Amendment 34 #
2011/2096(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Emphasises that the potential of inland waterways transport has yet to be fully harnessed and that this has an increasingly important role to play in linking European regions and seas, and in developing hinterland regions;
Amendment 3 #
2011/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that a strong and well-funded cohesion policy is an effective and efficient instrument to implement EU strategy by 2020 and prevent future economic and financial crises, owing to its long-term development programmes, decentralised administration system and the incorporation of the EU’s priorities for sustainable development;
Amendment 303 #
2011/2069(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Welcomes the decision to make 2012 the European Year of Active Ageing and Solidarity between Generations; calls on the Member States to enhance the quality of elderly people’s lives by providing adequate social services, adopting measures to combating abuse and all forms of violence against them and promoting their independence by supporting the renovation and accessibility of housing;
Amendment 309 #
2011/2069(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30a. Calls on the Member States to combat discrimination against persons with disabilities, particularly regarding labour market integration;
Amendment 380 #
2011/2069(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Calls on all EU institutions to effectively address challenges such as the removal of children from the custody of one or both parents, missing children, sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, protection of unaccompanied migrant children and the situation of institutionalised disabled children, as well as the protection of children who have suffered domestic abuse and workplace exploitation;
Amendment 399 #
2011/2069(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Regrets that EU citizens resident in a Member State other than their own are not effectively informed about their rights and urges Member States to improve their information systems, particularly concerning access to justice and their right to legal representation;
Amendment 32 #
2011/2068(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasizes that resource efficiency should be addressed at regional and local level, – taking into account the particularities and different development levels of European regions – and regional and local authorities and partners should be directly involved in the planning and implementation of relevant measures; this would lead to a greater feeling of responsibility for the goals of resource efficiency at all levels; recommends identifying and promoting examples of best practice in the context of networks of local and regional authorities;
Amendment 47 #
2011/2068(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Stresses the need for a common set of indicators that will enable the full effect of the measures adopted at sectoral level to be assessed, and believes that the Commission must be involved in determining those indicators;
Amendment 3 #
2011/2067(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Agenda for new skills and jobs as part of the 2020 strategy, pointing out that conly a workforce that is skilled iscrete and consistent measures for the training of a skilled workforce are of fundamental importance for the development of a competitive, sustainable and innovative economy;
Amendment 22 #
2011/2067(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Endorses the more effective use of funds for the development of new skills and the creation of new jobs, including in the burgeoning 'green economy’; advocates use of the social economy as a means of creating jobs for the less-favoured social groups; this involves principally the European Social Fund (ESF), the European Fund for Regional Development (EFRD), the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), the Lifelong Learning programme and the Progress programme;
Amendment 34 #
2011/2067(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Supports policies designed to promote job creation taking into account the needs of small and medium-sized enterprises, which provide two thirds of all jobs in the private sector; advocates innovative measures for creating new skills, especially in the context of SMEs;
Amendment 42 #
2011/2067(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Believes that support for private enterprise in the R & D context will generate new jobs and enable the development of new skills in response to market needs;
Amendment 13 #
2011/2051(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Takes the view that cohesion policy, together with a new and powerful CAP, will release the economic potential of rural areas and generate secure jobs, guaranteeing the sustainable development of these areas;
Amendment 9 #
2011/2048(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers that, in order to avoid loss to the Community's finances arising from delays and increase the absorption rate for the Structural Funds, it is necessary to ensure the support of local and regional public authorities in their role as contracting authorities; believes that where this is done with proper care, the local and regional contracting authorities can be encouraged to apply accelerated versions of the award procedures in order not to jeopardise the projects, especially in the case of major public projects;
Amendment 12 #
2011/2048(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers it essential to create tools to increase cross-border cooperation at the level of public procurement so as to increase spending efficiency in the implementation of programmes funded by cohesion policy instruments; believes that in the context of cross-border public procurement it is absolutely necessary to clarify the aspects relating to intellectual property law;
Amendment 24 #
2011/2048(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Considers that in order to derive maximum benefit from the economic and innovative potential of SMEs in the context of procurement procedures, SMEs should be encouraged to participate in public procurement procedures organised by local and regional authorities; believes it is desirable for tender procedures to be optimised with a view to the participation of SMEs on an equal opportunities basis, especially at the selection phase, which has proved to be marked by the greatest obstacles to their participation in public tenders;
Amendment 25 #
2011/2048(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Believes that public-private partnerships (PPPs) are vital if the EU is to make the necessary investments in certain fields; calls on the Commission to take all necessary steps to remove the obstacles and establish a consistent framework for the use of PPPs, on the basis of rules that can apply to both public procurement procedures and the Structural Funds; recommends that the Member States introduce greater flexibility into their legislative framework and ensure consistency of legislation, so that PPPs can operate with maximum efficiency;
Amendment 31 #
2011/2048(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Asks the Commission to effectively address the serious failures to comply with public procurement rules repeatedly identified by the Court of Auditors in the implementation of projects under the ERDF and the Cohesion Fund, which account for 43 % of all quantifiable errors according to the Court’s Report for 2009; recommends that the Member States, in the context of the operational programmes for technical assistance, consider including training or exchanges of experience in the field of public procurement;
Amendment 34 #
2011/2048(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Considers that Europe's untapped potential to stimulate innovation by means of public procurement is enormous, and calls on the Commission to devise a flexible strategy to enable contracting authorities to employ innovation-friendly tendering procedures through which industry can be encouraged to find new and advanced solutions;
Amendment 36 #
2011/2048(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Believes that ecological public procurement represents a challenge for local and regional authorities, and that it is therefore necessary to ensure technical support from the EU institutions, as well as exchanges of experience and best practice, and also to create a website dedicated to these aspects of public procurement at local and regional level;
Amendment 38 #
2011/2048(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Asks the Commission to simplify the procedural framework as a whole by avoiding exceptions and derogations to be applied by contracting authorities and to clarify the uncertainties expressed by the latter on awards below the thresholds of the directives.; believes it is necessary to strike a balance between the desire to simplify procedures and the need to ensure fair competition in public contracts and obtain the best possible results;
Amendment 9 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 13 a (new)
Citation 13 a (new)
- having regard to its Resolution of 14 December 2010 on achieving real territorial, social and economic cohesion within the European Union – a sine qua non for global competitiveness? (Texts adopted P7_TA(2010)0473),
Amendment 25 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas European structural policy contributes greatly to overcoming the economic and financial crisis, as it tends to be oriented towards innovation and removing disparities, strongly encouraging the European regions to upgrade infrastructure, increase regional innovation potential and boost sustainable ecological development,
Amendment 26 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Amendment 111 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Emphasises that the Union will be able to hold its own in the face of global competition only if its cohesion policy can tap the development potential of all the regions in response to the challenges of the EU 2020 strategy; hence sees a need for every type of infrastructure – transport, social, educational, health and environmental – to be developed to a similar standard in all the regions of the Member States, with cohesion policy providing the opportunity for that kind of development;
Amendment 133 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Sees macroregional strategies as affording a major opportunity to harness forms of trans-regional potential and adopt a joint approach to challenges stemming from the natural environment, e.g. in relation to environmental protection; considers that better coordination of existing support mechanisms can create scope for more targeted use of the EU structural funds; considers, however, that financing in support of macroregional objectives must not affect the financial support provided to the regions for smaller-scale development projects;
Amendment 143 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Doubts whether specific operational programmes for functional geographical entities such as metropolitan regions or sea or river basins will yield additional benefits; is particularly aware, in relation to such programmes, of the absence of political bodies (including democratically elected bodies) with a sufficiently wide- ranging remit to implement them; calls insteadcalls for closer coordination of macroregional or natural-environment strategies at inter-governmental levels;
Amendment 213 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Also considers that cohesion policy has a responsibility to do what is needed to fill gaps and remove bottlenecks in a core TEN network of main routes of European significance, particularly in the border regions which have until now been badly neglected in this regard;
Amendment 250 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Takes the view that GDP must be retained as the key criterion in the definition of areas eligible for maximum support (those with GDP/PE below 75% of the EU average) and, where appropriate, cohesion countries (GDP/PE below 90% of the EU average), with reference to Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006; points out that the competent national authorities must continue to have scope for the use of additional indicators at the relevant decision-making levels;
Amendment 287 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Fears that the transitional category proposed by the Commission will become a permanent feature and will act to the detriment of other regions; calls, therefore, for the transitional rules to be degressive, subject to a time limit and restricted to regions currently eligible for support under the 'convergence' objective;
Amendment 296 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Takes the unequivocal view that efforts under Objective 3 (European Territorial Cooperation) need to be stepped up at all EU internal borders and at all three levels of such cooperation (cross-border, inter- regional and trans-national) and calls for the relevant share of the structural funds to be increased to 710%; stresses the importance of the border regions in terms of achievement of the EU 2020 objectives and recognises the role that regions bordering two or more non-EU states play in helping to achieve the objectives of the Neighbourhood Policy; considers there is a need for closer linkage with the TEN networks – in line with European priorities – and with cross-border infrastructure, and calls for a corresponding increase in funding for all border regions;
Amendment 298 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Takes the unequivocal view that efforts under Objective 3 (European Territorial Cooperation) need to be stepped up at all EU internal borders and at all three levels of such cooperation (cross-border, inter- regional and trans-national) and calls for the relevant share of the Structural Funds to be increased to 7%; stresses the importance of the border regions in terms of achievement of the EU 2020 objectives; considers there is a need for closer linkage with the TEN networks – in line with European priorities – and with cross-border infrastructure, and calls for a corresponding increase in funding for all border regions; calls for simplification of the implementing rules governing Objective 3 programs, based on the principle of proportionality, as well as for the development of a common set of eligibility rules, all of which are pre- conditions for these programs to become more effective and more visible;
Amendment 317 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Draws attention to the synergies achievable through integrated approaches, notably linking the ESF and the ERDF, and calls for common eligibility rules and for the option of cross-financing between these funds – specifically with a view to integrated development planning – to be increased and facilitated;
Amendment 341 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Calls, in the interests of efficiency, for the elimination or merger of funds relevant to both regional development and cohesion; recommends that the Globalisation Fund be abandoned as a stand-alone instrument and that appropriate provision for its functions be included in the Social Fund; calls for consideration of whether a merger of the Cohesion Fund and the Regional Development Fund would be compatible with the European Treaties; points out that, as a rule, monies from the Regional Development Fund and the Cohesion Fund are spent on the same types of project;
Amendment 353 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Welcomes the objectives of the development and investment partnership contracts between the EU and the Member States, which the Commission is proposing in place of the strategic framework plans previously prepared for individual Member States; calls for key investment priorities geared to the implementation of the EU 2020 strategy and the achievement of other cohesion-policy and structural-policy objectives to be set at this stage; considers that the allocation of responsibilities between the various levels involved needs to be clarified, and calls for national and/or regional competences to be retained in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity;
Amendment 389 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Calls for delays in launching programmes to be avoided and for decision-making and evaluation processes to be expedited as a matter of course; calls, too, for the technical equipment available to the relevant administrative authorities to be improved and for them to be more closely networked, for disclosure requirements to be reduced, and for a significant shortening of deadlines for putting the necessary expert reports out to tender and for their delivery; favours the allocation of financing to increase local and regional administrative capacities where this is needed;
Amendment 429 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 a (new)
Paragraph 40 a (new)
40a. Calls on the Member States and regions to look ahead when programming co-financing appropriations and to boost them by means of financial engineering;
Amendment 437 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Considers that the maximum level of support must not exceed 785%, otherwise applications will be driven less by the case for the projects than by the prospect of the funding they can attract; calls for it to be made easier for regions to use private co- financing and market-oriented credit options to cover their share of project financing;
Amendment 463 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Emphasises that the provision of subsidies must always be retained as an option and that it must be the responsibility of those involved on the ground to use the funding mix best suited to regional needs; considers that subsidies should continue to dominate in regions lagging behind;
Amendment 496 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
Paragraph 51
Amendment 509 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Calls on the Member States/regions to designate authorities that will assume exclusive responsibility for the proper administration of monies from the sStructural Funds, without this hampering the process of administering those funds;
Amendment 529 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54 d (new)
Paragraph 54 d (new)
54d. Considers more efficient e- government solutions (harmonised forms) to be necessary for the entire implementation and monitoring system; calls for exchange of experience between the Member States coordinated by the Commission and for coordinated implementation through groupings of administrative authorities and auditing bodies;
Amendment 546 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
Paragraph 56
56. Supports the Commission's proposal that the N+2 rule should be applied systematically except in the first year of funding and that any other derogations from it should be abolishedshould only reflect the administrative burdens required by the programming process; considers this will guarantee that a balance is struck between high- quality investment and smooth and speedy programme implementation;
Amendment 555 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 57
Paragraph 57
57. Emphasises the importance in terms of cohesion policy of the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) promoting cross-border cooperation with states outside the EU; sees infrastructure (transport and energy)(transport, energy and environmental) infrastructure links with neighbouring countries as having particularly positive effects on the European border regions; calls for ENPI funding to focus more closely on strategic needs in relation to energy and to transport infrastructure;
Amendment 559 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58 a (new)
Paragraph 58 a (new)
58a. Considers it extremely important to provide support for regions bordering regions in non-EU states both under the cohesion policy and under the European Neighbourhood Policy Instrument, especially in the fields of the management of emergency situations, environmental protection and economic development;
Amendment 45 #
2011/2034(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls for closer and more effective collaboration with the private sector and financial institutions, especially the European Investment Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, to promote the necessary financing, in particular for priority cross- border projects.
Amendment 61 #
2011/2034(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Recommends that the financing of projects be achieved by developing public-private partnerships, for which local, regional and national authorities provide incentives and the necessary legislative framework and policy support;
Amendment 21 #
2011/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Supports the Commission’s efforts to include prevention aspects in its disaster response sincefrom the very beginning; points out, therefore, that regional and local authorities play a key role in disaster prevention by implementing, through the Cohesion Policy, risk prevention strategies at territorial level; calls on the Commission to identify fresh solutions for providing direct support for regional and local authorities;
Amendment 34 #
2011/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Notes that the European regions situated on the EU's borders may be affected by disasters occurring in regions belonging to non-member states, when intervention is even more difficult; proposes that specific measures be developed to support these regions;
Amendment 1 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that the indisputable added value of European cohesion policy offers the best means of creating jobs and promoting economic growth, contributing to the regions' economic and social development and the well-being of the population; stresses the fact that programmes that started after 2007 require higher payment appropriations, and that this need must be reflected accordingly in the EU Budget for 2012;
Amendment 6 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Points out that cohesion policy has a complex vision that covers both the economic development of the less- developed regions with support for vulnerable social groups, and increased competitiveness and sustainable development in keeping with the EU2020 objectives and specific regional characteristics; takes the view that this vision must also be reflected in the budget appropriations;
Amendment 17 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 1 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. The Mechanism will contribute to the implementation of the Solidarity Clause.
Amendment 36 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) . The reinforced cooperation should be based on a Union structure consisting of an emergency response centre, a European emergency response capacity in the form of a voluntary pool of pre-committed capacities from the Member States, trained experts, a common emergency communication and information system managed by the Commission and contact points in the Member States. It should provide a framework for collecting validated emergency information, for disseminating that information to the Member States and for sharing lessons learnt from interventions by promoting examples of good practice.
Amendment 41 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission, in cooperation with the Member States, shall define quality requirements for the capacities to be committed to the European Emergency Response Capacity. Member States shall be responsible for ensuring their quality.
Amendment 41 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 15 a (new)
Recital 15 a (new)
(15a) Particular attention must be given to regions on EU external borders and outlying regions, given the increased risk of natural and man-made disasters and the fact that intervention is more difficult there than in other regions, frequently necessitating assistance from third countries.
Amendment 43 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The accessibility of transport in all EU regions and the availability of adequate means of transport needs to be improved to support the development of a rapid response capability at the Union level The Union should support and supplement the efforts of Member States by facilitating the pooling of transport resources of Member States and contributing, where necessary, to the financing of additional means of transport subject to certain criteria.
Amendment 45 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 11 – paragraph 6
Article 11 – paragraph 6
6. The capacities registered in the European Emergency Response Capacity shall be available for emergency response operations under the Mechanism at the request of the Commission through the ERC. Member States shall inform the Commission as soon as possible of any compelling reasons that prevent them from making these capacities available in a specific emergency. The report will be accompanied by recommendations to individual Member States not doing enough to meet Union guidelines.
Amendment 101 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) assistance for Member States to improve accessibility in regions at greater risk from emergency situations.
Amendment 15 #
2011/0440(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shallare obliged to ensure the quality of the data transmitted.
Amendment 46 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Public procurement plays a key role in the Europe 2020 strategy as one of the market-based instruments to be used to achieve a smart, sustainable and inclusive growth while ensuring the most efficient use of public funds. For that purpose, the current public procurement rules adopted pursuant to Directive 2004/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts have to be revised and modernised in order to increase the efficiency of public spending, facilitatsimplifying in particular the participation ofaccess for small and medium-sized enterprises in public procurement, and to enable procurers to make better use of public procurement in support of common societal goals. There is also a need to clarify basic notions and concepts to ensure better legal certainty and to incorporate certain aspects of related well-established case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Amendment 47 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Illicit conduct by participants in a procurement procedure, such as attempts to unduly influence the decision-making process or to enter into agreements with other candidates to manipulate the outcome of the procedure can result in violations of the basic principles of Union law and in serious distortions of competition. Economic operators should therefore be required to submit a declaration on honour that they do not engage in such illicit activities and will be excluded from both the corresponding and subsequent procurement procedures within the EU if this declaration proves to be false.
Amendment 51 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) Joint awarding of contracts by contracting entities from different Member States currently encounters specific legal difficulties, with special reference to conflicts of national laws. Despite the fact that Directive 2004/17/EC implicitly allowed for cross-border joint public procurement, in practice several national legal systems have explicitly or implicitly rendered cross-border joint procurement legally uncertain or impossible. Contracting entities from different Member States may be interested in cooperating and in jointly awarding contracts in order to derive maximum benefit from the potential of the internal market in terms of economies of scale and risk-benefit sharing, not least for innovative projects involving a greater amount of risk than reasonably bearable by a single contracting entity. Therefore new rules on cross-border joint procurement designating the applicable law should be established in order to facilitate cooperation between contracting entities across the Single Market. In addition, contracting entities from different Member States may set up joint legal bodies established under national or Union law. Specific rules should be established for such form of joint procurement. Similarly, in the context of cross-border public procurement, it is absolutely necessary to clarify the aspects relating to intellectual property law;
Amendment 56 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) The evaluation has shown that Member States do not consistently and systematically promote and monitor the implementation and the functioning of public procurement rules. This has a negative impact on the correct implementation of provisions stemming from those directives, which is a major source of cost and uncertainty. Several Member States have appointed a national central body dealing with public procurement issues, but the functions that such bodies are empowered withtasks entrusted to such bodies vary considerably across Member States. Clearer, more consistent and authoritative information, monitoring and control mechanisms would increase knowledge of the functioning of procurement rules, improve legal certainty for businesses and contracting entauthorities, and contribute to establishing a level playing field. Such mechanisms could serve as tools for the prevention, detection and early resolution of problems, especially with regard toparticularly in the case of projects cofunded by the Union, and for the identification of structural deficiencies. There is in particular a strong need to coordinIt is vital thate those mechanisms be coordinated to ensure consistent application, controls and monitoring of public procurement policy, as well as systematic assessment of theits outcomes of procurement policy across the Union.
Amendment 58 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 59
Recital 59
(59) Not allSome contracting entities mayauthorities do not have the internal expertise to deal with economically or technically complex contracts. Against this background, appropriate professional support would be an effective complement to monitoring and control activities. On the one hand, this objective can be achieved by knowledge sharing tools (knowledge centres) offering technical assistance to contracting entities; on the other hand, business, not least SMEs, should benefit from administrative assistance, in particular when participating in procurement procedures on a cross- border basis.
Amendment 60 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 61 a (new)
Recital 61 a (new)
(61a) The Commission should encourage the Member States to conduct regular training and awareness-raising campaigns and engage in consultation targeted at regional and local authorities and SMEs, and also to involve other interested parties, in order to ensure there is informed participation in public procurement and reduce the frequency of errors and to develop the required expertise among the contracting authorities of local and regional administrations in order to implement innovative procurement;
Amendment 60 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Public procurement plays a key role in the Europe 2020 strategy as one of the market-based instruments to be used to achieve a smart, sustainable and inclusive growth while ensuring the most efficient use of public funds. For that purpose, the current public procurement rules adopted pursuant to Directive 2004/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts have to be revised and modernised in order to increase the efficiency of public spending, facilitating in particular the participation ofsimplifying access for small and medium-sized enterprises into public procurement and to enable procurers to make better use of public procurement in support of common societal goals. There is also a need to clarify basic notions and concepts to ensure better legal certainty and to incorporate certain aspects of related well-established case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Amendment 63 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) Illicit conduct by participants in a procurement procedure, such as attempts to unduly influence the decision-making process or to enter into agreements with other candidates to manipulate the outcome of the procedure, can result in violations of the basic principles of Union law and in serious distortions of competition. Economic operators should therefore be required to submit a declaration on honour that they do not engage in such illicit activities and be excluded from both this and subsequent procurement procedures within the EU if this declaration proves to be false.
Amendment 64 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) Joint awarding of public contracts by contracting authorities from different Member States currently encounters specific legal difficulties, with special reference to conflicts of national laws. Despite the fact that Directive 2004/18/EC implicitly allowed for cross-border joint public procurement, in practice several national legal systems have explicitly or implicitly rendered cross-border joint procurement legally uncertain or impossible. Contracting authorities from different Member States may be interested in cooperating and in jointly awarding public contracts in order to derive maximum benefit from the potential of the internal market in terms of economies of scale and risk-benefit sharing, not least for innovative projects involving a greater amount of risk than reasonably bearable by a single contracting authority. Therefore new rules on cross-border joint procurement designating the applicable law should be established in order to facilitate cooperation between contracting authorities across the Single Market. In addition, contracting authorities from different Member States may set up joint legal bodies established under national or Union law. Specific rules should be established for such form of joint procurement. Similarly, for the purposes of cross-border public procurement, it is essential to clarify the aspects relating to intellectual property law.
Amendment 66 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
Recital 31
Amendment 67 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) Many economic operators, and not least SMEs, find that a major obstacle to their participation in public procurement consists in administrative burdens deriving from the need to produce a substantial number of certificates or other documents related to exclusion and selection criteria. Limiting such requirements, for example through self-declarations, can result in considerable simplification for the benefit of both contracting authorities and economic operators. The tenderer to which it has been decided to award the contract should, however, be required to provide the relevant evidence and contracting authorities should not conclude contracts with tenderers unable to do so. Further simplification can be achieved throughIt is necessary to introduce standardised documents such as the European Procurement Passport, which should be recognized by all contracting authorities and widely promoted among economic operators, in particular SMEs, for whom they can substantially lessen the administrative burden.
Amendment 73 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) The evaluation has shown that Member States do not promote and do not consistently and systematically monitor the implementation and functioning of public procurement rules. This has a negative impact on the correct implementation of provisions stemming from these directives, which is a major source of cost and uncertainty. Several Member States have appointed a national central body dealing with public procurement issues, but the tasks entrusted to such bodies vary considerably across Member States. Clearer, more consistent and authoritative information, monitoring and control mechanisms would increase knowledge of the functioning of procurement rules, improve legal certainty for businesses and contracting authorities, and contribute to establishing a level playing field. Such mechanisms could serve as tools for the prevention, detection and early resolution of problems, especially with regard to projects cofunded by the Union, and for the identification of structural deficiencies. There is in particular a strong need to coordinate these mechanisms to ensure consistent application, control and monitoring of public procurement policy, as well as systematic assessment of the outcomes of procurement policy across the Union.
Amendment 75 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 51
Recital 51
(51) Not allCertain contracting authorities may, particularly at regional level, do not have the internal expertise to deal with economically or technically complex contracts. Against this background, appropriate professional support would be an effective complement to monitoring and control activities. On the one hand, this objective can be achieved by knowledge sharing tools (knowledge centres) offering technical assistance to contracting authorities; on the other hand, business, not least SMEs, should benefit from administrative assistance, in particular when participating in procurement procedures on a cross-border basis.
Amendment 76 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 53 a (new)
Recital 53 a (new)
(53a) In addition, the Commission and the Member States should periodically conduct training and awareness raising campaigns and engage in consultation targeted at regional and local authorities and SMEs involving also other interested parties, so as to ensure informed participation in public procurement, reduce the frequency of errors and develop the required expertise among the contracting authorities within local and regional administrations in order to implement innovative procurement.
Amendment 84 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) EUR 13200 000 for public supply and service contracts awarded by central government authorities and design contests organised by such authorities; where public supply contracts are awarded by contracting authorities operating in the field of defence, that threshold shall apply only to contracts concerning products covered by Annex III;
Amendment 26 #
2011/0428(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) Given that harmful effects on the environment and climate frequently arise from the activities of countries in the vicinity of the EU, particular attention should be given to its external border and outermost regions so as to ensure the necessary strategic guarantees and prevent damage to the environment;
Amendment 47 #
2011/0428(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) to support communication, management, and dissemination of information in the field of environment, and to facilitate knowledge sharing on successful environmental solutions and practice, including by developing regional cooperation platforms between stakeholders and training;
Amendment 65 #
2011/0428(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
VAT shall not be considered an eligible cost for projects referred to in Article 18 provided that it is non-recoverable and subject to compliance with Union VAT legislation.
Amendment 34 #
2011/0405(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission, the Member States and the European Investment Bank (EIB) shall ensure coherence between support provided under this Regulation and other support provided by the Union, the Member States and the European Investment Bank. Synergy between these programmes is essential in order to mutually reinforce and achieve regional and cross-border objectives.
Amendment 24 #
2011/0404(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) action to combat climate change and prevent disasters;
Amendment 25 #
2011/0404(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 5
Article 4 – paragraph 5
Amendment 643 #
2011/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a decision
Annex 1 – section 3 – point 1 – point 1.11 – paragraph 1
Annex 1 – section 3 – point 1 – point 1.11 – paragraph 1
There is a need to support the development of scientific tools, methods and statistics, privacy impact assessments for rapid, accurate and predictive assessment of the safety, efficacy, protection of human rights and quality of health technologies including new drugs, biologics, advanced therapies and medical devices. This is particularly relevant for new developments in domains including those concerning vaccines, cell/tissue and gene therapies, organs and transplantation, specialist manufacturing, bio banks, new medical devices, diagnostic/treatment procedures, genetic testing, interoperability and e- health, including privacy aspects. Similarly, support for improved risk assessment methodologies, testing approaches and strategies relating to environment and health are required. There is also a need to support the development of relevant methods for assisting the assessment of ethical aspects of the above domains.
Amendment 958 #
2011/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a decision
Annex 1 – section 3 – point 6 – point 6.3 – paragraph 3 – point 6.3.3 – paragraph 1
Annex 1 – section 3 – point 6 – point 6.3 – paragraph 3 – point 6.3.3 – paragraph 1
Cyber security is a prerequisite for people, business and public services in order to benefit from the opportunities offered by the Internet. It requires providing security for systems, networks, access devices, and software and services, including cloud computing, while taking into account the interoperability of multiple technologies. Research will prevent, detect and manage in real-time cyber-attacks across multiple domains and jurisdictions, and to protect critical ICT infrastructures. The digital society is in full development with constantly changing uses and abuses of the Internet, new ways of social interaction, new ways of online transactions, financial transactions (e-commerce) new mobile and location-based services and the emergence of the Internet of Things. This requires a new type of research which should be triggered by the emerging applications, usage, new specific business/trade models and societal trends. Nimble research initiatives will be undertaken including pro-active R&D to react quickly to new contemporary developments in trust and security.
Amendment 965 #
2011/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a decision
Annex 1 – section 3 – point 6 – point 6.3 – paragraph 3 – point 6.3.4 – paragraph 2
Annex 1 – section 3 – point 6 – point 6.3 – paragraph 3 – point 6.3.4 – paragraph 2
Activities across all mission areas will also address the integration and interoperability of systems and services including aspects such as communication, distributed architectures and human factors. This also requires integrating civilian and military capabilities in tasks ranging from civil protection to humanitarian relief, border management or peace-keeping. This will include technological development in the sensitive area of dual-use technologies to guarantee interoperability between civil protection and military forces and amongst civil protection forces worldwide, as well as reliability, organisational, legal and ethical aspects, trade issues, protection of confidentiality and integrity of information and traceability of all transactions and processing, without infringing the fundamental rights to privacy and protection of personal data.
Amendment 968 #
2011/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a decision
Annex 1 – section 3 – point 6 – point 6.3 – paragraph 3 – point 6.3.5 – paragraph 1
Annex 1 – section 3 – point 6 – point 6.3 – paragraph 3 – point 6.3.5 – paragraph 1
Safeguarding the human right of privacy in the digital society will requirecan notably be achieved by ensuring the development of privacy- by-design and privacy-by-default frameworks and technologies since the conception of products and services and creating incentives that reward privacy by design and security by design approaches. Technologies will be developed allowempowering users to control their personal data and its use by third parties; as well as tools to detect and block illegal content and data breaches and toin a manner that protects human rights on- lineand preventings that people's behaviours individually or in groups is subjected and/ or limited by unlawful searching and profiling.
Amendment 970 #
2011/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a decision
Annex 1 – section 3 – point 6 – point 6.3 – paragraph 3 – point 6.3.5 – paragraph 2
Annex 1 – section 3 – point 6 – point 6.3 – paragraph 3 – point 6.3.5 – paragraph 2
Any new security solution and technology needs to be acceptable to the society, comply with Union and international law, be effective and proportionate in identifying and addressing the security threat. Better understanding the socioeconomic, cultural, and anthropological dimensions of security, the causes of insecurity, the role of media and communication and the citizen's perceptions, are therefore essential. Ethical issues and protection of human values and fundamental rights will be addressed and remain fundamental in this debate.
Amendment 6 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The Union has the objective of strengthening its scientific and technological bases by achieving a European Research Area ("ERA") in which researchers, scientific knowledge and technology circulate freely, and encouraging the Union’s regions individually and the Union as a whole to become more competitive, including in its industry. To pursue those objectives the Union should carry out activities to implement research, technological development and demonstration, promote international cooperation, disseminate and optimise results and stimulate training and mobility.
Amendment 11 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) With the aim of deepening the relationship between science and society and reinforcing public confidence in science, Horizon 2020 should favour an informed engagement ofbe supported by a powerful information campaign for citizens and civil society on research and innovation matters by promoting science education, by making scientific knowledge more accessible, by developing responsible research and innovation agendas that meet citizens' and civil society's concerns and expectations and by facilitating their participation in Horizon 2020 activities.
Amendment 12 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Horizon 2020 should contribute to the attractiveness of the research profession in the Union and lead to fresh job creation in this area. Adequate attention should be paid to the European Charter for Researchers and Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers, together with other relevant reference frameworks defined in the context of the European Research Area, while respecting their voluntary nature.
Amendment 20 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) To achieve maximum impact, Horizon 2020 should develop close synergies with other Union programmes in areas such as education, space, environment, competitiveness and SMEs, the internal security, culture and media and with the Cohesion Policy funds and Rural Development Policy, which can specifically help to strengthen national and regional research and innovation capabilities in the context of smart specialisation strategies. Synergy should not be limited to supplementary project funding alone, given that the cultivation of professional relations, the development of capacities and in particular the transfer of know-how could represent a significant form of synergy.
Amendment 21 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26 a (new)
Recital 26 a (new)
(26a) Similarly, in order to optimize the results of Horizon 2020, the Commission should encourage regional stakeholders to formulate regional strategies so as to combine existing forms of public or private funding at EU level.
Amendment 31 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Linkages and interfaces shall be implemented across and within the priorities of Horizon 2020. Particular attention shall be paid in this respect to the development and application of key enabling and industrial technologies, to bridging from discovery to market application, to cross-disciplinary research and innovation, to social and economic sciences and humanities, to fostering the functioning and achievement of the ERA, to cooperation with third countries, to responsible research and innovation including gender, and to enhancing the attractiveness of the research profession and to facilitating cross-border and cross- sector mobility of researchers, as well as to the reduction of technological dependence on third countries.
Amendment 36 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Linkages and interfaces shall be implemented across and within the priorities of Horizon 2020. Particular attention shall be paid in this respect to the development and application of key enabling and industrial technologies, to bridging from discovery to market application, to cross-disciplinary research and innovation, to social and economic sciences and humanities, to fostering the functioning and achievement of the ERA, to cooperation with third countries, to responsible research and innovation including gender, and to enhancing the attractiveness of the research profession and, to facilitating cross-border and cross- sector mobility of researchers and to achieving adequate technology non-dependence on a European level.
Amendment 38 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. Research and innovation activities carried out under Horizon 2020 shall have an exclusive focus on civilfocus on civil applications without excluding technologies with dual-use applications.
Amendment 61 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 1 – section 3 – point 6.3 – point 6.3.3 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Annex 1 – section 3 – point 6.3 – point 6.3.3 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) identify the reasons why people become radicalised into violence and effective social policy measures to counter these reasons.
Amendment 100 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. For the implementation of Horizon 2020, account shall be taken of advice and inputs provided by: advisory groups of independent, high level experts set up by the Commission; dialogue structures created under international science and technology agreements; forward looking activities; targeted public consultations; active consultation of organisations of persons with disabilities, and transparent and interactive processes that ensure responsible research and innovation is supported.
Amendment 117 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
All the research and innovation activities carried out under Horizon 2020 shall comply with ethical principles and relevant national, Union and international legislation, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights and, its Supplementary Protocols as well as the United-Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
Amendment 120 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Particular attention shall be paid to the principle of proportionality, the right to privacy, the right to the protection of personal data, the right to the physical and mental integrity of a person, the right to non-discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age and the need to ensure high levels of human health protection.
Amendment 147 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 22 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) initiatives aimed at widening awareness and facilitating access to funding under Horizon 2020, in particular for those regions or types of participant that are underrepresented, including researchers and participants with disabilities;
Amendment 223 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part III – point 1.1 – paragraph 1
Annex I – part III – point 1.1 – paragraph 1
Lifelong health and wellbeing for all, high- quality and economically sustainable health and care systems, and opportunities for new jobs and growth are the aims of support to research and innovation in response to this challenge and will make a major contribution to Europe 2020. In particular, persons with disabilities are two to three times more likely to be unemployed than non-disabled people.
Amendment 230 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part III – point 1.1 – paragraph 2
Annex I – part III – point 1.1 – paragraph 2
The cost of Union health and social care systems is rising with care and prevention measures in all ages increasingly expensive, the number of Europeans aged over 65 expected to nearly double from 85 million in 2008 to 151 million by 2060, and those over 80 to rise from 22 to 61 million in the same period. Reducing or containing these costs such that they do not become unsustainable depends in part on ensuring the lifelong health and wellbeing of all and therefore on the effective prevention, treatment and management of disease and disabilityimpairments.
Amendment 240 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part III – point 1.1 – paragraph 3
Annex I – part III – point 1.1 – paragraph 3
Chronic conditions such as cardiovascular disease (CVD), cancer, diabetes, neurological and mental health disorders, overweight and obesity and various functional limitations are major causes of disabilityimpairments, ill-health and premature death, and present considerable social and economic costs.
Amendment 275 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part III – point 1.3 – paragraph 2
Annex I – part III – point 1.3 – paragraph 2
Successful efforts to prevent, manage, treat and cure disease, disabilityimpairments and reduced functionality are underpinned by the fundamental understanding of their determinants and causes, processes and impacts, as well as factors underlying good health and wellbeing. Effective sharing of data and the linkage of these data with large scale cohort studies is also essential, as is the translation of research findings into the clinic, in particular through the conduct of clinical trials.
Amendment 282 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part III – point 1.3 – paragraph 3
Annex I – part III – point 1.3 – paragraph 3
An increasing disease and disabilityimpairments burden in the context of an aging population places further demands on health and care sectors. If effective health and care is to be maintained for all ages, efforts are required to improve decision making in prevention and treatment provision, to identify and support the dissemination of best practice in the health and care sectors, and to support integrated care and the wide uptake of technological, organisational and social innovations empowering in particular older persons as well as disabled personspersons acquiring a disability during their life to remain active and independent. Doing so will contribute to increasing, and lengthening the duration of their physical, social, and mental well- being.
Amendment 292 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part III – point 1.3 – paragraph 5
Annex I – part III – point 1.3 – paragraph 5
Specific activities shall include: understanding the determinants of health (including environmental, social and climate related factors), improving health promotion and disease prevention; understanding disease and improving diagnosis; developing effective screening programmes and improving the assessment of disease susceptibility; improving surveillance and preparedness; developing better preventive vaccines; using in-silico medicine for improving disease management and prediction; treating disease; transferring knowledge to clinical practice and scalable innovation actions; better use of health data; active ageing, independent and assisted livingunderstanding of inequalities in the type, appropriateness and quality of health care and treatment available to persons with disabilities, including the consequences for disabled people (e.g. loss of independence); active ageing, independent and assisted living for elderly persons and persons with disabilities in particular those requiring a high level of support ; individual empowerment for self-management of health; promotion of integrated care; improving scientific tools and methods to support policy making and regulatory needs; and optimising the efficiency and effectiveness of healthcare systems and reducing inequalities by evidence based decision making and dissemination of best practice, and innovative technologies and approaches. including studies on European welfare systems and their effectiveness in satisfying the diverse needs of persons with disabilities including participation and retention in employment.
Amendment 371 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part III – point 6.3.1 – paragraph 1
Annex I – part III – point 6.3.1 – paragraph 1
The aim is to enhance solidarity as well as social, economic and political inclusion and positive inter-cultural dynamics in Europe and with international partners, through cutting-edge science and interdisciplinarity, technological advances and organisational innovations. Humanities research can play an important role here. Research shall support policymakers in designing policies that combat poverty and prevent the development of various forms of divisions, discriminations and inequalities in European societies, such as gender inequalities, discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age, including measures to remove barriers to accessibility for persons with disabilities or digital or innovation divides, and with other world regions. It shall in particular feed into the implementation and the adaptation of the Europe 2020 strategy and the broad external action of the Union. Specific measures shall be taken to unlock excellence in less developed regions, thereby widening participation in Horizon 2020.
Amendment 373 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part III – point 6.3.2 – paragraph 1
Annex I – part III – point 6.3.2 – paragraph 1
The aim is to foster the development of innovative societies and policies in Europe through the engagement of citizens, including persons with disabilities, enterprises and users in research and innovation and the promotion of coordinated research and innovation policies in the context of globalisation. Particular support will be provided for the development of the ERA and the development of framework conditions for innovation.
Amendment 374 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part III – point 6.3.1 – paragraph 2 – point c
Annex I – part III – point 6.3.1 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) ensure societal engagement, also by consulting civil society organisations, in particular organisations of persons with disabilities, in research and innovation;
Amendment 565 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point c a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point c a (new)
(c a) research activities intended to create a surveillance society.
Amendment 1672 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 1 – Part 3 – point 6 – point 6.1 – paragraph 5
Annex 1 – Part 3 – point 6 – point 6.1 – paragraph 5
Third, many forms of insecurity, whether crime, violence, terrorism, cyber attacks, privacy abuses and other forms of social and economic disorders increasingly affect citizens. According to estimates, there is likely to be up to 75 million direct victims of crime every year in Europe39 . The direct cost of crime, terrorism, illegal activities, violence and disasters in Europe has been estimated at at least EUR 650 billion (about 5 % of the Union's GDP) in 2010. A vivid example of the consequences of terrorism is the attack against the Twin Towers in Manhattan on 11 September 2001. Thousands of lives were lost and it is estimated that this event caused losses in US productivity amounting to US$ 35 billion, US$ 47 billion in total output and a rise in unemployment by almost 1 % in the following quarter. Citizens, firms and institutions are increasingly involved in digital interactions and transactions in social, financial and commercial areas of life but the development of Internet has also led to cyber crime worth billion of Euros each year and breaches of privacy affecting individual or associations across the continent. The development of insecurity in everyday life and because of unexpected situations is likely to affect the citizens' trust not only in institutions but also in each other. A key element in order to foster economic growth and development is a proper approach to stimulate the free flow of information balanced with an appropriate level of information security and protection of privacy and personal data.
Amendment 3 #
2011/0399(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. The relevant work programme may restrict the participation in Horizon 2020 or parts thereof of legal entities established in third countriwhich, by the work they do, by the objectives wthere conditions for the participation of legal entities from Member States in the third country's research and innovation programmes are considered prejudicial to the Union's interestsy pursue, or by the places in which they operate, would potentially hinder the Union in fulfilling its legal obligations under international law.
Amendment 130 #
2011/0399(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) These rules for the participation and dissemination should provide a coherent, comprehensive and transparent framework to ensure the most efficient implementation possible, taking into account the need for easy access by all participants, notably small and medium-sized enterprises, Civil Society Organisations, also including organisations of persons with disabilities, through simplified procedures. The financial assistance from the Union could be provided through different forms.
Amendment 139 #
2011/0399(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) Horizon 2020 should provide for funding to cover all the additional costs related to the participation of researchers and participants with disabilities in projects funded by Horizon 2020.
Amendment 73 #
2011/0367(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall adopt, by way of implementing act, the work programme for Union actions and, emergency assistance and technical assistance. That implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 55(3).
Amendment 94 #
2011/0367(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4
Article 12 – paragraph 4
4. Each Member State shall set up a monitoring committee to support the preparation and implementation of national programmes.
Amendment 142 #
2011/0367(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3
Article 22 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall allocate adequate resources for each boddesignated authority to carry out their functions throughout the programming period.
Amendment 148 #
2011/0367(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3
Article 25 – paragraph 3
3. The Responsible Authority shall draw up a detailed control report on each on-the- spot control.
Amendment 150 #
2011/0367(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 25 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) the rules concerning administrative and on-the-spot controls to be conducted by the Responsible Authorities of the Member States with regard to the respect of obligations, commitments and eligibility rules resulting from the application of this Regulation and the Specific Regulations;
Amendment 154 #
2011/0367(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1
Article 26 – paragraph 1
Responsible Authorities shall ensure that the beneficiaries receive the total amount of the public support as quickly as possiblon time and in full. No amount shall be deducted or withheld and no specific charge or other charge with equivalent effect shall be levied that would reduce these amounts for the beneficiaries.
Amendment 160 #
2011/0367(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 29 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
4. Commission officials or authorised Commission representatives, duly empowered to carry out on-the-spot audits, shall have access to all records, documents and metadata, irrespective of the medium in which they are stored, relating to expenditure or to management and control systems. Competent bodies of the Member States shall provide copies of such records, documents and metadata to the Commission upon request.
Amendment 40 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Experience with the current financial framework shows that many Member States, which are eligible to the Cohesion Fund, are facing significant obstacles in delivering on time complex cross-border transport infrastructure projects with a high Union added value. Therefore, in order to improve the delivery of transport projects, in particular cross-border ones, with a high Union added value, part of the Cohesion Fund allocation (EUR 10 billion22 ) should be transferred to finance transport projects on the transport core network in the Member States eligible to the Cohesion Fund under the Connecting Europe Facility. The Commission should support Member States eligible to the Cohesion Fund to develop an adequate pipeline of projects in order to give greatest possible priority to therespect national allocations under the Cohesion Fund.
Amendment 41 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Experience with the current financial framework shows that many Member States, which are eligible to the Cohesion Fund, are facing significant obstacles in delivering on time complex cross-border transport infrastructure projects with a high Union added value. Therefore, in order to improve the delivery of transport projects, in particular cross-border ones, with a high Union added value, part of the Cohesion Fund allocation (EUR 10 billion) should be transferred to finance transport projects on the transport core network in the Member States eligible to the Cohesion Fund under the Connecting Europe Facilityrespecting national allocations for the projects listed in the Annex of this Regulation. The Commission should support Member States eligible to the Cohesion Fund to develop an adequate pipeline of projects in order to give greatest possible priority to the national allocations under the Cohesion Fund.
Amendment 46 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) The Connecting Europe Facility should propose financial instruments to promote substantial participation by the private sector investors and financial institutions in infrastructure investment. To be sufficiently attractive to the private sector, financial instruments should be designed and implemented with due regard to simplification and reduction of administrative burden, while with a level of flexibility in mind to be able to respond to identified financing needs in a flexible manner. The responsible management authorities shall create the necessary incentives for attracting private investors. The design of these instruments should draw from the experience gained in the implementation of financial instruments in the 2007-2013 Multi- Annual Financial Framework, such as the Loan Guarantee instrument for TEN-T projects (LGTT), the Risk Sharing Finance Facility (RSFF) and the 2020 European Fund for Energy, Climate Change, and Infrastructure (the ‘'Marguerite Fund'’).
Amendment 54 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
The Connecting Europe Facility shall enable the preparation and implementation of projects of common interest within the framework of the trans-European networks policy in the sectors of energy, transport and telecommunications. In particular the Connecting Europe Facility shall support the implementation of projects aiming at the development and construction of new or upgrading of existing infrastructure in the field of transport, energy and telecommunications and giving priority to missing infrastructure. To this end, the Connecting Europe Facility shall pursue the following objectives:
Amendment 59 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) enable the Unioncontribute to achieve itsthe Union targets of a 20% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions42, a 20% increase in energy efficiency and raising the share of renewable energy to 20% up to 2020, while ensuring greater solidarity among Member States.
Amendment 68 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point i
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point i
(i) promoting the further integration of the internal energy market and the interoperability of electricity and gas networks across borders, including by ensuring that no Member State is isolated from the European network, to be measured by the number of projects effectively interconnecting Member states‘ networks and removing internal bottlenecks by taking into account also the future sources of energy available in the Member states;
Amendment 80 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) transport: EUR 31 694 000 000, out of which EUR 10 000 000 000 shall be transferred from the Cohesion Fund to be spent in line with this Regulation in Member States eligible for funding from the Cohesion Fundfor projects listed in the Annex to this Regulation, respecting the national allocations;
Amendment 87 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) actions implementing exclusively the core network according to Chapter III of Regulation (EU) No XXXX/2012 [TEN-T Guidelines], including the deployment of new technologies and innovation according to Article 39 of Regulation (EU) No XXXX/2012 [TEN-T Guidelines];
Amendment 97 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 7
Article 8 – paragraph 7
7. VAT shall not be an eligible cost.
Amendment 101 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point b – point i
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point b – point i
(i) rail and inland waterways: the amount of Union financial aid shall not exceed 230% of the eligible cost; the funding rate may be increased to 340% for actions addressing bottlenecks; the funding rate may be increased to 450% for actions concerning cross-border sections;
Amendment 105 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point b – point ii
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point b – point ii
(ii) inland transport connections to ports and airports, actions to reduce rail freight noise by retrofitting of existing rolling stock, as well as development of ports and multi-modal platforms: the amount of Union financial aid shall not exceed 230% of the eligible cost.
Amendment 152 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 1 – part 1 - section b – row - 1 (new)
Annex 1 – part 1 - section b – row - 1 (new)
Bucharest to Republic of Moldova border – Cross-Border – Rail – studies ongoing
Amendment 28 #
2011/0300(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Evaluation of the current TEN-E framework has clearly shown that this policy, while making a positive contribution to selected projects by giving them political visibility, lacks vision, focus, and flexibility to fill identified infrastructure gaps and the European Union is far from ready to meet future challenges in this field.
Amendment 40 #
2011/0300(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Projects of common interest should be implemented as quickly as possible and should be closely monitored and evaluated, while keeping the administrative burden for projects promoters to a minimum. The Commission should nominate European coordinators forto assist projects facing particular difficulties so as to prevent them being compromised.
Amendment 43 #
2011/0300(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) The establishment of a single competent authority at national level integrating or coordinating all permit granting procedures ("one-stop shop") should reduce complexity, increase efficiency and transparency and help enhance cooperation among Member States by organising joint working parties between these competent bodies.
Amendment 19 #
2011/0299(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Telecommunications networks and services are increasingly becoming internet-based infrastructures, with broadband networks and digital services closely interrelated. The internet is becoming the dominant platform for communication, services, and doing business. Therefore, the trans-European availabilityavailability in all EU regions of fast Internet access and digital services in the public interest is essential for economic growth, social inclusion and the Single Market.
Amendment 24 #
2011/0299(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14 a (new)
Recital 14 a (new)
(14 a) Given the problems arising regarding access to spectrum, wireless broadband networks can play a key role in covering all areas, including rural and isolated areas with no other options.
Amendment 27 #
2011/0299(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) contribute to economic growth, encourage social inclusion and support the development of the Single Market resulting in the improvement of the competitiveness of the European economy, including small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs).
Amendment 18 #
2011/0294(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Growth in traffic has resulted in increased congestion on international transport corridors. This situation is encountered in particular in new Member States because of underdeveloped infrastructure. In order to ensure the international mobility of goods and passengers, the capacity of the trans- European transport network and the use of this capacity should be optimised and, if necessary, expanded by removing infrastructure bottlenecks and bridging missing infrastructure links within and between Member States.
Amendment 25 #
2011/0294(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) The trans-European transport network, thanks to its large scale, should provide the basis for the large-scale deployment of new technologies and innovation, which, for example, can help enhance the overall efficiency of the European transport sector, increase transport safety and security and curb its carbon footprint. This will contribute towards the Europe 2020 strategy and the Transport White Paper's target of a 60% cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 (based on 1990 levels) and at the same time contribute to the objective of increasing fuel security for the Union.
Amendment 26 #
2011/0294(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) In order to achieve a high-quality and efficient transport infrastructure across all modes the guidelines should contain provisions regarding the security and safety of passengers and freight movements, the economic, social and environmental impact on regions in which the respective infrastructure projects are located, and the impact of climate change and of potential natural and man-made disasters on infrastructure and accessibility for all transport users.
Amendment 28 #
2011/0294(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) The core network should be a subset of the comprehensive network overlaying it. It should represent the strategically most important nodes and links of the trans- European transport network, according to traffic needs and the economic and social needs of the regions and countries in which they are located. It should be multi- modal, i.e. include all transport modes and their connections as well as relevant traffic and information management systems.
Amendment 31 #
2011/0294(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point j
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point j
(j) a transport infrastructure that reflects the specific situations in different parts of the Union and provides for a balanced coverage of all European regions, including regions of the new Member States, outermost regions and other peripheral ones;
Amendment 22 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) In order to help beneficiaries to become more aware of the relationship between agricultural practices and management of farms on the one hand, and standards relating to the environment, climate change, good agricultural condition of land, food safety, public health, animal health, plant health and animal welfare on the other, it is necessary that Member States establish a comprehensive farm advisory system offering advice to beneficiaries. That farm advisory system should in any way not affect the obligation and responsibility of beneficiaries to respect those standards. Also a clear separation between advice and checks , Member States should encourage beneficiaries to use the advisory system and should be ensured by the Member State a clear separation between advice and checks.
Amendment 23 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) EAlthough entry into the farm advisory system should be on a voluntary basis for beneficiaries, intense promotion of the system should serve to make beneficiaries aware of all the benefits that become available to them when they use that system. All beneficiaries, even if not receiving support under the CAP, should be allowed to participate in the system. However priority criteria may be set by the Member States. Due to the nature of the system, it is appropriate for the information obtained in the course of the advisory activity to be treated as confidential, except in case of serious infringements of Union or national law. In order to ensure the efficiency of the system, advisors should be suitably qualified and regularly trained.
Amendment 37 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)
(2a) Intense promotion of the farm advisory system shall make beneficiaries aware of all the benefits that become available to them when they use that system.
Amendment 90 #
2011/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) The evolution and specialisation of agriculture and forestry and the particular challenges faced by micro-, small and medium-sized enterprises (hereinafter "SMEs") in rural areas require an appropriate level of technical and economic training as well as an increased capacity to access and exchange knowledge and information including in the form of diffusion of best agricultural and forestry production practices. Knowledge transfer and information actions should take not only the form of traditional training courses but be adapted to the needs of rural actors. Workshops, coaching, demonstration activities, information actions, regional platforms for exchanging experiences but also short- term farm exchange or visit schemes should therefore also be supported. Knowledge and information acquired should enable farmers, forest holders, persons engaged in the food sector and rural SMEs to enhance in particular their competitiveness and resource efficiency and improve their environmental performance while at the same time contributing to the sustainability of the rural economy. In order to ensure that knowledge transfer and information actions are effective in delivering these results it should be required that the providers of knowledge transfer services have all the appropriate capabilities.
Amendment 93 #
2011/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) SMEs are the backbone of the Union rural economy. Farm and non-agricultural business development should be aimed at employment promotion and the setting up of quality jobs in rural areas, above all for young people, maintenance of already existing jobs, reduction of seasonality fluctuations in employment, development of non-agricultural sectors outside agriculture and agricultural and food processing while fostering at the same time business integration and local inter- sectoral links. Projects integrating at the same time agriculture, rural tourism through promotion of sustainable and responsible tourism in rural areas, natural and cultural heritage should be encouraged as well as renewable energy investments.
Amendment 94 #
2011/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) The development of local infrastructure and local basic services in rural areas, including leisure and culture, the renewal of villages and activities aimed at the restoration and upgrading of the cultural and natural heritage of villages and rural landscapes is an essential element of any effortlement without which it is not possible to realise the growth potential and promote the sustainability of rural areas. Support should therefore be granted to operations with this aim, including the access to Information and Communication Technologies and the development of fast and ultra-fast broadband. In line with these objectives, development of services and infrastructure leading to social inclusion and reversing trends of social and economic decline and depopulation of rural areas should be encouraged. In order to achieve the maximum effectiveness for such support, covered operations should be implemented in accordance with plans for the development of municipalities and their basic services, where such plans exist, elaborated by one or more rural communes. In order to ensure coherence with the Unions climate objectives the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty should be delegated to the Commission in respect of defining the types of renewable energy infrastructure that shall be eligible for support
Amendment 101 #
2011/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) Implementation of innovative projects in the context of the EIP for agricultural productivity and sustainability should be undertaken by operational groups bringing together farmers, researchers, advisors, businesses and other actors concerned by innovation in the agricultural sector. In order to ensure that results of such projects profit to the sector as a whole, their results should be disseminated dissemination of their results should be encouraged and dissemination activities should be financed as part of technical assistance.
Amendment 107 #
2011/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a
(a) facilitating diversification, creation of new small enterprises and job creation in particular for young people;
Amendment 468 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 9 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Part 2 – article 9 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Each CSF Fund shall support the following thematic objectives in accordance with its mission in order to contribute to, in compliance with its mission to achieve economic, social and territorial cohesion, as stipulated in Article 177 TFEU, shall support the following thematic objectives of the Union strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth:
Amendment 577 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ii
Part 2 – article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ii
(ii) a summary analysis of the ex ante evaluations of the programmes justifying the selection of the thematic objectives and the indicative allocations of the CSF Funds; the thematic objectives could differ from one region to another and they stem from the identified needs of each region.
Amendment 699 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 18 – paragraph 1
Part 2 – article 18 – paragraph 1
Amendment 710 #
Amendment 730 #
Amendment 745 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 23 – paragraph 2
Part 2 – article 23 – paragraph 2
2. Programmes shall be drawn up by Member States or any authority designated by them, in cooperation with the partners, and undergo public consultation prior to their submission to the Commission.
Amendment 1093 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 59 – paragraph 3 – point c
Part 2 – article 59 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) value added tax. However, VAT amounts shall be eligible where they are not recoverable under national VAT legislation and are paid by a beneficiary other than non-taxable person as defined in the first subparagraph of Article 13(1) of Directive 2006/112/EC, provided that such VAT amounts are not incurred in relation to the provision of infrastructure.
Amendment 1155 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 74 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Part 2 – article 74 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The payment deadline for an interim payment claim may be interrupted by the authorising officer by delegation within the meaning of the Financial Regulation for a maximum period of ninesix months if:
Amendment 1323 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 85 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – article 85 – paragraph 1
1. The total appropriations allocated to each Member State in respect of less developed regions, transition regions and more developed regions shall not be transferable either between each of those categories of regions. within a given member state, or among the member states;
Amendment 1343 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 87 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – article 87 – paragraph 1
1. An operational programme shall consist of priority axes. A priority axis shall concern one Fund for a category of region and shall correspond, without prejudice to Article 52, to a thematic objective and comprise one or more investment priorities of that thematic objective, in accordance with the Fund-specific rules. For the ESFIn duly justified cases, a priority axis may combine one or more complementary investment priorities from different thematic objectives set out in Article 9(8), (9), (10) and (11) in order to facilitate their contribution to other priority axes, in duly justified circumstancesor combine one or more complementary investment priorities from the ERDF, CF, and ESF under one thematic objective.
Amendment 1402 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 87 – paragraph 2 – point f – point iii
Part 3 – article 87 – paragraph 2 – point f – point iii
(iii) a non-exhaustive list of major projects for which the estimated start date for the execution of the main works is before 1 January 2018;
Amendment 1451 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 91 – paragraph 2
Part 3 – article 91 – paragraph 2
2. Major projects submitted to the Commission for approval shall be contained in the non-exhaustive list of major projects in an operational programme. The list shall be reviewed by the Member State or the managing authority two years following the adoption of an operational programme and may at the request of the Member State be adjusted in accordance with the procedure set out in Article 26(2), in particular to include major projects with an expected completion date by the end of 2022.
Amendment 1457 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 92 – paragraph 2
Part 3 – article 92 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall adopt a decision, by means of implementing act, no later than three months after the date of submission of the information approving a major project in accordance with Article 91. That decision shall define the physical object, the amount to which the co- financing rate for the priority axis applies, physical and financial indicators for monitoring progress, and the expected contribution of the major project to the objectives of the relevant priority axis or axes. AnThe approval decisionby the Commission under 92(1) and 92(2) shall be conditional on the first works contract being concluded within two years of the date of the decision, or in the case of operations implemented under PPP structures the signing of the PPP contract between the public body and the private sector body, within three years of the date of the approval. At the duly motivated request of the Member State, in particular in the case of delays resulting from administrative and legal proceedings related to the implementation of major projects, and made within the three year period, the Commission may adopt a decision, by means of an implementing act, on the extension of the period by not more than two years.
Amendment 1524 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 101 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – article 101 – paragraph 1
1. By 30 AprilJune 2016 and by 30 AprilJune of each subsequent year until and including 2022 the Member State shall submit to the Commission an annual implementation report in accordance with Article 44(1). The report submitted in 2016 shall cover the financial years 2014 and 2015, as well as the period between the starting date for eligibility of expenditure and 31 December 2013.
Amendment 1566 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 105 – paragraph 1 – point a
Part 3 – article 105 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) ensuring the establishment of a single website or a single website portal providing information on, and access to, all operational programmes in that Member State, including programming documents, observations received from the public and partners and how they have been taken into account (including a justification in the case rejection);
Amendment 1570 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 105 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Part 3 – article 105 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(c a) informing the public about the timeline of programming and the expected timing and form of all related public consultation processes from the start of the drafting of Partnership Contracts and updating this timeline at least every three months.
Amendment 1612 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 110 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Part 3 – article 110 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The co-financing rate at the level of each priority axis of operational programmes under the European territorial cooperation goal shall be no higher than 785%.
Amendment 279 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point i
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point i
(i) at least 530% of the total ERDF resources at national level shall be allocated to the thematic objectives set in out in point 1, 3 and 4 of Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR] .
Amendment 321 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
The ERDF shall support the following investment priorities within the thematic objectives set out in Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR] in accordance with regional needs and potentials described in partnership contracts:
Amendment 332 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
(a) enhancing research and innovation infrastructure (R&I) and capacities to develop R&I excellence and promoting centres of competence, in particular those of European interest;
Amendment 345 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
(b) promoting business R&I investment, and developing links and synergies between enterprises, enhancing R&D centres and higher education, in particular product and service development, technology transfer, social innovation and public service applications, demand stimulation, networking, clusters and open innovation through smart specialisation;
Amendment 363 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c a (new)
(c a) Developing appropriate links and synergies with Horizon 2020
Amendment 371 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
(a) extending broadband deployment and the roll-out of high-speed networks and supporting the development of future and emerging technologies and networks for the digital economy;
Amendment 376 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c
(c) strengthening ICT applications for e- government, e-learning, e-culture, e- inclusion and e- health;
Amendment 392 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – introductory part
(3) enhancing the competitiveness of entreprises and in particular SMEs :
Amendment 410 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b
(b) developing and implementing new business models for SMEs, in particular for internationalisation;
Amendment 422 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b a (new)
(b a) supporting the creation and the extension of advanced capacities for product and service development
Amendment 429 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b b (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b b (new)
(b b) supporting the capacity of SMEs to engage in growth and innovation process;
Amendment 446 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point b
(b) promoting energy efficiency and renewable energy use in SMEenterprises;
Amendment 464 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point d
(d) developing smart distribution systems at low and medium voltage levels;
Amendment 481 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point e a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point e a (new)
(e a) promotion of high-efficiency co- generation of heat and power
Amendment 503 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – introductory part
(6) protecting the environment and promoting resource efficiency including cultural and natural assets:
Amendment 533 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point e
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point e
(e) action to improve the urban environment, including regeneration of brownfield sites and reduction of air pollution including the areas located in the immediate neighbourhood of the urban areas;
Amendment 541 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point e a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point e a (new)
(e a) promoting innovative technologies to improve environmental protection and resource efficiency in the waste sector, water sector, soil protection or to reduce air pollution,
Amendment 542 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point e b (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point e b (new)
(e b) supporting endogenous growth potential of specific areas by enhancing accessibility to and use of specific natural and cultural resources and developing sustainable regional and local tourism
Amendment 562 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b a (new)
(b a) investments in national and local roads not included in TEN-T network;
Amendment 570 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point c
(c) developing environment-friendly and low-carbon transport systems and promoting sustainable urban mobility;
Amendment 31 #
2011/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The Union is uniquely placed to provide a Union platform for policy exchanges and mutual-learning between the Member States by encouraging examples of good practice in the employment and social areas. Knowledge of policies applied in other countries and of their results broadens the range of options available to policy-makers, triggers new policy developments and encourages national reform.
Amendment 38 #
2011/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Lack of access to credit is one of the main obstacles to business creation, especially among people furthest from the labour market. Union and national efforts in this area need to be stepped up in order to increase the supply of microfinance and meet demand from those who need it most, and in particular unemployed and vulnerable people who wish to start up or develop a micro-enterprise, including on a self-employed basis, but do not have access to credit. Similarly, small undertakings and micro-enterprises make up the majority of newly-formed companies in the European Union and microcredits could be the most rapid means of obtaining added value and concrete results. As a first step, in 2010 the European Parliament and the Council set up the Facility.
Amendment 52 #
2011/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Since the objectives of this Regulation cannot be sufficiently achieved atby all Member States, in particular at regional level, and can therefore, by reason of their scale and effects, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve those objectives.
Amendment 69 #
2011/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) Strengthen ownership of the Union objectives in the employment, social and working conditions fields among key Union and national policy-makers, as well as other interested parties in order to bring about concrete and coordinated actions at both Union and Member State level, thereby boosting public and comprehensive stakeholder confidence;
Amendment 92 #
2011/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b
(b) Capacity-building of national and regional administrations, ands well as specialist services responsible for promoting geographical mobility designated by the Member States and microcredit providers,;
Amendment 95 #
2011/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c
(c) Organisation of working groups of national, regional or local officials to monitor the implementation of Union law;
Amendment 113 #
2011/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point b
b. Facilitate effective and inclusive information-sharing, mutual learning and dialogue on Union employment and social policy and working conditions legislation at Union, national, regional and international level in order to assist the Member States and the other participating countries in developing their policies and in implementing Union law;
Amendment 41 #
2011/0269(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In compliance with the principle of sound financial management, financial contributions from the EGF should not replacesupplement support measures which are available for redundant workers within the Union's Structural Funds or other Union policies or programmes.
Amendment 42 #
2011/0269(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) SBearing in mind the low level of awareness of the EGF in the Member States, special provisions should be included for information and communicapromotion activities on EGF casthe programme, examples of best practices and EGF outcomes. In addition, to bring about greater efficiency in communication to the public at large and stronger synergies between the communication activities undertaken at the initiative of the Commission, the resources allocated to communication actions under this Regulation should also contribute to covering the corporate communication of the political priorities of the Union provided that these are related to the general objectives of this Regulation.
Amendment 175 #
2011/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the strategy and actions set out in the Operational Programmes are consistent and focused on addressing the challenges identified with the contribution of regional and local authorities in the National Reform Programmes and the relevant Council Recommendations made under Article 148(4) of the Treaty, in order to contribute to achieving the headline targets of the Europe 2020 strategy on employment, education and poverty reduction.
Amendment 181 #
2011/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Member States' national, regional and local authorities shall pursue thematic concentration according to the following modalities:
Amendment 7 #
2011/0177(APP)
Draft opinion
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas Cohesion policy has shown itself to be a flexible instrument and has been a major factor in combating the economic and financial crisis, decisively contributing to various national recovery programmes and seeking to promote innovation while eliminating the disparities between European regions;
Amendment 1947 #
2011/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 1
1. In the case of a personal data breach, when the breach is likely to adversely affect the protection of the personal data or privacy of the data subject, the controller shall without undue delay and, where feasible, not later than 24 hours after having become aware of it, notify the personal data breach to the supervisory authority. The notification to the supervisory authority shall be accompanied by a reasoned justification in cases where it is not made within 24 hours.
Amendment 216 #
2010/2309(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Calls on the EU institutions to send out a clear signal at both Union and international level that they intend to fight the new forms of organised crime, especially computer crime, and subsequently to call on as many as possible of their international partners to sign and ratify the 2001 Convention on Computer Crime, which is the sole existing legal instrument for fighting international computer crime;
Amendment 41 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers that many of the problems identified could be avoided by involving, right from the programming stage, all the relevant players at national, regional and local level, in order to match the proposals under future framework documents and operational programmes as closely as possible to their needs, hence enabling a greater and clearer contribution to be made to meeting EU objectives;
Amendment 44 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Reiterates the need for simplification of rules and procedures at both EU and national level without creating major difficulties for the beneficiaries; believes that simplification will contribute to the speedy allocation of funds, higher absorption rates, increased efficiency, fewer errors and reduced payment periods; considers that a balance needs to be struck between simplification and the stability of rules and procedures; maintains that simplifying the rules and procedures without providing potential applicants and beneficiaries with sufficient information on them will not produce the effects desired;
Amendment 53 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Takes the view that emphasis should be placed on payments for delivery of results rather than checking inputs; believes, in this context, that a better balance should be found between, on the one hand, the rules and procedures required for ensuring the legality and regularity of EU expenditure and, on the other, making cohesion policy more performance-oriented and cost- efficient; calls for the Commission to redouble its efforts to establish the payment arrangements for the forthcoming programming period and to ensure that these are geared to results and the timely training of national system experts;
Amendment 62 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses the paramount importance of timely adoption of the multiannual financial framework and clear and definitive rules and guidance for the Member States in order to avoid start-up difficulties at the beginning of the next programming period; considers it necessary for the Commission to provide technical support to ensure that these are also well understood at Member State level;
Amendment 71 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Member States to make further efforts to attract and retain qualified staff to manage EU funds; calls for closer attention to be paid to the management of human resources, in view of the multiple investments made in developing their expertise through European funding;
Amendment 75 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Invites the Member States to establish exchange fora or networks among their implementation structures with a view to discussing experiences and difficulties and exchanging best practices; invites the Member States also to help beneficiaries address more demanding control requirements by providing them with support; proposes that a percentage of the amounts allocated for the technical assistance operational programmes be used for such actions;
Amendment 87 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes that the establishment of ‘public- private partnerships’ is often a long and cumbersome procedure, but nonetheless believes that ‘public-private partnerships’ prepared well in advance could contribute to increasing absorption capacity and to resolving difficulties with co-financing; recommends that the Member States clarify and simplify their national legislation to make such partnerships possible;
Amendment 37 #
2010/2304(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that European law on aid, as it currently stands, frequently leads in practice to legal uncertainty, hampering planned investment; calls, therefore, on the Commission to examine to what extent the rules could be simplified and made more investment-friendlydesigned to encourage investments, particularly in those areas where they would otherwise have been unprofitable;
Amendment 41 #
2010/2304(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Commission to give particular importance to public-private partnerships and facilitate the use of structural instruments within this context;
Amendment 22 #
2010/2299(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that strategic autonomy in security affairs entails, for the EU, the capacity to agree common political objectives and strategic guidelines, to establish strategic partnerships with a wide range of international organisations and trustful states, to collect adequate information and generate joint analyses and assessments, to harness and where necessary pool financial, military, and civilian resources, to plan and run effective crisis management operations across the entire range of the Petersberg tasks, and to frame and implement a common defence policy, laying the first tangible foundations on which to build common defence;
Amendment 51 #
2010/2299(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. RegretsExpresses concern, therefore, that, more than one year after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, there are not yet clear signs of a post-Lisbon EU holisticcomprehensive approach enabling traditional procedural and institutional barriers to be overcome, while preserving the respective legal prerogatives when European citizens' security is at stake;
Amendment 223 #
2010/2299(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
Paragraph 54
54. RecognisesWelcomes the fact that since 2003 the EU has undertaken numerous missoperations (24) in three continents involving different types of intervention, the bulk being accounted for by civilian missions specialising in policing, security sector reform (SSR), and consolidation of the rule of law;
Amendment 227 #
2010/2299(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
Paragraph 56
56. Welcomes the ongoing revision of the existing civilian CSDP concepts; notes in particular that the rule of law will be considered as an overarching conceptseen as a central concept for civilian missions covering police, justice, civilian administration, customs, border monitoring, and other relevant areas of use to planners and experts on the ground in setting up and conducting missions with strengthening and/or substitution (executive) tasks; endorses the work being done to develop the concept of CSDP justice missions, while observing that needless overlapping with possible Community programmes has to be avoided; doubts whether the kinds of tasks carried out to date in the EULEX Iraq mission conform to the characteristics of a CSDP mission;
Amendment 266 #
2010/2299(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 73
Paragraph 73
73. Stresses the need to strengthen the cooperation between UEU and UN in the area of crisis management, notably during the early stages of a crisis and post-conflict reconstruction, in close connection towith the appropriate structures of the newly established EEAS;
Amendment 281 #
2010/2299(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 78
Paragraph 78
78. Recalls that, in addition to partnerships with other international organisations such as the UN, NATO, and the AU, cooperation with individual third countries should be enhanced in the context of the CSDP; notes that experience shows that third countries can bring important assets, human resources, and expertise to CSDP missions, such as in the context of EUFOR Chad/CAR, for which Russia provided much-needed helicopters, and EUFOR Althea, to which countries like Turkey and Morocco contributed substantial contingents of troops; believes, furthermore, that the involvement of third countries can enhance the legitimacy of CSDP operations and help set up a broader security dialogue with important partners while remaining committed to promoting respect of human rights and rule of law;
Amendment 283 #
2010/2299(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 79 a (new)
Paragraph 79 a (new)
79a. Underlines the importance of cooperation on CSDP with our neighbours, it should be regionally balanced and provide a broad range of opportunities that would catalyze security sector reforms in the partner states; it would not only help generate civilian and military capabilities to enable our Eastern and Southern partners to participate in CSDP missions but also give us stronger support in managing regional security;
Amendment 18 #
2010/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that single market accessibility for all EU regions is a prerequisite for the free movement of people, goods, capital and services, and thus for deriving full benefir from all the advantages of a strong and dynamic single market; points out, in this connection, the essential role played by the Union's regional policy in terms of developing infrastructure, particularly in the less developed and outermost regions; calls for the development of innovative sources of funding (such as public-private partnerships, project bonds and user charges); calls on the Commission and the Member States jointly to address the complexity of the rules governing revenue- generating projects;
Amendment 43 #
2010/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses that services are a unique source of development for the single market; emphasises that the Services Directive is an essential step towards a true single market for services, and that the transposition process should take place as quickly as possible and in a transparent manner; calls on the Commission to take all necessary measures with a view to the implementation of the Directive in all Member States and to support those Member States experiencing problems or delays in implementing it; underlines, in particular, the need for socially and regionally equitable access to services of general interest;
Amendment 1 #
2010/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recognises that Roma continue to be victims of persistent discrimination in many Member States and that this situation is exacerbated by the current economic and financial crisis; calls on those Member States which the EU Fundamental Rights Agency identified as having severe problems to fully exploit the EU resources available under the Structural Funds, and in particular the ERDF and ESF and to seek the support of the Commission where they consider it necessary; calls on the Commission to give particular attention to requests from the Member States concerned for technical assistance, so as to ensure that EU funding is used as effectively and efficiently as possible for the benefit of Roma communities;
Amendment 9 #
2010/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Encourages the use of EU funds for building of new houses or renovation of existing ones, improving of engineering infrastructure, local utilities, communication systems, education, measurements for access to the job market etc., which should lead to social and economic inclusion marginalised communities
Amendment 17 #
2010/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recognises that, in times of demographic change and other processes affecting the EU as a whole, the Roma population, which has been part of our common heritage for centuries, should be given the means through good quality education, decent housing and job opportunities to fully integrate the work place and contribute to economic development as foreseen in the EU 2020 strategy; calls on the Member States, therefore, to increase their efforts now, by reinforcing, improving and adapting to the economic and financial crisis their effective strategies for addressing the specific circumstances (deep poverty, lack of education, poor health conditions) of marginalised communities, in order to ensure their social and economic integration;
Amendment 34 #
2010/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises the opportunity created through the provisions of Regulation (EU) No 437/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 May 2010, providing up to 3% of the ERDF allocation to specific programmes or 2% of the overall allocated budget for the rehabilitation of housing for the benefit of marginalised communities; calls on the Member States, furthermore, to make quick and full use of this new possibility within the framework of the Structural Funds, in order to strengthen the prospects of effective social inclusion; recommends that the Commission submit an annual report on the utilisation of these funds by the Member States;
Amendment 42 #
2010/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recommends Member States to consider making the allocation of new housing to marginalised communities conditional on social commitments on their part, such as appropriate participation in the process of building the new establishments, obligatory school attendance for children (pre- schooling and for the whole period of schooling), and the acceptance of jobs offered by job mediators, in order to ensure their real, effective and sustainable integration.
Amendment 289 #
2010/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission and the Council to adopt the augmented and detailed components of the ‘Laeken Indicators’ in measuring social and territorial exclusion as well as to evaluate progress; stressing that the horizontal divisions of the ‘Laeken Indicators’ must be extended also to the smallest statistical- administrative units (LAU 1 and LAU 2); moreover, points out that the “Laeken Indicators” could be added to the future indicators within the cohesion policy, especially regarding the social dimension;
Amendment 294 #
2010/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 – introductory part
Paragraph 8 – introductory part
8. Calls on the Commission to draw up a European crisis map, which identifies, measures and surveys those micro-regions within the EU where inhabitants are hardest hit by poverty and social exclusion at least on the basis of the following attributes:
Amendment 298 #
2010/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 – indent 12 a (new)
Paragraph 8 – indent 12 a (new)
- capacity of the local public administration to manage poverty;
Amendment 11 #
2010/2273(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls on the Member States to facilitate access for migrant workers to free foreign language courses so as to help them integrate and achieve optimum productivity at their place of work in the host country. At the same time, attendance at language courses in the Member State may facilitate more effectively the social integration of migrant workers, which is of benefit to both the migrant workers themselves and the host Member States;
Amendment 10 #
2010/2245(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that decision-takers at regional level must be fully aware of the potential for economic growth that research and innovation activities offer all regions; notes in this regard that even regions without universities and research centres should be able to develop their own innovation capacities, utilising specially earmarked funds;
Amendment 18 #
2010/2245(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses the key role of the regions in drawing up policies to stimulate innovation at national level; points out, however, that in many Member States regional and local budgets are insufficient and national budgets for innovation are low;
Amendment 26 #
2010/2245(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Considers that the innovation dimension needs to be properly integrated into all EU funding programmes, including the Cohesion Fund, thus ensuring a substantial level of financing commensurate with the needs of all innovation stakeholders;
Amendment 32 #
2010/2245(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Believes it is necessary to continue simplifying the procedures for utilising EU funds, with a view to ensuring their flexibility and reducing red tape for researchers and innovators, thus allowing them to devote more time to their actual work;
Amendment 36 #
2010/2245(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the proposal to launch European Innovation Partnerships as a tool to bring together stakeholders across policies, sectors and borders to speed up innovations in order to tackle major societal challenges; notes that the partnerships and the regional policy instruments addressing these challenges should be better aligned and that partnerships should capitalise on the experience gained with existing national and regional initiatives with similar features; supports clarification of the legal aspects relating to partnerships and to intellectual property law in those Member States where this has not yet been done;
Amendment 83 #
2010/2211(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Stresses that cofinancing and the n+2 and n+3 rules should be maintained, possibly combined with greater flexibility to cover exceptional situations which might be expected to arise within the next programming period; insists that unspent funds should be made available for other regions and not returned to the Member States;
Amendment 42 #
2010/2206(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Considers that the sustainable development of tourism should be organised in such a way that its natural, cultural and heritage assets are in equal measure appreciated at the present time and also preserved for future generations;
Amendment 53 #
2010/2206(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission, the Member States and the local and regional authorities to encourage and support the development of networks andintegrated tourist networks and projects encompassing all infrastructural aspects so as to avoid uncoordinated development and encourage the creation of partnerships for the exchange of good practice; hopes that concrete initiatives will be undertaken in support of innovation and the development of new information technologies, and that access will be facilitated for stakeholders in the tourist industry, and particularly small– and medium–sized enterprises, to the relevant financial instruments;
Amendment 31 #
2010/2160(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Commission to examine the most effective ways of increasing synergies on the ground; suggests, in this respect, that consideration be given to the possibility of allowing the Member States to choose to have a single operational programme per region, encompassing different funds (ERDF, ESF, Cohesion Fund, EAFRD and EFF) with a single managing authority; suggests that the national management authorities in the Member States draw up future operational programmes geared as closely as possible to local and regional objectives;
Amendment 36 #
2010/2160(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on the Commission to encourage the Member Statesdraw up the European guide to multilevel governance and encourage the Member States to implement it in line with specific local and regional objectives and to extend the cohesion policy governance mechanisms (i.e. programming, funding and implementation in partnership between national, regional and local levels) to those funds covered by the planned Common Strategic Framework, in order to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of public spending;
Amendment 32 #
2010/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights that it is to a great extent urban areas that translate European policies into on the ground implementation; stresses that urban areas generate around 80% of the GDP of the EU and significantly contribute to the economic growth of Europe; on the other hand they also bear the costs of economic productivity (urban sprawl, congestions, pollution, exclusion etc.) that put their role as ‘motors of growth’ into risk; considers therefore that there is a clear justification for common engagement towards the urban areas of the EU; takes the view that the urban agenda must seek to develop sustainable, smart and inclusive investments so as to strengthen the role of cities as part of the EU 2020 Strategy and as a growth factor;
Amendment 47 #
2010/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to make it obligatory for Member States to formally involve political leaders of key urban areas and associations of local and regional authorities into all stages of Cohesion Policy decision-making (strategic planning, definition of and negotiation on the foreseen ‘National Strategic Development Contracts’); calls on the local authorities accordingly to draw up concrete programmes of action under their specific development strategies; welcomes the Covenant of Mayors and stresses the importance of using available funding to implement programmes of action to promote the exploitation of local renewable energy potential;
Amendment 59 #
2010/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that urban areas are not islands within their regions and their development must therefore be closely linked with the surrounding functional or rural areas; considers that multi-level governance and the partnership principle are the most effective tools to prevent sectorialisation and fragmentation of development policies; urges the Commission to call on the Member States specifically to set out urban-rural dimensions in planning documents and earmark funding for measures to ensure good rural-urban links;
Amendment 70 #
2010/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses the fact that local elected authorities have direct political accountability in terms of strategic decision-making and investing public resources; therefore for reaching the goals of Cohesion Policy and EU 2020 Strategy there must be obligatory involvement of local elected bodies in the strategic decision making process and the broad use of the option of sub-delegated responsibilities in the implementation and evaluation of the Cohesion Policy; stresses that the priority of the local authorities is the welfare and quality of life of their citizens who, together with all stakeholders, must be involved in local development strategies;
Amendment 76 #
2010/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recommends that in the next programming period one of the following options shall be used in implementation of urban dimension on national level: independent operational programmes managed by particular urban areas or joint operational programmes covering the urban areas of particular Member State or global grants or ring-fencing of urban measures and resources within specific regional operational programmes; recognises the importance of drawing up specific operational programmes in future for certain urban areas seeking to realise their development potential;
Amendment 79 #
2010/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Advocates for the integrated strategic planning principles as they can help local authorities with stepping up from thinking in terms of ‘individual projects’ to a more strategic inter-sectorial thinking to use their endogenous development potential at the same time, regrets the vague common definition resulting only in formal application in some cases; urges the Commission to call on the Member States to ensure support for the development of local administrative capacities for the purposes of integrated strategic planning;
Amendment 83 #
2010/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Invites the Commission to prepare a study comparing the to-date practice of individual Member States in this area concluded by specific EU guidelines for integrated urban development planning practise clarifying relations between these plans and other planning documents as well as promoting efficient partnershipand legally regulated partnerships, including cross- border urban partnerships; calls on the Commission to make integrated urban planning legally binding if EU funds are used for co-financing projects; urges the local authorities of the Member States to initiate new public-private partnerships and innovative urban infrastructural development strategies so as to attract investment and stimulate business activity; calls for improved coordination between the local and regional administrations, so as to facilitate new partnerships between urban and rural areas on the one hand and between small, medium and large cities on the other, with a view to ensuring balanced regional development;
Amendment 92 #
2010/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission to create more flexible conditions for cross- financing between ERDF and ESF funds so that these rules do not create obstacles when designing and implementing integrated urban development plans/strategies; points out that the pooling of existing European funds could substantially increase available financing;
Amendment 95 #
2010/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls on the Commission to incorporate environmental protection considerations in integrated urban development plans/strategies, given the high pollution risk in urban areas and the need for European funding for all projects with a view to achieving the EU 2020 objectives;
Amendment 99 #
2010/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses the promising role of new financial engineering instruments put in place during the current programming period; calls on the Commission to evaluate the experience with these tools and adapt them where necessary to improve their competitive position on the financial market in comparison with common commercial products; calls on the Member States, in view of the positive results obtained from the use of existing financial engineering instruments, to constantly ensure that the most effective use is made of the potential benefits to be derived from these financial instruments;
Amendment 19 #
2010/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that demographic change has very different effects from region to region and that workforce migration accentuates the effects of demographic change;
Amendment 35 #
2010/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the regions to also consider demographic indicators when allocating and distributing EU structural funds; considers it essential both from a perspective of access to infrastructure and services, and from that of environmental protection, to assess not only workforce migration but also the need to guarantee the conditions that keep people in their own regions in order to avoid their agglomerating in given urban areas;
Amendment 64 #
2010/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers that, in areas with a dwindling population, financial support should also be provided for urban renovation and redevelopment; believes that urban planning must take changing infrastructure uses into greater account, including by revitalising and restructuring inner cities; calls for urban tourism potential and heritage objectives to be acknowledged and developed, as these present opportunities to attract new residents into areas at risk of depopulation;
Amendment 69 #
2010/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the regions to develop innovative concepts for local public transport in order to address the challenge of dwindling passenger numbers, particularly in rural areas; calls on the Commission to provide financial support for these types of project;
Amendment 82 #
2010/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Encourages the Member States to adapt welfare and healthcare benefits in line with needs of families and children and provide funding to ensure the availability of care at home and universal healthcare for elderly people;
Amendment 86 #
2010/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Considers that public investments in the health and care systems are important for social cohesion in Europe; calls on the Member States to ensure good healthcare provision in rural areas also, for example through gateway clinics, and to use structural funds to promote additional measures in the field of telemedicine; calls on the Commission to find innovative solutions for financial support for these actions;
Amendment 154 #
2010/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Believes that the female employment rate should be increased; demands, therefore, that more women should be given access to skilled jobs and life-long learning programmes; recommends that the Member States develop systems for encouraging employees to participate in special projects for reconciling work and family life;
Amendment 162 #
2010/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Calls on the Member States to enhance cooperation with local and regional stakeholders on issues connected with demographic change; suggests that training programmes be developed in this field to create a better understanding and awareness of the issues involved;
Amendment 6 #
2010/2156(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Encourages Member States and national authorities to support culture and creative industries, as a means of job creation and economic development, and also to support efforts to enhance local identity;
Amendment 12 #
2010/2156(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that cultural and creative infrastructures and facilities play an important role in the development of the physical environment of towns and cities and, in particular, the rehabilitation of old industrial districts, and that cultural heritage is at the same time considered significant in the development of rural areas, especially through its contribution to rural tourism; believes therefore that cultural and creative strategies should be included in regional and local development strategies, in a partnership between public authorities representing different policy areas and relevant civil society representatives; is aware that cultural and creative infrastructures and facilities of this kind can contribute to the achievement of territorial cohesion and the implementation of an urban-cum- rural approach;
Amendment 34 #
2010/2154(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for every body scanner to meet a minimum set of technical requirements before it can be placed on a permissible screening methods list; these requirements should inter alia ensure the prevention of any possible health risk, including long- term risks; calls in this regard for any form of x-ray technology using x-rays or any other type of harmful ray to be explicitly excluded from the permissible screening methods list;
Amendment 38 #
2010/2154(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Insists furthermore that body scanners should only be equipped with technology that does not enable any possibility of rendering full body images but merely standardised gender-neutral ‘stick figure’ images that are fully anonymised, and that no data processing or data storage should be possible; points out that staff responsible for the storage of processed date should be held criminally responsible for their actions;
Amendment 48 #
2010/2154(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that every person should have the right to refuse a body scan, without the obligation to give any explanation, and the right to request a standard security check, with full respect for the rights and dignity of that person; calls in this regard for all security personnel to receive proper, extensive training; calls on the Commission to propose alternative methods of body scanning, bearing in mind that everyone has the right to refuse to undergo this type of scanning;
Amendment 8 #
2010/2139(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)
Citation 14 a (new)
- having regard to the report of the Committee on Regional Development 'On achieving real territorial, social and economic cohesion within the EU – a sine qua non for global competitiveness?' (A7- 0309/2010),
Amendment 17 #
2010/2139(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas cohesion policy is crucial for ensuring competitive economic growth by means of support for regional specificities in line with their level of development and the priorities established,
Amendment 45 #
2010/2139(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Stresses that the lack of recent information means that planning for the next programming period is not being backed up by proper statistics;
Amendment 54 #
2010/2139(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes that the current framework of cohesion policy has proven to allow a flexible and appropriate response to the rapidly deteriorating socioeconomic environment; underlines that Member States appreciated that the crisis measures could be tailored to their specific needs; encourages Member States to use all measures made available to them by the Commission with a view to ensuring an appropriate reaction;
Amendment 67 #
2010/2139(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Stresses the need to correlate regional political resources with those of cohesion policy and other types of policy, recalling that the effects of intervention of whatever kind make themselves felt at local and regional level, while their coordination with a view to achieving sustainable development represents a significant challenge;
Amendment 6 #
2010/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Acknowledges that one of the greatest obstacles to realising energy savings at local and regional level is the need to invest upfront; is convinced that any measure taken at EU level should take due account of the implications for, and budgetary restrictions of, municipalities and regions; recommends, therefore, that local and regional representatives be consulted when development guidelines are being established in the field of energy, and that financial support be provided for local- and regional-level programmes for the use of existing energy resources;
Amendment 12 #
2010/2095(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the vast majority of our industrial market is made up of small and medium-sized enterprises and that they play a key role in promoting economic competitiveness and in job creation: any integrated strategy on the future of European industries should therefore focus primarily on an enhanced approach toward SMEs as the key to territorial cohesion;
Amendment 17 #
2010/2095(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises that the global economic crisis is affecting employment rates all over Europe, thus worsening the socio- economic prospects of the EU and increasing regional disparities; in this respect, emphasises that athe existence of a competitive, diversified, fair and sustainable industrial sector is essential for the future of workers Europe-wide;
Amendment 41 #
2010/2095(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Stresses that the world business environment is continuously changing, necessitating suitable investment in the development and adaptation of transport, communications and energy infrastructures and services, so as to meet present and future challenges;
Amendment 3 #
2010/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 16 #
2010/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Takes the view that GDP is an essential measurement of economic growth, but is insufficient to assess regional development and establish cohesion policies;
Amendment 27 #
2010/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 57 #
2010/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission, therefore, to introduce, as a matter of priority and urgency, indicators in addition to GDP for environmental and social issues, with a view to establishing a more comprehensive picture of regional cohesion policies, at the latest by the start of the 2014-2020 programming perioTakes the view that indicators in addition to GDP could be taken into account only after studies have been carried out on their relevance and the way in which information is collected and processed;
Amendment 76 #
2010/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. ProposeRecalls that the criteria governing regions’ eligibility for EU funding should be considered in the light of the set ofMember States can use other indicators that is brought in; calls for environmental and social indicators to be given the same status as GDP when it comes to classifying thenational level that take account of attributes specific to each regions.
Amendment 9 #
2010/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that in order to launch an effective Strategy for the Black Sea, it is vital to involve fully all the countries concerned, with no distinction between EU and non-EU countries; calls for cooperation between all the relevant regions, through the involvement of existing organisations, such as the BSEC, the PABSEC and the Commission on the Black Sea, but also through the creation of new ones where necessary, with the aim of identifying common challenges and available resources, as well as areas where coordinated action can bring significant added value; believes link-up with other strategies developed at EU level, such as the EU strategy for the Danube, to be vital;
Amendment 16 #
2010/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Encourages the development, in the context of the Strategy, of an integrated approach and the use of the well- established principles of the EU’s Cohesion Policy; in particular, believes that cross-border cooperation between regions should be promoted, in order to tackle common problems through coordinated action; is in favour of the continuation of programmes supported under the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument and of an increase in the funding allocated to the Black Sea Operational Programme;
Amendment 42 #
2010/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Is in favour of developing innovative financial instruments that enable joint private companies to operate in the region;
Amendment 7 #
2010/2053(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that the Internal Market Information System and the points of single contact, by demanding a great effort of administrative cooperation between all the authorities involved, may pave the way for further interoperability and networking at national, regional and local level across the EU; takes the view, however that it needs to be ensured that this does not impose additional burdens on the parties concerned, especially local and regional government and that the measures should therefore be adopted in partnership and after genuine debate at local and regional level;
Amendment 13 #
2010/2053(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Hopes that the aims of the directive may start to be achieved in the near future and that the whole of the EU and its regions may benefit, thus contributing to real economic, social and territorial cohesion; underlines the role of the structural funds and other funding instruments in providing access to and ensuring the availability of infrastructure such as transport, telecommunications and, research and innovation and education, in granting access to public goods and services in the regions, particularly in areas unattractive to investors, and in helping to encourage exchanges of good practice in the provision of key services; demands, in this context, greater coherence and coordination between all policies;
Amendment 26 #
2010/2053(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Expects that the directive may in fact bring about a reduction in administrative burdens, especially those affecting SMEs, which predominate in the field of services; advocates the implementation of national strategies to support innovative SMEs, which are most affected by the consequences of the economic and financial crisis;
Amendment 20 #
2010/0282(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Generally speaking, the European Union and the Member States must do their utmost to ensure that both the system derived from the Galileo programme and PRS technologies and equipment are safe and secure, to prevent signals emitted for the PRS from being used by non- authorised natural or legal persons, and to prevent any hostile use of the PRS against them. A European monitoring system should therefore be introduced.
Amendment 38 #
2010/0282(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 8 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 5 a (new)
(5a) The systems and modules must be flexible in order to meet needs which are constantly increasing over time.
Amendment 57 #
2010/0256(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In order to achieve in an effective manner the lowering of prices in the outermost regions and mitigating the additional costs of their extreme remoteness, all the while maintaining the competitiveness of EU products, aid should be granted for the supply of Community products to the outermost regions. Such aid should take account of the additional cost ofs associated with the transport tof theseose products to the outermost regions and the cost of exports to third countries and, in the case of agricultural inputs and products intended for processing, the additional costs of their extreme remoteness, specifically insularity and small surface areas.
Amendment 62 #
2010/0256(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Farmers in the outermost regions should be encouraged to supply high- quality products and to prioritise their marketing. Use of the logo introduced by the Union may be useful to this end. Controlled and guaranteed denomination of origin systems should also be encouraged and facilitated in order to promote the products of the outermost regions.
Amendment 39 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) the overall amount of closure aid granted by a Member State for any particular undertaking must follow a downward trend, where the reduction between successive periods of fifteen months must not be less than 3325 percent of the aid provided in the initial fifteen -month period of the closure plan;
Amendment 48 #
2010/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) It is appropriate to ensure that statements of support for a citizens' initiative are collected within a specific time-limit. In order to ensure that proposed citizens' initiatives remain relevant, whilst taking account of the complexity of collecting statements of support across the European Union, that time-limit should not be longer than 128 months from the date of registration of the proposed initiative.
Amendment 92 #
2010/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. All statements of support shall be collected after the date of registration of the proposed initiative and within a period that shall not exceed 128 months.
Amendment 13 #
2010/0067(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Spouses should be able to choose the law of a country with which they have a special connection or the lex fori as the law applicable to divorce and legal separation. The law chosen by the spouses must be consonant with the fundamental rights enshrined in the Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The possibility of choosing the law applicable to divorce and legal separation should not harm the superior interests of the child. A special child protection code should be established for the entire duration of the divorce process.
Amendment 16 #
2010/0067(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Before designating the applicable law, it is important for spouses to have access to up-to-date information concerning the essential aspects of national and Union law and of the procedures governing divorce and legal separation. To guarantee such access to appropriate, good-quality information, the Commission regularly updates it in the Internet-based public information system set up by Council Decision 2001/470/EC, while the Member State in which the divorce proceedings take place should make available to the spouses all the information they need, without any material involvement on their part.
Amendment 16 #
2010/0006(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 3 a (new)
Article 1 – point 3 a (new)
Council Decision 2008/839/JHA
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
(3a) In Article 14, paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: "(3) The records may only be used for the purposes referred to in paragraph 1 and shall be deleted automatically three years after their creation."
Amendment 69 #
2009/2235(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18a (new)
Paragraph 18a (new)
18a. Believes it is necessary to ensure an efficient and extensive infrastructure if a high level of competitiveness is to be achieved; in this context, the creation of suitable financial instruments for the modernisation and interconnection of infrastructures throughout the EU must remain a priority for the future of the EU- 2020 Strategy;
Amendment 86 #
2009/2235(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Points out that a stronger territorial dimension of the strategy, considering the specificities of the European regions, with the direct involvement of regional and local authorities in the planning and implementation of the relevant programmes, will lead to a greater sense of ownership of its goals at all levels and ensure a better awareness of objectives and outputs on the ground; believes, in addition, that the regions need to be continuously supported by developing innovative financial instruments so that their role in achieving the objectives of the Lisbon Strategy can be maintained;
Amendment 24 #
2009/2233(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the added value provided by the European Union’s cohesion policy and its role as an EU instrument for increasing the competitiveness of the regions, carrying out structural reforms and enhancing the ability of the regions to adapt to the global economic climate; notes that in globally competitive economies (US, Japan) development disparities among regions are relatively small;
Amendment 37 #
2009/2233(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Points out that, through the synergies generated with research and development and innovation policies, cohesion policy can provide a means of meeting the EU 2020 challenges by bolstering and harnessing specific local potentials and ensuring social, economic and territorial cohesion; takes the view that ensuring the continuity of the cohesion policy guidelines already in operation will safeguard the regional dimension of RDI and generate jobs in innovative sectors;
Amendment 41 #
2009/2233(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Supports the encouragement of economic sectors that are competitive at world level and that help to achieve a sustainable, intelligent and inclusive economy and enhance the EU's competitive advantage;
Amendment 93 #
2009/2233(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Takes the view that some of the funding allocated to research, development and innovation under the cohesion policy should be used to attain and maintain the role of world leader in sectors where Europe already has a competitive advantage and in sectors where Europe has a fresh opportunity to become a world leader;
Amendment 98 #
2009/2233(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. Takes the view that, in order to consolidate the internal market, specific measures are needed to stimulate competition at European level, without however creating an imbalance among Member States; believes that in this way a comfortable level of stability and economic prosperity can be achieved at European level;
Amendment 100 #
2009/2233(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 c (new)
Paragraph 15 c (new)
15c. Appreciates the added value offered by the financial engineering instruments and encourages their use on the widest possible scale, so as to complement the resources available under the Structural Funds with a view to achieving positive synergies and hence maximising the results;
Amendment 101 #
2009/2233(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 d (new)
Paragraph 15 d (new)
15d. Recommends that the Member States and the Commission pay greater attention to supporting major projects covering two or more operational programmes with a major impact at European level, which will generate added value, create high- quality jobs and safeguard the sustainable development of the regions;
Amendment 102 #
2009/2233(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 e (new)
Paragraph 15 e (new)
15e. Takes the view that cohesion policy should continue by promoting measures that will generate the greatest possible number of jobs, making it possible to harness local human resources and ensure their ongoing development so as to guarantee high productivity;
Amendment 103 #
2009/2233(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 f (new)
Paragraph 15 f (new)
15f. Maintains that achieving economic, social and territorial cohesion is a necessary condition but is not sufficient to guarantee economic competitiveness at world level, which requires significant investments in key areas such as energy, the environment, infrastructure, education, research and development, creative industries and services, logistics and transport;
Amendment 12 #
2009/2232(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that the usefulness of the data provided on beneficiaries needs to be improved in terms of both content and presentation; calls, therefore, on the Commission to define a more detailed and prescriptive format specifying the structure, form and content of the information to be provided; believes that providing the necessary information should also facilitate criterion-based search with a view to obtaining an immediate picture of the elements sought;
Amendment 17 #
2009/2232(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls for additional essential information to be provided when publishing the lists of beneficiaries; recommends, therefore, that besides the current minimum requirements, consideration be given to including location and comprehensive contact details, summaries of approved projects, types of support (e.g. loans, grants, venture capital, etc.) and a description of the project partners (e.g. legal status, size, etc.) as elements of the disclosure of beneficiaries; the information collected should be managed, sorted and presented to those concerned in as logical a shape as possible, to ensure its full usability; this can be done without giving rise to additional expenditure;
Amendment 33 #
2009/2232(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Reiterates its request for the provision of information regarding recoveries and withdrawals under the ETI; urges the Member States to provide this information in full, and the Commission to make it available to the budgetary authority and the public along with information on financial corrections and fraud, thus ensuring high standards of credibility and responsibility vis-à-vis the European public;
Amendment 45 #
2009/2231(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Invites the Commission to put in place additional technical assistance mechanisms to promote knowledge at regional and local level on implementation-related problems, especially in the EU12, which are as yet relatively less informed and experienced with regard to the rules governing the cohesion policy; suggests that the Commission set up a permanent helpdesk for regional and local authorities with a view to improving awareness of EU rules;
Amendment 51 #
2009/2231(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Is convinced that compliance with the procedures cannot be at the expense of the quality of interventions; asks the Commission for a more result-oriented policy in the future, focused on quality performance and strategic project development rather than on controls; to this end, urges the Commission to develop objective and measurable indicators which are comparable across the Union via consultation with the main national and regional participants;
Amendment 56 #
2009/2231(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Welcomes the ongoing simplification of the Structural Funds regulations; calls for a simpler architecture for the Funds after 2013, not as a consequence of the economic crisis but as a general principle of the future cohesion policy, in order to avoid discouraging potential partners from taking part in projects; advocates flexibility in applying the measures under the regulations in order to respond to specific economic and social circumstances;
Amendment 53 #
2009/2230(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Member States and regions to take advantage of the Structural Funds available for 2007-2013 in order to ensure maximum support for the Strategy, while understanding the difficulties associated with modifying the Operational Programmes in the current programming period. Highlighting the particular characteristics of regions could lead to much more effective use of the Structural Funds and the creation of added value at regional level, while also taking care to avoid double funding;
Amendment 3 #
2009/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that the diversity of models of SSGI among Member States needs to be respected in line with the principle of subsidiarity; advocates the dissemination of best practice and the transfer of know- how from those Member States and regions with most experience in providing such services;
Amendment 44 #
2009/2198(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 – point e
Paragraph 8 – point e
e. the clause on mutual assistance in the event of armed aggression on the territory of a Member State,
Amendment 23 #
2009/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Supports the Commission’s initiative aimed at assessing the possibility of improving the integration of disaster prevention in the Operational Programmes set up for the period 2007-2013, and calls on the Member States to make use of the structural funds directly allocated to risk prevention so that actions in this field are taken without delay during the current programming period; recalls, however, the need for coordinated action in this respect; suggests that in the strategy for the next programming period the Commission take into account the need to introduce Community financing measures for disaster prevention that cover all areas of action;
Amendment 28 #
2009/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that the funding of infrastructure under the structural funds in the next programming periods must be made conditional upon thebound in with prior implementation of specific measures in keeping with disaster prevention standards.
Amendment 17 #
2009/2096(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights the added value of interregional, cross-border and transnational cooperation in addressing challenges faced by the transport sector; therefore calls for the trans-border considerations to be taken into account in future transport policy; recommends the development of the TEN-T priority axes, for example axis 18 (Rhine/Meuse – Main – Danube), so as to facilitate the development of regional transport infrastructures in southeast Europe in line with the objectives and measures of the EU Strategy for the Danube Region;
Amendment 40 #
2009/2096(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recognises that regional airports play a crucial role in the development of peripheral and outermost regions by increasing their connectivity with hubs; considers it particularly useful to apply intermodal solutions where possible and the identification of innovative financial solutions to facilitate the modernisation of these airports; takes the view that (high- speed) rail links between airports offer an ideal opportunity to sustainably link different modes of transport.
Amendment 88 #
2009/0803(CNS)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) Member States recognise the benefits of full access to the customs files identification database as regards coordinating and strengthening the fight against cross-border criminality. Member States should therefore commit to entering data onto that database to the greatest extent possible. Data obtained from the Customs Information System should not be transferred under any circumstances for use by the national authorities of third countries.
Amendment 16 #
2009/0136(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 3 a (new)
Article 1 – point 3 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1104/2008
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
(3a) In Article 14, paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: “3. The records may only be used for the purposes referred to in paragraph 1 and shall be deleted automatically three years after their creation.”
Amendment 8 #
0112/2167(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that infringement of public procurement rules remains the most frequent reason for irregularities along with the non-compliance with eligibility rules; asks the Commission to address effectively the serious failures repeatedly identified by the Court of Auditors regarding compliance with public procurement rules in the implementation of ERDF and Cohesion Fund projects; draws attention to the different approach to the application of corrections related to the public procurement errors by the Commission and the Court and calls for the standardisation of the methodology;« takes note of the efforts of the Commission to provide training and guidance in order to improve the knowledge of the eligibility rules on the ground;
Amendment 13 #
0112/2167(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Observes the increasing level of suspension and interruption of payments carried out by the Commission; notes that in spite of the fact that the Commission ensures corrective actions to be systematically initiated whenever deficiencies are identified, the Court is of the opinion that there is no assurance that financial correction mechanisms adequately compensate the detected errors, nor that they prevent the recurrence of such errors; takes the view that the efficiency of control procedures in the Member States should be stepped up so that errors can be identified even at first-level inspection;