4 Amendments of Jens GEIER related to 2012/2016(BUD)
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recognises the persistent economic and budgetary constraints at national level, as well as the need for fiscal consolidation; points out, however, that savings in the Member States' contributions from their national budgets have been able to make only an inadequate contribution towards consolidation, and reiterates, however, its conviction that the EU budget represents a common and effective instrument of investment and solidarity, which is needed particularly at the present time to trigger economic growth, competitiveness and job creation in the 27 Member States; stresses that, despite its limited size that does not exceed 2% of total public spending in the Union, the EU budget has had a real economic impact and successfully complemented so far Member States’ recovery policies;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Intends, therefore, to strongly defend an adequate level of resources for next year’s budget, as defined in the Draft Budget, and to oppose any attempt to cut down the resources especially for policies delivering growth and employment; believes that the EU budget, which cannot run a deficit, should not be the victim of unsuccessful economic policies at national level; notes that in 2012 several Member States are increasing the size of their national budgets and in any case the fiscal consolidation argument is unfounded;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Takes note of the rationale adopted by the Commission when proposing reductions as compared to the Financial programming, which has led, in the view of the Commission, to the identification of potential savings within under- implemented lines of –among others- FP7, TEN-T, Marco Polo, Progress, Statistical programme, Customs and Fiscalis; points out that all these programmes are priorities for the European Parliament and adequate resources must be made available for them; is determined to carefully analyse the performance under each of these programmes in order to check the appropriateness of the proposed cuts and exclude negative impacts on the programmes concerned;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Regrets that appropriations for the PROGRESS programme have been reduced by EUR 5,3 million compared to the Financial programming and practically brought back to the 2012 levels, despite the good performance of this programme so far; deplores that not even in the last year of the current MFF the Commission has seized the opportunity to reinstate to this programme the EUR 60 million redeployed in favour of the Progress Microfinance Facility, to what it had committed in 2010; points out that the European Parliament has highlighted the key role played by social programmes in achieving the social and employment targets of the Europe 2020 Strategy in various resolutions and has expressed its view that these should be treated as a political priority and receive corresponding funding;