6 Amendments of Alain CADEC related to 2010/2001(BUD)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Expresses concern at the low take-up rate of Structural Funds and calls on the Commission to identify the reasons for this; considers that achieving an optimum take-up of funds should be a political priority, particularly in the run-up to the next budget planning period;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the fisheries and maritime policy proposals in the 2011 general budget despite the fact that the 2007-2013 multiannual financial framework does not take adequate account of the political importance of the common fisheries policy (CFP), in particular as regards the political expectations from greater European Union involvement in fisheries control, in fisheries research, in modernisation of the fleet to save energy and improve safety, and in cushioning the social effects of what is a necessary reduction in capacity;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Deplores the proposed cut in commitment appropriations for support for the management of fish resources (improvement of scientific advice), since expanding fisheries research is an essential prerequisite for a successful fisheries policy, particularly in establishing fishing opportunities on an annual basis and guaranteeing the sustainable management of resources and a socio- economically viable fisheries sector; notes that, in the medium and long term, a significant increase in expenditure on fisheries research is essential for successful reform of the CFP;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that the funds proposed for the development of an Integrated Maritime Policy (IMP) are not sufficient to cover the most important aspects of the launch of this new policy; calls for specific budget headings to be created for the European Union's new maritime policy, which must be endowed with the appropriations needed for successful developmentufficient funding for implementation of the IMP; states that it must be ensured that the IMP does not develop at the expense of the CFP;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Deplores the lack of funding for a number of areas in which coordinated action at EU level is imperative, in particular for the dissemination of knowledge already gained about selective fishing gear and for the coordination of, and support for, applied fisheries research; stresses the need for R&D funding to build up expertise on all stocks and establish the average sustainable yield under the CFP.