4 Amendments of Sabine LÖSING related to 2011/2201(DEC)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Takes note ofNotes with concern the fact that the supervisory and control systems for External Action / Development / Enlargement policies are considered only partially effective;, and calls on the Commission to take and implement all necessary measures to improve the regularity of payments;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses, however, that the cost/benefit ratio cannot always be considered, in itself, as a sufficient criterion for assessing the appropriateness of the Union's interventionassistance in a third country; is in fact of the conviction that additional criteria - such as, for example, the strategic interests of the Union, the need for a Union presence on the ground, or the implementation of projects and actions fostering Union values and fundamental principle the implementation of certain principles within projects, such as the support of direct poverty eradication, social justice, the build-up/support of a strong public sector, leading to a fully-fledged independent development of countries and environmental standards - should also be taken into consideration;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Agrees with the Court of Auditors' opinion that a variety of fields of Union interventionassistance could, in some cases, be optimised by means of better coordination with Member States whose external action should not be considered competitive, but rather complementary;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recalls that the external action of the Union could become even more efficient and effective if Union delegations' staff, regardless of their institution of origin, cooperated closely and flexibly; as a result, calls on the Commission and the High Representative / Vice-President to implement, without delay, all necessary administrative and regulatory measures in order to facilitate and improvegrets the incorporation of the Union delegations by the EEAS, and in particular the lack of transparency and parliamentary control over the EEAS; further regrets in this respect the movement of significant coomperation between staff within Union delegationstences to the EEAS.