4 Amendments of Michèle STRIFFLER related to 2011/2073(INI)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses the fact that the European Union must strengthen its reaction capacity, given the growing number of major natural disasters; with this in mind, recalls that the European Parliament has for many years been calling for a more realistic humanitarian budget in the interests of remedying the chronic underfunding of the relevant budget lines and making it possible to provide a margin of financial manoeuvre throughout the financial year; welcomes the recent Commission Communication on the 2014- 2020 Multiannual Financial Framework, which provides for an increase in the humanitarian aid instrument budget of EUR 6.4 billion over this period (i.e. an annual average of EUR 915 million, as against EUR 813 million in 2007-2013); also notes with satisfaction the increase in the emergency aid reserve for the same period, bringing it to EUR 2.5 billion, as well as the proposal for unspent funds in the reserve to be carried over to the following year, and asks the Commission to ensure that these funds continue to be earmarked primarily for urgent humanitarian needs;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Asks for the EU budget to support actions designed to anticipate disasters, prepare for them, avert them and react more quickly to them, as well as those enabling greater flexibility in launching development measures as a means of emerging from crisis situations; finds it regrettable that concrete progress on the link between emergency aid, rehabilitation and development remains limited despite the many political commitments made in recent years; calls therefore for more resources to be deployed to guarantee continuity of aid in the transition phase between emergency and development, and for thought to be given to achieving greater flexibility and complementarity of the existing financial mechanisms, includparticularly ing the resources of the Europecontext of EDF and Development Fund (EDF)CI country/regional strategy papers;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recognises the potential benefits of the consortium-based organisation advocated by DG ECHOseeking new arrangements for financing by DG ECHO, together with its partners; calls at the same time for the diversity of the actors involved in financing and implementing the European humanitarian programmes – the United Nations, the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, NGOs – to be borne in mind; encourages the work of strengthening the capacities of local stakeholders;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises the high-quality ofwork carried out by DG ECHO’s partners, achieved by means of an effective selection method – such as the Framework Partnership Agreement – and the development of standards and practices applicable in the humanitarian field; stresses also that effective monitoring of the use of funds in the form of audits of the partners carried out by private audit firms is essential and helps to legitimise the humanitarian sector; notes, however, in the interests of safeguarding the diversity of the partners and guaranteeing access for small and medium-sized NGOs, the complexity of the administrative access procedures and the difficulties experienced with undergoing audits, given the lack of human resourceexcessive administrative charges, which are very costly for NGOs, and calls for the tools used to be appropriate to the specific requirements of the humanitarian sector;