BETA

Activities of Lajos BOKROS related to 2011/2019(BUD)

Plenary speeches (1)

2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2011/2019(BUD)

Amendments (20)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Acknowledges that if the EU budget is to contribute to the collective effort of Member States in times of austerity this effort should be commensurate with its size, specific features and real economic impact; reminds the Council that under EU Treaty provisions the EU budget cannot run a deficit and that cuts to it, given its limited size, will have no significant long-term impact in addressing the urgent issue of accumulated national public deficit, which amounted in 2009 to EUR 801 billion for the EU as a whole;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Highlights the fact that the proposed figures in the 2012 EU annual budget are consistent with the profile of EU expenditure set in the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2007-2013; emphasises that any increase (or decrease) compared to Budget 2011 must therefore be assessed bearing in mind its impact on the delivery of the multiannual programmes; stresses that this is a question of institutional credibility and coherence of the EU project when EU responsibilities and commitments keep on growing; deeply regrets from this point of view that the Commission did not propose endowing policies and new competencies established at EU level following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty with meaningful and visible financial capacity;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Notes the proposed increase in PA of 4.9% compared to 2011; is convinced that the Commission is proposing such figures on the basis of a careful and critical analysis of forecasts provided by Member States, which themselves co-manage 80% of the EU budget; notes that the bulk of this increase is linked to legal needs arising in relation to the 7th Research Programme and the Structural and Cohesion Funds; is convinced that the proposed level of payments represents the bare minimum required to honour EU legal commitments made in previous years and that it is the EU’s duty to comply with the legal obligations deriving from these commitments; strongly urges the Council, therefore, to refrain from cutting the proposed level of payments;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. ~~Regret~~Notes, however, that most of the increases foreseen under this heading for 2012 do not go beyond the mere yearly breakdown of multiannual global amounts agreed to by both Parliament and Council when these programmes and actions were adopted; underlines therefore that the Commission does not generally propose to boost – beyond what was originally planned – the support for investments urgently needed to implement the seven flagship initiatives, and notes that it is regrettably inclined to postpone the necessary big leap in terms of common financial effort to the post-2013 MFF; is convinced that this attitude will seriously endanger the achievement of the headline goals by 2020;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Underlines that, with the DB 2012 and the updated financial programming for 2013, the total amount of funds committed by 2013 for key programmes for the achievement of the EU 2020 strategy, such as the 7th EC Framework Research Program (EC FP7), anti-pollution measures, Marco Polo II, PROGRESS, Galileo and GMES, would be less than the reference amount agreed by Parliament and Council when these programmes were adopted; notes that, on the contrary, these reference amounts would be slightly exceeded in the case of the following key Europe 2020 programmes: the Competiveness and Innovation Framework programme (CIP), Trans-European Transport Network, Trans-European Energy network, Erasmus Mundus and Lifelong Learning; ~~regrets, however, that these proposed increases are well below the 5% legislative flexibility allowed under Point 37 of the IIA~~asks for assessment of the programmes;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Notes with concern, in addition to the proposed EUR 100 million redeployment for ITER, the extra cuts of EUR 64 million made to EC FP7 as compared to the financial programming; regrets that the Commission is not proposing to use all the savings (amounting in total to EUR 190 million) to be made in 2012 thanks to re-assessment of staffing needs and the reduced financial contributions to some Joint Undertakings for the benefit of operational expenditure under the EC FP7;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Recalls that the bulk of the new EU competences introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon, in the areas of energy, tourism and space, falls within the remit of Heading 1a; expresses its disappointment that no extra funding for these new policies is proposed by the Commission in the third year after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty; underlines that neither Galileo nor GMES – the two main EU space programmes – is to benefit from extra funding by the end of the current MFF and that the Galileo funding is decreasing between 2011 and 2012; reiterates the need to introduce some specific, visible measures in support of tourism, given the economic relevance of this sector, which represents the third industry in Europe in terms of size and revenue, and regrets that the Commission is not proposing a new legal basis to replace the three preparatory actions in this field which cannot be extended in 2012;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Welcomes the Commission’s decision to include in the DB for the second consecutive year payment appropriations (EUR 50 million) for the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF); underlines the fact that this not only gives higher visibility to the fund but also avoids transfers from other budget lines pursuing different aims and covering different needs; eagerly awaits the presentation of the mid-term review of the EGF Regulation by the Commission as a means of identifying ways to speed up the procedure for mobilising the fund and of simplifying its management rules;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Stresses therefore that this level of payments ~~is a bare minimum and~~ complies fully with realistic budgeting, taking due account of the general payment profile over the period, the Member States’ available forecast in respect of payment claims to be sent to the Commission, and the need to fill the gap between commitments and payments; underlines the fact that these cash flows will also help accelerate the recovery of the European economy and contribute to the Europe 2020 strategy in the regions; will therefore strictly oppose any possible decrease in the level of payments compared to the one proposed by the Commission in its Draft Budget, particularly in view of Council’s early 2011 reluctance to honour its formal commitment of December 2010 to providing fresh appropriations in case of need;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35

35. Observes that these increases are above all the consequence of continuous phasing- in of direct payments to new Member States and additional needs for rural development; ~~underlines the fact that market interventions remain almost stable compared with Budget 2011, while price volatility and the instability of certain markets continue to affect the agricultural sector;~~

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43

43. Notes that these increases are mostly linked to three of the four Solidarity and Management of Immigration programmes: External Borders Fund (+38%), European Return Fund (+43%) and European Fund for the Integration of Third-Country Nationals (+24%); emphasises, however, that the increases foreseen under this heading for 2012 are simply the result of the yearly breakdown of multiannual global amounts agreed upon by both Parliament and Council when these programmes and actions were adopted;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44

44. Very much wonders, therefore, whether the DB presented by the Commission constitutes an appropriate and updated answer to the current challenges facing the EU, not least in the context of the ongoing events in the Southern Mediterranean; rRecalls its strong call for an appropriate and balanced answer to these challenges, in full respect of internal protection rules and human rights; highlights in particular the role and support of the European Refugee Fund, including emergency measures in the event of mass influxes of refugees, and greatly regrets that the Commission did not propose any increase for this fund beyond what was initially foreseen in the financial programming;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52

52. Regrets that similar efforts are not being proposed for programmes such as MEDIA and Culture 2007, although they contribute greatly to the richness and diversity of European culture and give support to actions which would not be funded by Member States alone;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53

53. Is astonished that the Commission has not proposed in its Draft Budget 2012 any specific programme in favour of sport, although this is now a fully-fledged competence of the Union deriving from the Treaty of Lisbon; finds this attitude all the more surprising since some funding – though of limited magnitude – was available in Budgets 2009, 2010 and 2011;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55

55. Notes that the commitment and payment appropriations requested in the DB 2012 have increased by 2.9% and 0.8%, as compared to the 2011 Budget, to EUR 9 009.3 and EUR 7 293.7 million respectively (account being taken of the Emergency Aid reserve); ~~points out that these increases remain below the increase proposed by the Commission for the Budget as a whole;~~

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 65

65. ~~Not~~Welcomes the letter from the Commissioner for Financial Programming and Budget of 3 February 2011 committing to an increase in Heading 5 expenditure below 1% and no new staff as compared to 2011 and calling upon all institutions to follow the same approach as regards the evolution of their budgets and expresses its determination to follow this example;

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 67

67. ~~Acknowledg~~Welcomes the Commission’s great effort to freeze its own administrative expenditure in nominal terms; notes that this was rendered possible through the offsetting of the increases linked to statutory and contractual obligations against other drastic cuts in other administrative expenditure; is nevertheless ~~concerned about~~determined to analyse the possible consequences of the latter, for instance those related to training (-11%) and publications (-17% and -2.1% for the Publication Office);

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68

68. Stresses that any further cut to 2012 administrative appropriations within Section III, including to the administrative support expenditure lines (former BA-lines), might have an adverse impact on the implementation of programmes, in particular in view of the new EU tasks following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty; insists that the savings resulting from reduced administrative support expenditure remain within the corresponding programmes’ financial envelopes for enhanced delivery on the ground; emphasises, furthermore, that while EU competences keep on increasing, this trend is not sustainable in the long term and will have an adverse impact on the swift, regular and effective implementation of EU actions and programmes;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 69

69. Acknowledges the Commission’s efforts not to request any additional posts, but views with scepticism its commitment to meet all its needs, including those relating to new priorities and to the entry into force of the TFEU, merely by means of internal redeployment of existing human resources; wonders in particular where the 230 additional posts for the monitoring of Member States’ economic and financial situation within DG ECFIN are to be redeployed from and what the impact of 70 fewer posts for administrative support and programmes management will be, following redeployments within specific Directorates-General;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 71

71. Takes the view that the European Schools should be adequately funded in the interests of addressing the specific situation and needs of the children of agents of the EU institutions; will carefully scrutinise the proposed overall 1.7% increase as compared to 2011, which is below that foreseen in the financial programming, as well as each of the European Schools’ budget lines, and make, during its reading, any modification it considers appropriate in this respect;deleted

2011/05/24
Committee: BUDG