15 Amendments of Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY related to 2011/0177(APP)
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)
Citation 4 a (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 3 July 2013 on the political agreement on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014- 2020;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Welcomes the Europe 2020 strategy accompanied by its flagship initiatives which need to be translated into concrete actions, commitments and legislative frameworks; is committed to transform the European Union with an enhanced engagement in more sustainability towards smart, inclusive and competitive Europe; is convinced that investments in biodiversity and ecosystem measures and in resource efficiency as well as complementary actions at EU level in the public health area will contribute to sustainable growth and jobs;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Strongly believes that the Europe 2020 strategy should be the main policy reference for the next MFF; is convinced that all internal policies contribute to achieving the targets set by the Europe 2020 strategy; considers, as a consequence, that the structure of the MFF should reflect and give political visibility to the Europe 2020 dimensions of smart, sustainable and inclusive growth; is not convinced that the structure proposed by the Commission, only reshaping slightly the existing structure, is translating the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Strongly demands that at least 1 % of the Union budget be allocated to the LIFE Programme, given its extremely positive track record as a small but well targeted and effective instrument and its high European Added Value as only instrument exclusively targeting climate and environment challenges; emphasises that integrated spending for climate and environment via LIFE Integrated Projects should be actively supported within relevant Union funds; calls for LIFE to be equipped with the necessary share to contribute to a sound and steady management of the Natura 2000 network, taking into account the secured contribution of other Union funds;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Recalls the EP's previous request that the Union's ambition of taking a sustainable low-carbon development path is mainstreamed into all spending policies; emphasises that a failure to decidedly target funds towards sustainability within the Union's cohesion, infrastructure, agriculture and research policy will lead to a feigned, short-sighted increase in flexibility, while strongly reducing the flexibility of future generations; calls, therefore, for intelligent earmarking within all funds as suggested in respective ENVI opinions, leading to at least 20% of climate-related expenditure1;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 e (new)
Paragraph 3 e (new)
3e. Strongly believes that the current debt crisis should not lead to short-sighted investments jeopardizing, in addition to its financial capital, the Union's natural capital by further degrading biodiversity and eco-system services; calls instead for the establishment of the appropriate framework to counter the crisis by forward-looking investments into major future challenges such as resource- efficiency, climate change and eco-system preservation, where potential economic and social benefits would be significant;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Provide Cohesion Fund support for projects in the field of environment, especially biodiversity, resource efficiency, urban environment and air pollution, refusing macroeconomical conditionalities;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)
Paragraph 5 d (new)
5d Strongly believes that the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) must promote long-term environmental sustainability which is a prerequisite for economic and social stability and contributes to the availability of food supplies; therefore demands that the MFF support a transition to efficient and sustainable fishing which ensures, for example, that maximum sustainable yield is achieved by 2015 and that discards are eliminated;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Consider healthcare sector (one of the largest in EU, accounting for 10% EU GDP and 10% EU employment, with higher than average % of workers with tertiary-level education) to be of major importance in an Europe in crisis; stress the importance of Health for Growth Programme 2014-2020 and underline that by 2020 there will be a shortage of one million health workers in EU, making the programme provide labour market incentives;
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Supports the introduction of (ex ante and ex post) conditionality provisions to ensure that EU funding, particularly in respect of the Cohesion Fund, the Structural Funds and the rural and fisheries funds, are better targeted to the achievement of the Europe 2020 objectives; stresses the need in this respect to establish safeguards to guarantee that MFF subsidies do not undermine the achievement of EU 2020 climate and environmental targets; believes that if their implementation is based on a reinforced partnership principle through the stronger involvement of local and regional authorities, these conditionality provisions could improve the legitimacy and effectiveness of EU support;
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Believes, at the same time, that the work of the decentralised EU agencies should result in significantly higher savings at national level; urges the Member States to assess the efficiency gains generated by these agencies at national to make full use of them, thus rationalising their national expenditure; calls, also, on the Member StatesCommission to identify possible areas of duplication of work or reduced added value in relation to the agencies, with a view to streamlining their functioning;
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Profoundly disagrees with the application of a linear staff reduction to all institutions, bodies and agencies, as their roles and responsibilities under the Treaties differ widely; stresses that ithey should be left to each of them to decidetreated individually as to where cuts can be introduced, and which cuts, so as to not hamper their proper functioning.