Progress: Procedure completed
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | BUDG | TRÜPEL Helga ( Verts/ALE) | FERNANDES José Manuel ( PPE) |
Committee Opinion | AFET | ||
Committee Opinion | DEVE | ||
Committee Opinion | INTA | ||
Committee Opinion | CONT | ||
Committee Opinion | ECON | ||
Committee Opinion | FEMM | ||
Committee Opinion | ENVI | ||
Committee Opinion | ITRE | ||
Committee Opinion | IMCO | ||
Committee Opinion | TRAN | ||
Committee Opinion | REGI | ||
Committee Opinion | AGRI | ||
Committee Opinion | PECH | ||
Committee Opinion | CULT | ||
Committee Opinion | JURI | ||
Committee Opinion | LIBE | ||
Committee Opinion | AFCO | ||
Committee Opinion | EMPL | ||
Committee Opinion | PETI |
Lead committee dossier:
Subjects
Events
The European Parliament adopted the resolution on the guidelines for the 2011 budget procedure for the other institutions.
It recalls that the ceiling for heading 5 in 2011 is EUR 8.415 billion (representing an increase of EUR 327 million, or 4%, compared with 2010, including 2% for inflation). It also recalls that the European Parliament’s budget for 2010 amounts to EUR 1 607 363 235, representing 19.87% of heading 5 for this year before the revision of the 2007-2013 MFF (which lowered the ceiling of heading 5 by EUR 126 million in order to contribute to the financing of the European Economic Recovery Plan ), and 20.19% after that revision.
Parliament points out that the circumstances under which the 2010 and 2011 budgets will be adopted are quite exceptional and challenging, since, on the one hand, successful implementation of the Lisbon Treaty is a major priority that will also be challenging financially, while, on the other hand, the effects of the financial crisis are still very present in many Member States, resulting in a political dilemma at EU level . It recalls, in this context, that the EU budget represents less than 2.5% of total EU public expenditure;
Furthermore, it notes that a number of administrative areas are financed outside heading 5 and requests that all administrative expenditure be included in that heading, and that the ceiling be revised accordingly. Parliament insists, therefore, that developments be monitored closely before final decisions are taken. It reiterates its belief that priorities will have to be set and that core activities should be prioritised.
Moreover, Parliament reiterates its conviction that interinstitutional cooperation is essential in order to exchange best practices and explore further the scope for improving effectiveness and efficiency and, where possible and appropriate, identifying savings and sharing resources better as regards in particular building policy . In this context, it calls on the other EU institutions likewise to develop medium- and long-term buildings strategies. Members take the view that, in this context, cooperation with other institutions in working towards the harmonisation of such information in order to allow a comparison of building space and costs should be considered a key issue. They point to the need for a specific report and possible recommendations concerning unnecessarily high maintenance, renovation and purchase costs.
European Parliament : as regards the Parliament’s own budget, it underlines the fundamental challenge of managing a number of uncertainties in relation to the 2011 budget, which will make precise forecasts and budgeting extremely difficult until the very late stages of the procedure. Parliament calls on relevant EP bodies and the administration to make available, in due time, a set of basic scenarios able to facilitate the taking of final political decisions by affording a better understanding of the corresponding financial consequences. It expects the Bureau to submit realistic requests when presenting the estimates. It is prepared to examine the Bureau’s proposals on a wholly needs-based and prudent basis in order to ensure the appropriate and efficient functioning of the institution. It emphasises that legislative excellence is Parliament’s priority, and highlights the need to provide the institution with the necessary means to achieve it. Members consider that measures to make the Lisbon Treaty work effectively are a crucial priority for the 2011 budget, and that this will necessitate the best possible management of available resources in order to make a success of the exercise.
Other budgetary elements to be taken into consideration can be summarised as follows :
New expenditure : the resolution notes that since 2006, Parliament has had to include expenditure not foreseen in its self-imposed 1988 declaration, such as the Statute for Members and direct and indirect expenditure related to its new role following the Lisbon Treaty. Parliament highlights the need for an open and in-depth discussion on the current, self-imposed 20% threshold, which applies to the level of the European Parliament budget. The Bureau and the Committee on Budgets should work together to re-assess this limit before opening an interinstitutional dialogue on the issue. It takes the view that, on the basis of the original MFF references negotiated in 2006 and in force since 2007, its expenditure should be established around the traditional 20% limit, taking into account the needs of the other institutions and the available margin. Services allocated to Members : Parliament cannot stress enough the fundamental principle that all Members should enjoy equal access to comprehensive, high-quality services allowing them to work and express themselves and to receive documents in their native language. Europarl TV : Parliament requests information about its viewing figures and viewers’ geographical distribution and age range. Zero-based budget policy : Parliament awaits a reply from the competent bodies as to how the concept of a zero-based budget policy, which also distinguishes between fixed and variable costs, can be applied in the context of the EP budget procedure. It calls for the Bureau to submit annual estimates of these fixed costs for the years corresponding to the MFF. Financial impact and new accredited parliamentary assistants : Parliament calls for an evaluation of the use of secretarial assistance allowances and an assessment of the total cost of the increase currently awaiting approval from both arms of the budgetary authority. It recalls that wider cost implications should always be assessed in relation to new measures introduced, for example when deciding on schemes for staff and accredited parliamentary assistants for both 2010 and 2011. It especially underlines that, if additional assistants were to be recruited in Brussels, this would have an impact on the situation as regards office space, building maintenance and security, IT equipment, human resources for dealing with administrative tasks, and general facilities. It considers that the presentation in March of the medium-term buildings strategy for its three places of work is crucial; insists on the need for long-term planning of its buildings policy in order to ensure the sustainability of the budget. Parliament’s building strategy : Parliament calls for the development of a medium- and long-term buildings strategy that includes the following objectives: (i) establishment of guidelines for the planning and development of buildings; effective use of existing office and other space; (ii) an accurate needs assessment and the provision of proper working conditions for Parliament’s staff and MEPs; (iii) an effective strategy for building upkeep, maintenance and renovation, so as to prevent any recurrence of incidents such as the one at Parliament in Strasbourg in 2008 or problems in relation to asbestos; (iv) a rigorous review of liability issues, including the process of determining liability, and the pursuit of claims for compensation in respect of damage for which third parties are liable, as well as strict and transparent adherence to procurement procedures; (v) for the medium- and long-term buildings strategy to be geared to sustainability, and for factors such as environmental friendliness, energy efficiency and health to be taken into account. The Parliament points out once again that the Committee on Budgets sees the acquisition of buildings as taking priority over expensive rental or leasing arrangements. Additional posts : Parliament recalls that the Bureau proposed an additional 70 members of staff for the committee secretariats and underlines that these staff will be divided among three groups according to the expected increase in their workload for legislative activities following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. It considers that this breakdown should be subject to a mid-term assessment by July 2011, in order to clarify whether those services allocated more staff have been affected in real terms by the predicted increase in workload. Follow-up and expense analysis : Parliament emphasises the need for continuous follow-up and analysis of Parliament’s budget implementation in general. It recalls, in this context, the negative media coverage resulting from subsidies being given to relatives of Parliament staff members, and calls for the Secretariat to scrutinise in advance any subsidising of event-type activities and bring it to the attention of the committee responsible. House of European History : Parliament underlines the need to receive a complete financial statement concerning the House of European History once the architects’ competition has been completed, as otherwise there will be no possibility of an in-depth assessment of the long-term costs in terms of Parliament’s buildings strategy and budget. Other institutions : Parliament calls for realistic and cost-based budget requests , which take full account of the need to manage scarce resources in an optimal way and must be presented in good time. It takes the view that it may be advisable to request information about, and to compare, the other institutions’ systems for various types of remuneration, allowances and travel costs. It wishes to follow up on last year’s priority of better sharing of the available resources among all the institutions, including the concrete measures taken in the area of translation, and considers that the area of interpretation could also be looked at once again in this context. Members even suggest that the same kind of operation be called out for 2011 in the field of interpretation. Salaries : lastly, Parliament points out that, with regard to the staff salaries adjustment and the pending court case, the additional cost for all the institutions may be estimated at some EUR 135 million (for the period from July 2009 to 31 December 2010) if the Court were to rule in the Commission’s favour. It notes that this ruling is expected in 2010, but does not exclude the possibility that it could be delayed until 2011.
The Committee on Budgets unanimously adopted the report drawn up by Helga TRÜPEL (Greens/ALE, DE) on the guidelines for the 2011 budget procedure for the other institutions. It recalls that the ceiling for heading 5 in 2011 is EUR 8.415 billion (representing an increase of EUR 327 million, or 4%, compared with 2010, including 2% for inflation). Members recall that the European Parliament’s budget for 2010 amounts to EUR 1 607 363 235, representing 19.87% of heading 5 for this year before the revision of the 2007-2013 MFF (which lowered the ceiling of heading 5 by EUR 126 000 000 in order to contribute to the financing of the European Economic Recovery Plan), and 20.19% after that revision.
The report points out that the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, notably the single budget reading by each of the two arms of the budgetary authority, followed by a conciliation meeting with a view to arriving at a final budget, will require even closer cooperation and dialogue among all the institutions throughout the whole procedure, including the presentation of realistic estimates in due time. Members point out that the circumstances under which the 2010 and 2011 budgets will be adopted are quite exceptional and challenging , since, on the one hand, successful implementation of the Lisbon Treaty is a major priority that will also be challenging financially, while, on the other hand, the effects of the financial crisis are still very present in many Member States, resulting in a political dilemma at EU level. The report notes that the institutions may encounter problems in reconciling the financing of all needs with their desire to maintain budgetary discipline and self-restraint in order to comply with the multiannual financial framework.
Members also note that a number of administrative areas are financed outside heading 5 and request that all administrative expenditure be included in that heading, and that the ceiling be revised accordingly. Therefore, they reiterate the belief that priorities will have to be set and that core activities should be prioritised.
Moreover, the committee reiterates its conviction that interinstitutional cooperation is essential in order to exchange best practices and explore further the scope for improving effectiveness and efficiency and, where possible and appropriate, identifying savings and sharing resources better as regards in particular building policy . In this context, it calls on the other EU institutions likewise to develop medium- and long-term buildings strategies. Members take the view that, in this context, cooperation with other institutions in working towards the harmonisation of such information in order to allow a comparison of building space and costs should be considered a key issue. They point to the need for a specific report and possible recommendations concerning unnecessarily high maintenance, renovation and purchase costs.
European Parliament : as regards the Parliament’s own budget, Members underline the fundamental challenge of managing a number of uncertainties in relation to the 2011 budget, which will make precise forecasts and budgeting extremely difficult until the very late stages of the procedure. They call on relevant EP bodies and the administration to make available, in due time, a set of basic scenarios able to facilitate the taking of final political decisions by affording a better understanding of the corresponding financial consequences. The committee expects the Bureau to submit realistic requests when presenting the estimates. It is prepared to examine the Bureau’s proposals on a wholly needs-based and prudent basis in order to ensure the appropriate and efficient functioning of the institution. It emphasises that legislative excellence is Parliament’s priority, and highlights the need to provide the institution with the necessary means to achieve it. Members consider that measures to make the Lisbon Treaty work effectively are a crucial priority for the 2011 budget, and that this will necessitate the best possible management of available resources in order to make a success of the exercise.
Other budgetary elements to be taken into consideration can be summarised as follows :
New expenditure : Members note that since 2006, Parliament has had to include expenditure not foreseen in its self-imposed 1988 declaration, such as the Statute for Members and direct and indirect expenditure related to its new role following the Lisbon Treaty. They highlight the need for an open and in-depth discussion on the current, self-imposed 20% threshold, which applies to the level of the European Parliament budget. The Bureau and the Committee on Budgets should work together to re-assess this limit before opening an interinstitutional dialogue on the issue. They take the view that, on the basis of the original MFF references negotiated in 2006 and in force since 2007, its expenditure should be established around the traditional 20% limit, taking into account the needs of the other institutions and the available margin. Services allocated to Members : the committee cannot stress enough the fundamental principle that all Members should enjoy equal access to comprehensive, high-quality services allowing them to work and express themselves and to receive documents in their native language. Europarl TV : Members request information about its viewing figures and viewers’ geographical distribution and age range. Zero-based budget policy : Members await a reply from the competent bodies as to how the concept of a zero-based budget policy, which also distinguishes between fixed and variable costs, can be applied in the context of the EP budget procedure. They call for the Bureau to submit annual estimates of these fixed costs for the years corresponding to the MFF. Financial impact and new accredited parliamentary assistants : the committee calls for an evaluation of the use of secretarial assistance allowances and an assessment of the total cost of the increase currently awaiting approval from both arms of the budgetary authority. It recalls that wider cost implications should always be assessed in relation to new measures introduced, for example when deciding on schemes for staff and accredited parliamentary assistants for both 2010 and 2011. It especially underlines that, if additional assistants were to be recruited in Brussels, this would have an impact on the situation as regards office space, building maintenance and security, IT equipment, human resources for dealing with administrative tasks, and general facilities. The committee insists on the need for long-term planning of its buildings policy in order to ensure the sustainability of the budget. Parliament’s building strategy : Members call for the development of a medium- and long-term buildings strategy that includes the following objectives: (i) establishment of guidelines for the planning and development of buildings; effective use of existing office and other space; (ii) an accurate needs assessment and the provision of proper working conditions for Parliament’s staff and MEPs; (iii) an effective strategy for building upkeep, maintenance and renovation, so as to prevent any recurrence of incidents such as the one at Parliament in Strasbourg in 2008 or problems in relation to asbestos; (iv) a rigorous review of liability issues, including the process of determining liability, and the pursuit of claims for compensation in respect of damage for which third parties are liable, as well as strict and transparent adherence to procurement procedures; (v) for the medium- and long-term buildings strategy to be geared to sustainability, and for factors such as environmental friendliness, energy efficiency and health to be taken into account. The report points out once again that the Committee on Budgets sees the acquisition of buildings as taking priority over expensive rental or leasing arrangements. Follow-up and expense analysis : Members emphasise the need for continuous follow-up and analysis of Parliament’s budget implementation in general. They recall, in this context, the negative media coverage resulting from subsidies being given to relatives of Parliament staff members, and calls for the Secretariat to scrutinise in advance any subsidising of event-type activities and bring it to the attention of the committee responsible. House of European History : the report underlines the need to receive a complete financial statement concerning the House of European History once the architects’ competition has been completed, as otherwise there will be no possibility of an in-depth assessment of the long-term costs in terms of Parliament’s buildings strategy and budget.
Other institutions : the committee calls for realistic and cost-based budget requests , which take full account of the need to manage scarce resources in an optimal way and must be presented in good time. It takes the view that it may be advisable to request information about, and to compare, the other institutions’ systems for various types of remuneration, allowances and travel costs. The committee wishes to follow up on last year’s priority of better sharing of the available resources among all the institutions, including the concrete measures taken in the area of translation, and considers that the area of interpretation could also be looked at once again in this context. Members even suggest that the same kind of operation be called out for 2011 in the field of interpretation.
Salaries : lastly, Members point out that, with regard to the staff salaries adjustment and the pending court case, the additional cost for all the institutions may be estimated at some EUR 135 million (for the period from July 2009 to 31 December 2010) if the Court were to rule in the Commission’s favour. They note that this ruling is expected in 2010, but does not exclude the possibility that it could be delayed until 2011.
Documents
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament: T7-0087/2010
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A7-0036/2010
- Committee report tabled for plenary: A7-0036/2010
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE439.234
- Committee draft report: PE439.083
- Committee draft report: PE439.083
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE439.234
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A7-0036/2010
Amendments | Dossier |
35 |
2010/2003(BUD)
2010/02/25
BUDG
35 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Points out that the circumstances under which the 2010 and 2011 budgets will be adopted are quite exceptional and challenging as, on the one hand, successful implementation of the Lisbon Treaty is a major priority that will also be challenging financially while, on the other hand, the effects of the financial crisis are still very present
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 b (new) 7b. Stresses the need for a fully integrated knowledge management system; recalls the need to organise a presentation in the Committee on Budgets on the multitude of information sources/systems available to Members and to receive the requested information concerning the state of play of the 'knowledge management system', as agreed during the conciliation between the Bureau and the Committee on Budgets on 15 September 2009; is of the opinion that such a system should be made easily accessible via the Internet; underlines the need to consider how much of this information should be made available to European citizens;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 c (new) 7c. Would welcome an analysis of Parliament's WebTV channel, Europarl TV; requests, in particular, information about its viewing figures and the geographical dispersal and age range of viewers, in order to evaluate whether the aims of this tool have been fulfilled in terms of dissemination and quality and quantity of information transmitted;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Cannot stress enough the fundamental principle that all Members should be equally provided with comprehensive, high-quality services allowing them to work and express themselves and to receive documents in their native language, in order to be able to act on behalf of their voters in the best way possible;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Considers that the current 20% of heading 5 basis is now more restrictive compared to the previous situation, as it will have to cover expenditure not foreseen in the self-imposed declaration of 1988; recalls that, since 2006, Parliament has included expenditure such as the Members' Statute (generating savings for Member States), the Assistants' Statute, expenditure relating to its new role following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty and also an expanded buildings policy to accommodate its overall needs, including enlargements; considers that, on the basis of the original MFF references negotiated in 2006 and in force since 2007, its expenditure should remain within the traditional 20% limit, as an indicative reference;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 b (new) 9b. Highlights the need for an open and in-depth discussion on the current self- imposed 20% threshold applying to the level of Parliament's budget; considers that the Bureau and the Committee on Budget should work together to reassess this limit before opening an interinstitutional dialogue on the issue;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 c (new) 9c. Points out that action needs to be taken with a view to securing budgetary sustainability in future years; reaffirms the importance of drawing up a zero- based budget policy that will ensure further rigour and transparency;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 d (new) 9d. Emphasises the need to know the fixed costs of Parliament as already approved in Parliament's resolutions of 26 February 2010 on the estimates of revenue and expenditure for Amending Budget 1/2010 and of 22 October 2009 on the draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2010, in order to ensure rigorous and transparent budget planning; calls for the Bureau to submit annual estimates of these fixed costs for the years corresponding to the MFF; requests that a cost-benefit analysis be carried out for the variable expenditure;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) 10a. Notes that, on the basis of the decision approved in the Manka report (A7-0037/ 2009), a report on the application of the system for travel reimbursements must be presented in time for it to be able to affect the budget for 2011;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Recalls that wider cost implications should always be assessed in relation to new measures introduced such as, for example, when deciding on staff and assistants schemes in both 2010 and 2011;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11.
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Recalls that the purpose of the amending letter presented by the Bureau to the Committee on Budgets in September is to take into account needs unforeseen at the time the estimates were drawn up, and stresses that it should not be seen as an opportunity to renew estimates previously agreed; expects the Bureau to submit realistic requests when presenting the estimates; is ready to examine the Bureau's proposals on a fully needs-based and prudent basis in order to ensure an appropriate and efficient functioning of the institution;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Recalls that wider cost implications should always be assessed in relation to new measures introduced such as, for example, when deciding on staff and assistants schemes in both 2010 and 2011; underlines especially that if additional assistants were to be recruited in Brussels
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Recalls that wider cost implications should always be assessed in relation to new measures introduced such as, for example, when deciding on staff and assistants schemes in both 2010 and 2011; underlines especially that if additional assistants were to be recruited in Brussels, this would have an impact on the situation regarding office space, which is already stretched; considers that the March presentation of the medium-term buildings strategy for its three places of work is crucial; insists on the need for long-term planning of its buildings policy, with a view to ensuring budget sustainability;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Calls for the development of a medium and long-term buildings strategy that includes the following objectives: establishment of guidelines for the planning and development of buildings; effective use of existing office and other space; an accurate assessment of need and the provision of proper working conditions for Parliament’s staff and MEPs; an effective strategy for the upkeep, maintenance and renovation of buildings, to prevent any recurrence of incidents such as that at Parliament in Strasbourg in 2008 or in relation to asbestos; a rigorous review of liability issues, including the process of determining liability, and the pursuit of claims for compensation in respect of damage for which third parties are liable, as well as strict and transparent adherence to procurement procedures; calls, too, for the medium and long-term buildings strategy to be geared to sustainability and for factors such as environment-friendliness, energy efficiency and health to be taken into account; insists, moreover, that mobility- related aspects, especially with regard to access for people with motor or sensory disabilities, should also be included in the objectives; points out once again that the Committee on Budgets sees the acquisition of buildings as taking priority over expensive rental or leasing arrangements;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 b (new) 11b. Recalls that the Bureau, in its draft estimates for Amending Budget 1/2010, proposed a reinforcement of 70 members of staff for the committee secretariat; underlines that these staff will be divided between three groups according to the increased workload expected for their legislative activity, following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty; considers that that breakdown should be submitted to a mid-term assessment by July 2011, in order to clarify whether the services benefiting from a higher increase of staff have been affected in real terms by the predicted increased work load;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 c (new) 11c. Considers that the March presentation of the medium-term buildings strategy for its three places of work is crucial; underlines that the recruitment of additional assistants in Brussels will have an impact on the already very limited office space available;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 d (new) 11d. Stresses that a detailed case-by-case assessment of the buildings strategy must be made available to the competent budgetary authorities in time for them to be able to take the necessary decisions;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13.
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Considers that follow-up and analysis are important on a number of fronts with clear budgetary links such as, inter alia, the restructuring of Directorates-General, the pursuit of a more effective and professional staff policy, a cost- and energy-efficient buildings policy, including with regard to location, non-discrimination action, EMAS, public procurement and action taken following budget discharge recommendations; emphasises the need for continuous follow-up and analysis of Parliament's budget implementation in general;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Considers that follow-up and analysis are important on a number of fronts with clear budgetary links such as, inter alia, the restructuring of Directorates-General, the pursuit of a more effective and professional staff policy, non-discrimination action, EMAS, public procurement and action taken following budget discharge recommendations; emphasises the need for continuous follow-up and analysis of Parliament's budget implementation in general; recalls, in this context, the negative media coverage that resulted from subsidies being given to relatives of Parliament staff members and calls for the Secretariat to scrutinise in advance any subsidising of event-type activities and to bring it to the attention of the committee responsible;
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Underlines the difficult situation with respect to the Heading 5 expenditure ceiling for 2011 and is aware of the fact that the Institutions may encounter problems in reconciling the financing of all needs and the wish to maintain budgetary discipline and self-restraint in order to comply with the multiannual financial framework; notes that a number of administrative areas are financed outside heading 5; requests that all administrative expenditure be included in that heading;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13a. Stresses the fact that sound financial management of building expenses is essential; calls on the Bureau and Secretary General of the Parliament to carry out the main proposals of the joint declaration between Parliament and the Council agreed during the last budget conciliation meeting in November 2009; reiterates, in particular, the importance of enhancing interinstitutional cooperation in this field; stresses the need to receive information necessary for decision- making in good time under the procedure laid down in Article 179 of the Financial Regulation, which 'should include needs assessments and cost benefit analyses for the various alternatives, outlining the options to rent or buy, as well as transparent information concerning the alternative financing possibilities, the long-term financial consequences, and compatibility with the MFF'; in this context, cooperation with other institutions in working towards the harmonisation of such information in order to allow a comparison of building space and costs would be considered a key issue;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 b (new) 13b. Reiterates its call to receive a medium- to long-term strategy paper on Parliament's buildings policy, to provide a basis for future relevant decisions in this area; points to the need for a specific report and any possible recommendations concerning unnecessarily high maintenance, renovation and purchase costs relating to Parliament's buildings; underlines, in this context, the need to receive a complete financial statement concerning the House of European History when the architects' competition is completed, as otherwise no in-depth assessment on the long-term costs will be possible in terms of Parliament's buildings strategy and Parliament's budget;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 c (new) 13c. Endorses the importance of information sources and information services being made available to Members, staff and the wider public, with a view to fostering further public dialogue; recalls, in this respect, the strengthening of the relevant directorate within Parliament's administrative structure, with a view to ensuring a professional information service; expects further improvements in terms of an overall Knowledge Management System to facilitate the dissemination of all information at both political and administrative levels;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 d (new) 13d. Recalls the conciliation agreement to carry out an organisational audit of DG INLO and the Security Service in order to assess whether resources are being used in the best way possible; is convinced that the results of this audit will form a good basis for taking further steps;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Wishes to follow up on last year's priority of better sharing the available resources between all Institutions, including the concrete measures taken in the area of translation, and considers that the interpretation area could also again be looked at in this light; asks for an evaluation of the possible effects of the cross-cutting reserve of 5% established in the 2010 budget against specific budget lines for each institution with its own translation service, the aim of that reserve being to encourage closer interinstitutional cooperation and efficiency gains in the translation field;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 a (new) 17a. Calls on the other EU institutions likewise to develop medium and long-term buildings strategies that include the objectives set out in this resolution;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Reiterates its conviction that interinstitutional cooperation is essential to exchange best practices and explore further the scope for improving effectiveness and efficiency and, where possible and appropriate, finding savings and sharing resources better; believes that useful gains
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Reiterates its conviction that interinstitutional cooperation is essential to exchange best practices and explore further the scope for improving effectiveness and efficiency and, where possible and appropriate, finding savings and sharing resources better; believes that useful gains could also be made by extending this concept to other areas which have not so far been considered in this context, such as EMAS, non-discrimination policies, possibilities to use open software with sufficient safety guarantees and teleworking; points out that efforts should continue in areas already under consideration such as for example translation capacity and recruitment (EPSO); recommends that the Institutions consider introducing a centralised purchasing policy;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Reiterates its conviction that interinstitutional cooperation is essential to exchange best practices and explore further the scope for improving effectiveness and efficiency and, where possible and appropriate, finding savings and sharing resources better; believes that useful gains could also be made by extending this concept to other areas which have not so far been considered in this context, such as EMAS, non-discrimination policies, possibilities to use open software with sufficient safety guarantees and teleworking; points out that efforts should continue in areas already under consideration such as for example translation capacity and recruitment (EPSO), on the basis of actual or justifiable needs;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses the fundamental challenge of managing a certain number of uncertainties for the 2011 budget, as indicated below, which will make precise forecasts and budgeting extremely difficult until the very late stages of the procedure when these have become better known; requests that its relevant bodies and the administration make available, in due time, a set of basic scenarios that can facilitate the final political decisions through a better understanding of the corresponding financial consequences;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Emphasises that legislative excellence is Parliament's priority, and highlights the need to provide the Members, committees and political groups with the necessary means to achieve it;
source: PE-439.234
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
docs/0/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE439.083New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/BUDG-PR-439083_EN.html |
docs/1/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE439.234New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/BUDG-AM-439234_EN.html |
docs/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0036_EN.htmlNew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0036_EN.html |
events/0/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee |
events/1 |
|
events/1 |
|
events/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20100324&type=CRENew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CRE-7-2010-03-24-TOC_EN.html |
events/4 |
|
events/4 |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
procedure/Other legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/10 |
|
committees/11 |
|
committees/12 |
|
committees/13 |
|
committees/14 |
|
committees/15 |
|
committees/16 |
|
committees/17 |
|
committees/18 |
|
committees/19 |
|
docs/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-36&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0036_EN.html |
events/1/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-36&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0036_EN.html |
events/4/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2010-87New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2010-0087_EN.html |
activities |
|
commission |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/5 |
|
committees/5 |
|
committees/6 |
|
committees/6 |
|
committees/7 |
|
committees/7 |
|
committees/8 |
|
committees/8 |
|
committees/9 |
|
committees/9 |
|
committees/10 |
|
committees/11 |
|
committees/12 |
|
committees/13 |
|
committees/14 |
|
committees/15 |
|
committees/16 |
|
committees/17 |
|
committees/18 |
|
committees/19 |
|
docs |
|
events |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150New
Rules of Procedure EP 159 |
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
BUDG/7/01957New
|
procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
procedure/subject/0 |
Old
8.70.51 2011 budgetNew
8.70.60 Previous annual budgets |
activities |
|
committees |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure |
|