BETA


Events

2011/02/08
   EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2010/09/07
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2010/09/07
   EP - Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
Details

The European Parliament adopted a resolution on the funding and functioning of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund.

It recalls that the EGF's added value as an EU social policy instrument lies in the fact that it provides visible, specific, targeted and temporary financial support for personalised programmes for the reskilling and reintegration into employment of workers affected by collective redundancies in sectors or regions undergoing severe economic and social disruption. However, it considers that the increase in the number of applications for EGF funding and the difficulties experienced in implementing the EGF call for improvements to be made to the fund's procedural and budgetary arrangements at the earliest opportunity. Members call on the Commission to bring the submission of its mid-term evaluation forward to 30 June 2011 in order to remedy the fund's clearest shortcomings. This evaluation should focus on the following :

the contributions granted with reference to the following qualitative aspects: (i) the rate of success in reintegration and assessment of the upgrading of the skills of the beneficiaries; (ii) the measures financed in response to each EGF application and results on the basis of reintegration; (iii) the impact of the EGF on its beneficiaries' network and on the small and medium-sized enterprises potentially affected by the redundancy plan and whose employees could profit from the fund; (iv) the impact of contributions from the EGF by age group in benefiting Member States and sectors; the contributions granted from the budgetary point of view, with particular reference to: (i) the reasons for the large disparity between the resources requested from the EGF and the amounts reimbursed by the beneficiary Member States when the assistance is already concluded; (ii) in the cases where Member States have made reimbursements, which were the financed programmes and measures not executed; (iii) the reasons for the large disparities between Member States in terms of the funding provided per worker in the different EGF applications; (iv) the proportion of overall funding in relation to other national and company-specific support measures;- the EGF's functioning and of the experience gained , and measures that will substantially reduce the length of the EGF mobilisation procedure should be introduced. Members state that the time required to mobilise the EGF could be halved if the following measures are formulated and adopted: (i) applications for mobilisation of the EGF should be drawn up by Member States as soon as a collective redundancy has been announced, and not after it has taken place; (ii) the Commission should inform Member States that an application could be presented from the first day when the intervention criteria have been fulfilled; (iii) enhanced communication with the Member State concerned in this process; (iv) the Commission should have the necessary human and technical capacities; (v) the Commission should take decisions on the mobilisation of the EGF within 3-4 months after having received the application.

The Commission is also asked to provide the Member States with a set of guidelines for the design and implementation of applications for EGF funding geared to a fast application procedure and a broad consensus among stakeholders on the strategy to be applied. For their part, Member States are asked to:

accelerate the procedure by prefinancing the measures that should start from the day of the application; involve the social partners right from the outset in the task of preparing applications and provide information on and publicise the funded actions ; put in place a communication and administration structure for the EGF at national level, in consultation with all stakeholders, and to exchange good practice at European level.

Speed up and simplify procedures : Parliament states that more effective coordination between the Commission and the European Parliament must be ensured, so that the time limit for decision-making could be reduced. The Commission must take due account of Parliament’s calendar, and must inform Parliament in due time on difficulties and/or blockages encountered while assessing the Member States' applications.

Members state that any of these steps should not in any way limit or decrease the power of Parliament as one arm of the budgetary authority while deciding on the mobilisation of the fund.

Financial crisis : the period of validity of the derogation inserted in 2009 with a view to assisting workers who lose their jobs as a result of the economic and financial crisis should be extended until the end of the current MFF and that the cofinancing rate should, therefore, be maintained at 65%, given that the underlying causes on which their approval was based are far from having been removed.

EGF budget : Parliament notes the inclusion, for the first time, in the Commission's Draft Budget 2011 of payment appropriations for the EGF, which is an important element in the overall reflection on the visibility of this fund. Members consider, however, that these payment appropriations might not be sufficient to cover the amounts necessary for EGF applications in 2011. They reiterate, therefore, their demand not to finance EGF applications exclusively through transfers from ESF lines.

With regard to the future of the EGF , this will be determined in the framework of negotiations on the next MFF. Several options could be examined, particularly that of establishing an independent fund with its own commitment and payment appropriations. Parliament calls on the Commission to come forward with proposals for resourcing such a fund; believes that any future reform of the EGF should maintain its flexibility, which currently represents a comparative advantage in relation to the EU Structural Funds. Members stress that the conversion of the current EGF measures into a permanent means of support for active job-seeking measures would show a political will to develop a European social pillar that would be complementary to Member States' social policies and capable of revitalising the European approach to professional training. They point out that the EGF should remain distinct in its objectives from the ESF and the European lifelong learning programmes, given that the EGF focuses on enhancing the abilities of each of the workers assisted, rather than on providing a response to the concerns of businesses or on the delivery of across-the-board services to training establishments. Parliament calls on Member States using the EGF to create synergies between the EGF, ESF and micro-finance so as to identify the measure best suited to the individual case.

Lastly, Parliament calls on the Commission to improve its reporting on the use of the EGF by substantially fleshing out its annual reports and regularly forwarding to Parliament information on Member States' implementation of financial contributions.

Documents
2010/09/07
   EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2010/09/06
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2010/07/26
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
Documents
2010/07/26
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
Documents
2010/07/14
   EP - Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
Details

The Committee on Budgets adopted the own-initiative report by Miguel PORTAS (GUE/NGL, PT) on the funding and functioning of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund. The Committee on Employment and Social Affairs gave its opinion as an associated committee under Rule 50 of the European Parliament’s Rules of Procedure

Members take the view that the EGF's added value as an EU social policy instrument lies in the fact that it provides visible, specific, targeted and temporary financial support for personalised programmes for the reskilling and reintegration into employment of workers affected by collective redundancies in sectors or regions undergoing severe economic and social disruption. However, they consider that the increase in the number of applications for EGF funding and the difficulties experienced in implementing the EGF call for improvements to be made to the fund's procedural and budgetary arrangements at the earliest opportunity. Members call on the Commission to bring the submission of its mid-term evaluation forward to 30 June 2011 in order to remedy the fund's clearest shortcomings. This evaluation should focus on the following :

- the contributions granted with reference to the following qualitative aspects: (i) the rate of success in reintegration and assessment of the upgrading of the skills of the beneficiaries; (ii) the measures financed in response to each EGF application and results on the basis of reintegration; (iii) the impact of the EGF on its beneficiaries' network and on the small and medium-sized enterprises potentially affected by the redundancy plan and whose employees could profit from the fund; (iv) the impact of contributions from the EGF by age group in benefiting Member States and sectors.

- the contributions granted from the budgetary point of view, with particular reference to: (i) the reasons for the large disparity between the resources requested from the EGF and the amounts reimbursed by the beneficiary Member States when the assistance is already concluded; (ii) in the cases where Member States have made reimbursements, which were the financed programmes and measures not executed; (iii) the reasons for the large disparities between Member States in terms of the funding provided per worker in the different EGF applications; (iv) the proportion of overall funding in relation to other national and company-specific support measures;

- the EGF's functioning and of the experience gained , and measures that will substantially reduce the length of the EGF mobilisation procedure should be introduced. Members state that the time required to mobilise the EGF could be halved if the following measures are formulated and adopted: (i) applications for mobilisation of the EGF should be drawn up by Member States as soon as a collective redundancy has been announced, and not after it has taken place; (ii) the Commission should inform Member States that an application could be presented from the first day when the intervention criteria have been fulfilled; (iii) enhanced communication with the Member State concerned in this process; (iv) the Commission should have the necessary human and technical capacities; (v)) the Commission should take decisions on the mobilisation of the EGF within 3-4 months after having received the application.

The Commission is also asked to provide the Member States with a set of guidelines for the design and implementation of applications for EGF funding geared to a fast application procedure and a broad consensus among stakeholders on the strategy to be applied. For their part, Member States are asked to:

accelerate the procedure by prefinancing the measures that should start from the day of the application; involve the social partners right from the outset in the task of preparing applications and provide information on and publicise the funded actions ; put in place a communication and administration structure for the EGF at national level, in consultation with all stakeholders, and to exchange good practice at European level.

Speed up and simplify procedures : the committee states that more effective coordination between the Commission and the European Parliament must be ensured, so that the time limit for decision-making could be reduced. The Commission must take due account of Parliament’s calendar, and must inform Parliament in due time on difficulties and/or blockages encountered while assessing the Member States' applications.

Members state that any of these steps should not in any way limit or decrease the power of Parliament as one arm of the budgetary authority while deciding on the mobilisation of the fund.

Financial crisis : the period of validity of the derogation inserted in 2009 with a view to assisting workers who lose their jobs as a result of the economic and financial crisis should be extended until the end of the current MFF and that the cofinancing rate should, therefore, be maintained at 65%, given that the underlying causes on which their approval was based are far from having been removed..

EGF budget : Members note the inclusion, for the first time, in the Commission's Draft Budget 2011 of payment appropriations for the EGF, which is an important element in the overall reflection on the visibility of this fund. They consider, however, that these payment appropriations might not be sufficient to cover the amounts necessary for EGF applications in 2011. They reiterate, therefore, their demand not to finance EGF applications exclusively through transfers from ESF lines. With regard to the future of the EGF, this will be determined in the framework of negotiations on the next MFF. Several options could be examined, particularly that of establishing an independent fund with its own commitment and payment appropriations. Members stress that the conversion of the current EGF measures into a permanent means of support for active job-seeking measures would show a political will to develop a European social pillar that would be complementary to Member States' social policies and capable of revitalising the European approach to professional training. They point out that the EGF should remain distinct in its objectives from the ESF and the European lifelong learning programmes, given that the EGF focuses on enhancing the abilities of each of the workers assisted, rather than on providing a response to the concerns of businesses or on the delivery of across-the-board services to training establishments.

Lastly, Members call on the Commission to improve its reporting on the use of the EGF by substantially fleshing out its annual reports and regularly forwarding to Parliament information on Member States' implementation of financial contributions.

2010/07/05
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2010/06/28
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2010/06/25
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2010/06/15
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2010/05/20
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
2010/05/20
   EP - Referral to associated committees announced in Parliament
2010/03/17
   EP - HÄNDEL Thomas (GUE/NGL) appointed as rapporteur in ECON
2010/02/03
   EP - PORTAS Miguel (GUE/NGL) appointed as rapporteur in BUDG
2009/11/26
   EP - MORIN-CHARTIER Elisabeth (PPE) appointed as rapporteur in EMPL

Documents

Activities

AmendmentsDossier
158 2010/2072(INI)
2010/06/09 ECON 87 amendments...
source: PE-442.842
2010/06/25 BUDG 71 amendments...
source: PE-443.137

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Budgets
committee
BUDG
rapporteur
name: PORTAS Miguel date: 2010-02-03T00:00:00 group: European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL
shadows
name: PICKART ALVARO Alexander Nuno group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Budgets
committee
BUDG
date
2010-02-03T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: PORTAS Miguel group: European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL
shadows
name: PICKART ALVARO Alexander Nuno group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Economic and Monetary Affairs
committee
ECON
rapporteur
name: HÄNDEL Thomas date: 2010-03-17T00:00:00 group: European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Economic and Monetary Affairs
committee
ECON
date
2010-03-17T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: HÄNDEL Thomas group: European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Employment and Social Affairs
committee
EMPL
rapporteur
name: MORIN-CHARTIER Elisabeth date: 2009-11-26T00:00:00 group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Employment and Social Affairs
committee
EMPL
date
2009-11-26T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: MORIN-CHARTIER Elisabeth group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
docs/4/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-236&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0236_EN.html
docs/5/body
EC
events/3/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-236&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0236_EN.html
events/6/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2010-303
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2010-0303_EN.html
activities
  • date: 2010-05-20T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP shadows: group: ALDE name: ALVARO Alexander responsible: True committee: BUDG date: 2010-02-03T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: GUE/NGL name: PORTAS Miguel body: EP responsible: False committee: ECON date: 2010-03-17T00:00:00 committee_full: Economic and Monetary Affairs rapporteur: group: GUE/NGL name: HÄNDEL Thomas body: EP responsible: False committee: EMPL date: 2009-11-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Employment and Social Affairs (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: MORIN-CHARTIER Elisabeth
  • date: 2010-07-14T00:00:00 body: EP committees: body: EP shadows: group: ALDE name: ALVARO Alexander responsible: True committee: BUDG date: 2010-02-03T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: GUE/NGL name: PORTAS Miguel body: EP responsible: False committee: ECON date: 2010-03-17T00:00:00 committee_full: Economic and Monetary Affairs rapporteur: group: GUE/NGL name: HÄNDEL Thomas body: EP responsible: False committee: EMPL date: 2009-11-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Employment and Social Affairs (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: MORIN-CHARTIER Elisabeth type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • date: 2010-07-26T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-236&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A7-0236/2010 body: EP type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • date: 2010-09-06T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20100906&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament body: EP type: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2010-09-07T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=18740&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2010-303 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0303/2010 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament
commission
  • body: EC dg: Budget commissioner: LEWANDOWSKI Janusz
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Budgets
committee
BUDG
date
2010-02-03T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: PORTAS Miguel group: European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL
shadows
name: PICKART ALVARO Alexander Nuno group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
committees/0
body
EP
shadows
group: ALDE name: ALVARO Alexander
responsible
True
committee
BUDG
date
2010-02-03T00:00:00
committee_full
Budgets (Associated committee)
rapporteur
group: GUE/NGL name: PORTAS Miguel
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Economic and Monetary Affairs
committee
ECON
date
2010-03-17T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: HÄNDEL Thomas group: European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL
committees/1
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
ECON
date
2010-03-17T00:00:00
committee_full
Economic and Monetary Affairs
rapporteur
group: GUE/NGL name: HÄNDEL Thomas
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Employment and Social Affairs
committee
EMPL
date
2009-11-26T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: MORIN-CHARTIER Elisabeth group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
committees/2
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
EMPL
date
2009-11-26T00:00:00
committee_full
Employment and Social Affairs (Associated committee)
rapporteur
group: PPE name: MORIN-CHARTIER Elisabeth
docs
  • date: 2010-06-15T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE442.889 title: PE442.889 type: Committee draft report body: EP
  • date: 2010-06-25T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE440.110&secondRef=02 title: PE440.110 committee: EMPL type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2010-06-28T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE443.137 title: PE443.137 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
  • date: 2010-07-05T00:00:00 docs: title: PE441.371 committee: ECON type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2010-07-26T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-236&language=EN title: A7-0236/2010 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading body: EP
  • date: 2011-02-08T00:00:00 docs: url: /oeil/spdoc.do?i=18740&j=0&l=en title: SP(2010)7906 type: Commission response to text adopted in plenary
events
  • date: 2010-05-20T00:00:00 type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2010-05-20T00:00:00 type: Referral to associated committees announced in Parliament body: EP
  • date: 2010-07-14T00:00:00 type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading body: EP summary: The Committee on Budgets adopted the own-initiative report by Miguel PORTAS (GUE/NGL, PT) on the funding and functioning of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund. The Committee on Employment and Social Affairs gave its opinion as an associated committee under Rule 50 of the European Parliament’s Rules of Procedure Members take the view that the EGF's added value as an EU social policy instrument lies in the fact that it provides visible, specific, targeted and temporary financial support for personalised programmes for the reskilling and reintegration into employment of workers affected by collective redundancies in sectors or regions undergoing severe economic and social disruption. However, they consider that the increase in the number of applications for EGF funding and the difficulties experienced in implementing the EGF call for improvements to be made to the fund's procedural and budgetary arrangements at the earliest opportunity. Members call on the Commission to bring the submission of its mid-term evaluation forward to 30 June 2011 in order to remedy the fund's clearest shortcomings. This evaluation should focus on the following : - the contributions granted with reference to the following qualitative aspects: (i) the rate of success in reintegration and assessment of the upgrading of the skills of the beneficiaries; (ii) the measures financed in response to each EGF application and results on the basis of reintegration; (iii) the impact of the EGF on its beneficiaries' network and on the small and medium-sized enterprises potentially affected by the redundancy plan and whose employees could profit from the fund; (iv) the impact of contributions from the EGF by age group in benefiting Member States and sectors. - the contributions granted from the budgetary point of view, with particular reference to: (i) the reasons for the large disparity between the resources requested from the EGF and the amounts reimbursed by the beneficiary Member States when the assistance is already concluded; (ii) in the cases where Member States have made reimbursements, which were the financed programmes and measures not executed; (iii) the reasons for the large disparities between Member States in terms of the funding provided per worker in the different EGF applications; (iv) the proportion of overall funding in relation to other national and company-specific support measures; - the EGF's functioning and of the experience gained , and measures that will substantially reduce the length of the EGF mobilisation procedure should be introduced. Members state that the time required to mobilise the EGF could be halved if the following measures are formulated and adopted: (i) applications for mobilisation of the EGF should be drawn up by Member States as soon as a collective redundancy has been announced, and not after it has taken place; (ii) the Commission should inform Member States that an application could be presented from the first day when the intervention criteria have been fulfilled; (iii) enhanced communication with the Member State concerned in this process; (iv) the Commission should have the necessary human and technical capacities; (v)) the Commission should take decisions on the mobilisation of the EGF within 3-4 months after having received the application. The Commission is also asked to provide the Member States with a set of guidelines for the design and implementation of applications for EGF funding geared to a fast application procedure and a broad consensus among stakeholders on the strategy to be applied. For their part, Member States are asked to: accelerate the procedure by prefinancing the measures that should start from the day of the application; involve the social partners right from the outset in the task of preparing applications and provide information on and publicise the funded actions ; put in place a communication and administration structure for the EGF at national level, in consultation with all stakeholders, and to exchange good practice at European level. Speed up and simplify procedures : the committee states that more effective coordination between the Commission and the European Parliament must be ensured, so that the time limit for decision-making could be reduced. The Commission must take due account of Parliament’s calendar, and must inform Parliament in due time on difficulties and/or blockages encountered while assessing the Member States' applications. Members state that any of these steps should not in any way limit or decrease the power of Parliament as one arm of the budgetary authority while deciding on the mobilisation of the fund. Financial crisis : the period of validity of the derogation inserted in 2009 with a view to assisting workers who lose their jobs as a result of the economic and financial crisis should be extended until the end of the current MFF and that the cofinancing rate should, therefore, be maintained at 65%, given that the underlying causes on which their approval was based are far from having been removed.. EGF budget : Members note the inclusion, for the first time, in the Commission's Draft Budget 2011 of payment appropriations for the EGF, which is an important element in the overall reflection on the visibility of this fund. They consider, however, that these payment appropriations might not be sufficient to cover the amounts necessary for EGF applications in 2011. They reiterate, therefore, their demand not to finance EGF applications exclusively through transfers from ESF lines. With regard to the future of the EGF, this will be determined in the framework of negotiations on the next MFF. Several options could be examined, particularly that of establishing an independent fund with its own commitment and payment appropriations. Members stress that the conversion of the current EGF measures into a permanent means of support for active job-seeking measures would show a political will to develop a European social pillar that would be complementary to Member States' social policies and capable of revitalising the European approach to professional training. They point out that the EGF should remain distinct in its objectives from the ESF and the European lifelong learning programmes, given that the EGF focuses on enhancing the abilities of each of the workers assisted, rather than on providing a response to the concerns of businesses or on the delivery of across-the-board services to training establishments. Lastly, Members call on the Commission to improve its reporting on the use of the EGF by substantially fleshing out its annual reports and regularly forwarding to Parliament information on Member States' implementation of financial contributions.
  • date: 2010-07-26T00:00:00 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-236&language=EN title: A7-0236/2010
  • date: 2010-09-06T00:00:00 type: Debate in Parliament body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20100906&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2010-09-07T00:00:00 type: Results of vote in Parliament body: EP docs: url: https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=18740&l=en title: Results of vote in Parliament
  • date: 2010-09-07T00:00:00 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2010-303 title: T7-0303/2010 summary: The European Parliament adopted a resolution on the funding and functioning of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund. It recalls that the EGF's added value as an EU social policy instrument lies in the fact that it provides visible, specific, targeted and temporary financial support for personalised programmes for the reskilling and reintegration into employment of workers affected by collective redundancies in sectors or regions undergoing severe economic and social disruption. However, it considers that the increase in the number of applications for EGF funding and the difficulties experienced in implementing the EGF call for improvements to be made to the fund's procedural and budgetary arrangements at the earliest opportunity. Members call on the Commission to bring the submission of its mid-term evaluation forward to 30 June 2011 in order to remedy the fund's clearest shortcomings. This evaluation should focus on the following : the contributions granted with reference to the following qualitative aspects: (i) the rate of success in reintegration and assessment of the upgrading of the skills of the beneficiaries; (ii) the measures financed in response to each EGF application and results on the basis of reintegration; (iii) the impact of the EGF on its beneficiaries' network and on the small and medium-sized enterprises potentially affected by the redundancy plan and whose employees could profit from the fund; (iv) the impact of contributions from the EGF by age group in benefiting Member States and sectors; the contributions granted from the budgetary point of view, with particular reference to: (i) the reasons for the large disparity between the resources requested from the EGF and the amounts reimbursed by the beneficiary Member States when the assistance is already concluded; (ii) in the cases where Member States have made reimbursements, which were the financed programmes and measures not executed; (iii) the reasons for the large disparities between Member States in terms of the funding provided per worker in the different EGF applications; (iv) the proportion of overall funding in relation to other national and company-specific support measures;- the EGF's functioning and of the experience gained , and measures that will substantially reduce the length of the EGF mobilisation procedure should be introduced. Members state that the time required to mobilise the EGF could be halved if the following measures are formulated and adopted: (i) applications for mobilisation of the EGF should be drawn up by Member States as soon as a collective redundancy has been announced, and not after it has taken place; (ii) the Commission should inform Member States that an application could be presented from the first day when the intervention criteria have been fulfilled; (iii) enhanced communication with the Member State concerned in this process; (iv) the Commission should have the necessary human and technical capacities; (v) the Commission should take decisions on the mobilisation of the EGF within 3-4 months after having received the application. The Commission is also asked to provide the Member States with a set of guidelines for the design and implementation of applications for EGF funding geared to a fast application procedure and a broad consensus among stakeholders on the strategy to be applied. For their part, Member States are asked to: accelerate the procedure by prefinancing the measures that should start from the day of the application; involve the social partners right from the outset in the task of preparing applications and provide information on and publicise the funded actions ; put in place a communication and administration structure for the EGF at national level, in consultation with all stakeholders, and to exchange good practice at European level. Speed up and simplify procedures : Parliament states that more effective coordination between the Commission and the European Parliament must be ensured, so that the time limit for decision-making could be reduced. The Commission must take due account of Parliament’s calendar, and must inform Parliament in due time on difficulties and/or blockages encountered while assessing the Member States' applications. Members state that any of these steps should not in any way limit or decrease the power of Parliament as one arm of the budgetary authority while deciding on the mobilisation of the fund. Financial crisis : the period of validity of the derogation inserted in 2009 with a view to assisting workers who lose their jobs as a result of the economic and financial crisis should be extended until the end of the current MFF and that the cofinancing rate should, therefore, be maintained at 65%, given that the underlying causes on which their approval was based are far from having been removed. EGF budget : Parliament notes the inclusion, for the first time, in the Commission's Draft Budget 2011 of payment appropriations for the EGF, which is an important element in the overall reflection on the visibility of this fund. Members consider, however, that these payment appropriations might not be sufficient to cover the amounts necessary for EGF applications in 2011. They reiterate, therefore, their demand not to finance EGF applications exclusively through transfers from ESF lines. With regard to the future of the EGF , this will be determined in the framework of negotiations on the next MFF. Several options could be examined, particularly that of establishing an independent fund with its own commitment and payment appropriations. Parliament calls on the Commission to come forward with proposals for resourcing such a fund; believes that any future reform of the EGF should maintain its flexibility, which currently represents a comparative advantage in relation to the EU Structural Funds. Members stress that the conversion of the current EGF measures into a permanent means of support for active job-seeking measures would show a political will to develop a European social pillar that would be complementary to Member States' social policies and capable of revitalising the European approach to professional training. They point out that the EGF should remain distinct in its objectives from the ESF and the European lifelong learning programmes, given that the EGF focuses on enhancing the abilities of each of the workers assisted, rather than on providing a response to the concerns of businesses or on the delivery of across-the-board services to training establishments. Parliament calls on Member States using the EGF to create synergies between the EGF, ESF and micro-finance so as to identify the measure best suited to the individual case. Lastly, Parliament calls on the Commission to improve its reporting on the use of the EGF by substantially fleshing out its annual reports and regularly forwarding to Parliament information on Member States' implementation of financial contributions.
  • date: 2010-09-07T00:00:00 type: End of procedure in Parliament body: EP
links
other
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/budget/ title: Budget commissioner: LEWANDOWSKI Janusz
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee
Old
BUDG/7/02515
New
  • BUDG/7/02515
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure EP 052
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
procedure/subject
Old
  • 4.15.05 Industrial restructuring, job losses, redundancies, relocations, Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF)
  • 5.03 World economy and globalisation
  • 8.70 Budget of the Union
  • 8.70.03 Budgetary control and discharge, implementation of the budget
New
4.15.05
Industrial restructuring, job losses, redundancies, relocations, Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF)
5.03
Global economy and globalisation
8.70
Budget of the Union
8.70.03
Budgetary control and discharge, implementation of the budget
procedure/subject/0
Old
4.15.05 Industrial restructuring, job losses, redundancies, relocations
New
4.15.05 Industrial restructuring, job losses, redundancies, relocations, Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF)
activities
  • date: 2010-05-20T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP shadows: group: ALDE name: ALVARO Alexander responsible: True committee: BUDG date: 2010-02-03T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: GUE/NGL name: PORTAS Miguel body: EP responsible: False committee: ECON date: 2010-03-17T00:00:00 committee_full: Economic and Monetary Affairs rapporteur: group: GUE/NGL name: HÄNDEL Thomas body: EP responsible: False committee: EMPL date: 2009-11-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Employment and Social Affairs (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: MORIN-CHARTIER Elisabeth
  • date: 2010-07-14T00:00:00 body: EP committees: body: EP shadows: group: ALDE name: ALVARO Alexander responsible: True committee: BUDG date: 2010-02-03T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: GUE/NGL name: PORTAS Miguel body: EP responsible: False committee: ECON date: 2010-03-17T00:00:00 committee_full: Economic and Monetary Affairs rapporteur: group: GUE/NGL name: HÄNDEL Thomas body: EP responsible: False committee: EMPL date: 2009-11-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Employment and Social Affairs (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: MORIN-CHARTIER Elisabeth type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • date: 2010-07-26T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-236&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A7-0236/2010 body: EP type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • date: 2010-09-06T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20100906&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament body: EP type: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2010-09-07T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=18740&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2010-303 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0303/2010 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament
committees
  • body: EP shadows: group: ALDE name: ALVARO Alexander responsible: True committee: BUDG date: 2010-02-03T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: GUE/NGL name: PORTAS Miguel
  • body: EP responsible: False committee: ECON date: 2010-03-17T00:00:00 committee_full: Economic and Monetary Affairs rapporteur: group: GUE/NGL name: HÄNDEL Thomas
  • body: EP responsible: False committee: EMPL date: 2009-11-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Employment and Social Affairs (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: MORIN-CHARTIER Elisabeth
links
other
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/budget/ title: Budget commissioner: LEWANDOWSKI Janusz
procedure
dossier_of_the_committee
BUDG/7/02515
reference
2010/2072(INI)
title
Funding and functioning of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund
legal_basis
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
stage_reached
Procedure completed
subtype
Initiative
type
INI - Own-initiative procedure
subject