Derek VAUGHAN
Constituencies
-
United Kingdom
Labour Party
2009/07/14 - 9999/12/31
Groups
-
S&D
Member
Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament
2009/07/14 - 9999/12/31
Committees
| Role | Committee | Start | End |
|---|---|---|---|
| Member of | Committee on Budgets | 2012/01/19 | 9999/12/31 |
| Substitute of | Committee on Regional Development | 2012/01/19 | 9999/12/31 |
| Substitute of | Committee on Budgetary Control | 2012/01/19 | 9999/12/31 |
Show earlier commitees...
Delegations
| Role | Delegation | Start | End |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vice-Chair of | Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly | 2012/05/23 | 9999/12/31 |
| Substitute of | Delegation for relations with Japan | 2009/09/16 | 9999/12/31 |
Show earlier delegations...
| Role | Delegation | Start | End |
|---|---|---|---|
| Member of | Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly | 2012/04/17 | 2012/05/22 |
| Member of | Delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China | 2009/09/16 | 2012/04/16 |
Contact
Online
- [javascript protected email address]
Brussels
- Phone
- +322 28 45419
- Fax
- +322 28 49419
- Office
- Bât. Altiero Spinelli 13G254
- Full Address
-
- City
- Bruxelles/Brussel
- Zip
- B-1047
- Street
- 60, rue Wiertz / Wiertzstraat 60
Strasbourg
- Phone
- +333 88 1 75419
- Fax
- +333 88 1 79419
- Office
- Bât. Louise Weiss T07030
- Full Address
-
- City
- Strasbourg
- Zip
- CS 91024 - F-67070
- Street
- 1, avenue du Président Robert Schuman
Postal
- European Parliament
- Rue Wiertz
- Altiero Spinelli 13G254
- B-1047 Brussels
Rapporteur
| Opinion | 2013/2042(INI) | Effects of budgetary constraints for regional and local authorities regarding the EU's Structural Funds expenditure in the Member States |
| Responsible | 2012/2285(INI) | Annual report 2011 on the protection of EU's financial interests - Fight against fraud |
| Responsible | 2012/2283(DEC) | Special report 18/2012 (2011 discharge): European Union assistance to Kosovo related to the rule of law |
| Responsible | 2012/2092(BUD) | 2013 general budget: all sections |
| Shadow | 2012/2010(DEC) | Special report 13/2011 (2011 discharge): Does the control of customs procedure 42 prevent and detect VAT evasion? |
| Responsible | 2012/2006(BUD) | 2013 budget: estimates of revenue and expenditure - section I, Parliament |
| Responsible | 2012/2001(BUD) | 2013 budget, other sections: guidelines |
| Opinion | 2012/0295(COD) | Fund for European aid to the most deprived (2014-2020) |
| Responsible | 2011/2312(INI) | Optimising the role of territorial development in cohesion policy |
| Opinion | 2011/2068(INI) | Resource-efficient Europe |
| Opinion | 2011/2035(INI) | EC 5th Cohesion Report and Strategy for the post-2013 Cohesion Policy |
| Opinion | 2011/0276(COD) | Structural instruments: common provisions for ERDF, ESF, Cohesion Fund, EAFRD and EMFF; general provisions applicable to ERDF, ESF and Cohesion Fund |
Born
1961/05/02 NeathAmendments
| Amendments | Dossier |
| 3 |
2009/2166(INI) European Investment Bank EIB - Annual Report 2008
2010/02/17
CONT
3 amendments...
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Reiterates its recommendations in paragraphs 46-48 of its above-mentioned resolution of 25 March 2009 following the Court of Justice's judgement of 6 November 2008 on the legal basis of Decision 2006/1016/EC and awaits the new Commission proposal for a decision on the EIB's external lending mandate following the mid-term review in April 2010; calls for greater consistency in the EIB’s external mandate, as regards
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Calls for the release of the extra EUR 2 billion within the EIB’s optional mandate, which should be used for horizontal climate change issues in all countries with EIB activity, subject to there being sufficient evidence that the EIB can effectively utilise the extra funds;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 a (new) 29a. Requests that the EIB add up-to-date details, in its next Annual Report, of the accomplishments of the JESSICA initiative;
source: PE-438.383
|
| 4 |
2010/0048(APP) Multiannual financial framework for the years 2007-2013
2010/07/23
BUDG
4 amendments...
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 - point vi vi. given the current economic climate, make efforts to consider reprioritisation within the budget
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 - point vii vii. recognise that
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 - point x x. take all necessary steps for a revision of the MFF providing the extra resources necessary to deliver the European External Action Service and other Lisbon-Treaty- related policy priorities, as well as other initiatives, particularly under Heading 1a "Competitiveness Growth and Employment" and Heading 4 "External Relations", providing EU added value allowing the EU to meet its commitments and its citizens’ expectations;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 - point xiii xiii. recognise the importance of flexibility to create reserves and margins allowing the EU to respond to current and future needs, both within the financial framework, within and between headings (such as was necessary to find the resources for Galileo, the Food Facility and the Economic Recovery Plan for example), and in negotiations over its establishment and revision; take note of the fact that Parliament is
source: PE-445.870
|
| 9 |
2010/2003(BUD) 2011 budget, other sections: guidelines
2010/02/25
BUDG
9 amendments...
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 7 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Highlights the fact that the timetable foreseen for the approval of the guidelines and estimates for Parliament's budget for 2011 will not allow Members to work in a proper and informed way, as they did not have an opportunity to reflect upon the guidelines, because they were formally approved by the Bureau shortly before the deadline for tabling amendments; underlines that, as a result, the guidelines will probably be approved by the plenary after the Bureau has taken a decision on its estimates;
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 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 19 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11.
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 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;
source: PE-439.234
|
| 4 |
2010/2004(BUD) 2011 budget, section III, Commission: guidelines
2010/02/26
BUDG
4 amendments...
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Takes the view that
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 a new 29a. Points out that amendments have recently been adopted to Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund, and to Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 on the European Regional Development Fund; wonders what impact the Commission estimates these amendments will have on the level of payments in the coming years - considering also the effect of the late launch of the 2007-2013 programming period - and to what extent it will take this into account in its draft budget;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 a new 30a. Points out also that the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 and currently under discussion in Parliament could, if adopted, have repercussions for the budget; wonders how the Commission intends to factor the potential amendments into the equation and what the effect on the budget would be of a prospective derogation from the rule on automatic decommitment with retrospective effect;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 b new 30b. Notes that in recent years the level of payments has remained somewhat low and expresses its concern at the widening gap between commitment appropriations and payment appropriations (RAL) under this heading; also considers it a priority to make optimum use of ESF resources in 2011 in order to boost the competitiveness of European enterprises and overcome the economic and financial crisis; points out that this will require the availability of sufficient payment appropriations;
source: PE-439.297
|
| 10 |
2010/2005(BUD) 2011 budget, other sections: Parliament's estimates of revenue and expenditure for the financial year and the budget
2010/04/20
BUDG
10 amendments...
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Recalls its 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; notes in this regard the requests by the ESC and the Co R for over EUR 10 Mio for the year 2010 only; reiterates that the External Action Service may also have an impact on heading 5; Confirms its view that the Bureau and the Committee on Budgets should work together to re-assess this limit before opening an inter- institutional dialogue on the matter; suggests that a working group be established for this purpose; decides to put in reserve EUR 5 million from item 320 – acquisition of expertise – until steps are taken to set up such a group;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. In this regard, supports the idea of finding an appropriate mix of in-house and external expertise for the policy departments depending on the type of information required for the specific files under consideration but would like further explanations as to whether and how the staff increases proposed could be used in a flexible way and wishes to receive more information on past implementation rates and demand from committees for such expertise;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Being aware of the sensitive situation within groups as regards the assistance allowance, and after weighing the different arguments, cannot endorse the second instalment of the EUR 1 500 per year; wishes to withdraw the corresponding appropriations from the draft estimates; recalls its resolution on the guidelines in which an evaluation was already called for, including a detailed financial statement of the overall costs that would result from this measure;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Being aware of the sensitive situation within groups as regards
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16.
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Attaches importance to the in-depth review on security policy announced by the Bureau and, in this regard, recalls its attachment to a prudent use of resources and, particularly, a cost-effective balance between internal staff and external agents; asks the Bureau to carefully examine the operational and financial implications of a new strategy, aiming to strike a good balance in the proposals to be made between security concerns on the one hand and accessibility and openness on the other hand; stresses that Parliament should remain as much as possible an open and accessible institution; for this reason wishes to receive more information from the administration concerning the so- called "Wiertz project" in order to assess its implications relating to the accessibility of Parliament for the public;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 34. Notes that the budget item for Members' travel costs is actually higher than the one for salaries; underlines the need for responsible use of allowances, notably travel allowances, and points out that by using, where possible, other means of transport than business class air travel from and to Parliament's places of work, Parliament's carbon footprint can be reduced and costs saved at the same time
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 40 40. Takes note of the Bureau's proposal to introduce allowances for office holders with a budgetary impact of EUR 0,
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 40 40.
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41 41. Takes note of the Bureau's proposal to enter EUR 2,5 for the House of European History, concerning studies following the results of the architect's competition currently under evaluation; recalls its request from last year to receive a clear overview of the costs envisaged for the project as a whole, including administrative costs, at the latest at the stage of the Preliminary draft estimates for the 2011 budget procedure; also recalls the agreement with the Bureau from the pre- conciliation meeting in 2009; highlights that the report of the Committee of experts to the House of European History lists 11 points, which entail further costs: (1)"academic advisor composed of experts and museum specialists", (2)"institutional independence of the institution", (3)"extensive museum- pedagogic offers", (3)"meeting place for young academics", (5)"permanent evaluation", (6)"temporary exhibit and travelling exhibition", (7)"relevant events with a European reference", (8)"own publications", (9)"extensive on-line offers", (10)"Creation of an own museums collection", (11)"continuous development of exhibitions and the infrastructure of the museum"; therefore stresses that the global cost of this project must be identified as a matter of urgency; decides to put the proposed amount of EUR 2,5 million into a reserve until this information has been provided;
source: PE-440.144
|
| 1 |
2010/2072(INI) Funding and functioning of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund
2010/06/25
BUDG
1 amendments...
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Wishes the EGF to be made a permanent fund in the next multiannual financial framework, with its own commitment and payment appropriations, instead of on which depends on the non- utilisation or under-utilisation of appropriations from previous financial years; therefore requests the Commission to come forward with proposals for resourcing a permanent fund;
source: PE-443.137
|
| 4 |
2010/2079(INI) Simplifying the implementation of the Research Framework Programmes
2010/06/24
CONT
4 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the simplification measures already introduced by the Commission in the implementation of the 7th framework programme (FP) and supports the Commission in its efforts to simplify and clarify the rules still further, to leave no room for differing interpretations and to reduce the risk of error, thereby also reducing the cost of monitoring; further calls on the Commission to define the measures they would take when simplifying and clarifying the current rules;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Insists that the Commission, in its preparations for the next FP, should put forward a set of ambitious proposals aimed at establishing a financing system that is based on scientific results and performance, rather than on inputs and costs, whilst ensuring that innovative applications are not deterred;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that help is provided to all applicants by providing assistance in finding relevant partner;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 b (new) 6b. Calls on the Commission to examine its move towards flat rate and lump sum payments, which could have a detrimental effect on beneficiaries' ability to adequately fulfil audit requirements;
source: PE-443.129
|
| 6 |
2010/2143(DEC) 2009 discharge: EU general budget, European Parliament
2011/02/22
CONT
6 amendments...
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7.
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Notes th
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 67 67. Deplores the fact that EuroparlTV cannot be considered to be a success story in view of its very low number of direct users (excluding viewers through partnership agreements with regional TVs) in spite of the considerable annual appropriations that it receives, amounting to some EUR 9 000 000; therefore, calls for a cost-benefit evaluation of Europarl TV with a view to making savings in this area;
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 68 68. Observes that, in the last few years, Parliament has greatly increased the number of and the budget for its prizes; expresses doubts as to whether those prizes represent at their best Parliament's core competences and the tasks which stem from its legislative, budgetary and budgetary control prerogatives; calls on its Bureau to refrain from initiating the funding of new prizes, and to examine the funds set aside for winners of these prizes;
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 69 69. Deplores the fact that, in spite of its opinion, expressed in its resolution, that the Prize for Journalism is inappropriate, as Parliament should not award prizes to journalists whose task is critically to examine the EU institutions and their work, DG COMM has already launched the procedure for the 2011 prize; calls for the prize for 2012 to be abolished;
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 99 99. Stresses that real savings could be achieved if Parliament only had one seat; indeed, in the report of the Secretary- General on Parliament's preliminary draft estimates for 2011, the estimated annual cost arising from the geographical dispersion of Parliament has been estimated at around EUR 160 000 000, accounting for about 9% of Parliament's total budget; draws the attention to the fact that currently the decision to change this situation - and to make some EUR 160 000 000 of savings annually as well as to considerably lessen Parliament's carbon footprint - lies exclusively with
source: PE-458.841
|
| 9 |
2010/2211(INI) Investing in the future: a new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for a competitive, sustainable and inclusive Europe
2010/12/17
REGI
1 amendments...
Amendment 65 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 10. Stresses that a successful cohesion policy needs
source: PE-454.695
2011/04/13
SURE
2 amendments...
Amendment 307 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 32 32. Stresses, moreover, that the Europe 2020 strategy can only be credible if it is adequately funded; calls for the next MFF to reflect the ambitions of the Europe 2020 strategy and demands the Commission and the Member States to produce a credible funding framework ensuring, in particular, a fundamental reprioritisation of the MFF to ensure adequate funding for its flagship initiatives; argues, in this respect, that tasks, resources, and responsibilities must be clearly defined and well orchestrated between the Union and its Member States, including local and regional authorities; calls on the Commission to clarify the budgetary dimension of the flagship initiatives as these priority action plans cut across all policies funded through the EU budget;
Amendment 337 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 36. Rejects that the European Stability Mechanism after 2013 should be organised in a purely inter-governmental manner; underlines the lack of democratic control and accountability of the intergovernmental approach;
source: PE-462.729
2011/04/27
SURE
4 amendments...
Amendment 905 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 b (new) 89b. Notes that at 5.7% of total spending, administration costs form a higher proportion of spending than in Member States and therefore expects the Commission's analysis to lead to savings to fund frontline priorities; calls on the European Council to enable the European Parliament to choose a single seat in Brussels, allowing significant savings in the Parliament's budget by ending the monthly relocation to Strasbourg; calls for equally significant savings to be made by all the institutions;
Amendment 1025 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 112 112. Is of the firm opinion that freezing the EU budget
Amendment 1030 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 113 113. Reiterates that without sufficient
Amendment 1056 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 116 116. Considers that the main aim of the reform is to achieve a fairer
source: PE-462.732
2011/05/04
SURE
2 amendments...
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Recital H a (new) Ha. whereas, in line with the adjustments Member States are making to national budgets and to ensure a focus on financial management, the level of the MFF should be frozen in real terms; whereas to effectively fund the Europe 2020 strategy a significant reprioritisation of expenditure is therefore required,
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Recital K K. whereas the current system of own resources based on Member States’ contributions is excessively complex
source: PE-462.723
|
| 2 |
2011/0046(NLE) Euratom Framework Programme 2012-2013: nuclear research and training activities
2011/09/13
BUDG
2 amendments...
Amendment 7 #
Draft legislative resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Considers that the prime reference amount set in the legislative proposal is not compatible with the ceiling of Heading 1a of the current Multiannual Financial Framework 2007-13 (MFF); takes note of the proposal of the Commission of 20.04.2011 (COM (2011)0226) to revise the current MFF on the basis of points 21 to 23 of the Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission of 17 May 2006 on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (IIA) in order to accommodate the additional unforeseen funding for ITER for the years 2012- 2013; is willing to enter into negotiations with the other arm of the budgetary authority, on the basis of all the means provided in the IIA, with a view to reaching a swift agreement on the financing of the Euratom research programme by the end of 2011; recalls its opposition to any form of redeployment from the Seventh Framework Programme for research as proposed in the above- mentioned Commission proposal;
Amendment 24 #
Proposal for a decision Recital 16 (16) This Decision should establish, for the entire duration of the Framework Programme (2012-2013), a financial envelope that constitutes the prime reference, within the meaning of point 37 of the Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission of 17 May 2006 on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (IIA), for the budgetary authority during the annual budgetary procedure. On 20 April 2011, the Commission tabled a proposal (COM (2011)0206) to revise the current MFF 2007-13 on the basis of points 21 to 23 of the IIA, in order to accommodate the additional unforeseen additional funding needs for ITER for the years 2012-2013. That proposal should serve as a basis for an agreement between the two arms of the budgetary authority that should be concluded on the basis of all the means provided in the IIA without jeopardising the financing of other polices under Heading 1a;
source: PE-472.176
|
| 4 |
2011/0276(COD) Structural instruments: common provisions for ERDF, ESF, Cohesion Fund, EAFRD and EMFF; general provisions applicable to ERDF, ESF and Cohesion Fund
2012/07/05
CONT
4 amendments...
Amendment 58 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 2 – Article 62 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) procedures for ensuring the correctness and regularity of expenditure declared and respect for the principle of sound financial management;
Amendment 80 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – Article 117 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3 In deciding whether to request those documents, the Commission shall
Amendment 82 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – Article 131 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. When launching the procedure in accordance with Article 137, the Commission may only make a financial correction in relation to expenditure concerning accounting years for which the annual accounts were or should have been submitted. Expenditure considered as closed under paragraphs (1) and (2) of this Article for which the 3 year period under Article 132(1) has expired shall not be subject to financial corrections, except in the case of irregularities detected for non compliance with Article 61 and in the cases referred to in Article 136 (4) and (5).
Amendment 84 #
Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – Article 137 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 a (new) Any financial correction resulting in a net correction shall constitute assigned revenue to the same Chapter of the general budget of the Union.
source: PE-489.347
|
| 3 |
2011/0280(COD) Common agricultural policy (CAP): direct payments to farmers under support schemes 2014-2020
2012/07/19
AGRI
2 amendments...
Amendment 505 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. In accordance with their constitutional arrangements, Member States may implement relevant provisions of this regulation at regional level. In that case, Member States shall define regions in accordance with objective and non- discriminatory criteria and proceed to divide the national ceiling amongst the regions. Member States may also take all decisions referred to in this regulation at regional level and apply the financial provisions referred to in Articles 33, 35, 37, 39, and 51 to the regional ceilings. Member States may also decide to establish regional reserves
Amendment 515 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 Without prejudice to Article 8, the total amount of direct payments which may be granted in a Member State pursuant to Titles III, IV and V in respect of a calendar year, after application of Article 11, shall not be higher than the ceilings set out in Annex III to this Regulation. For this purpose, Member States may divide the ceiling set out in Annex III of this Regulation amongst regions defined in accordance with objective and non- discriminatory criteria.
source: PE-492.791
2012/07/24
AGRI
1 amendments...
Amendment 1913 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 36 – paragraph 1 1. Member States
source: PE-494.491
|
| 4 |
2011/0404(COD) Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA II) 2014-2020
2012/03/05
REGI
4 amendments...
Amendment 15 #
Proposal for a regulation Recital 8 (8) Assistance under this Regulation should be provided in accordance with the enlargement policy framework defined by the Union for each beneficiary country reflected in the annual enlargement package of the Commission, which includes the Progress Reports and the Enlargement Strategy, in the Stabilisation and Association agreements and in the European or Accession Partnerships. Assistance should mainly focus on a limited number of policy areas that will help beneficiary countries strengthen democratic institutions and the rule of law, reform the judiciary and public administration, respect fundamental rights
Amendment 18 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iv (iv) public administration reform
Amendment 19 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory wording (b) Support for economic, social and territorial development, with a view to a smart, sustainable and inclusive growth and increased cooperation between Member States and candidate or potential candidate countries to encourage the exchange of experience and knowledge concerning Union legislation and administration, inter alia through:
Amendment 21 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – point v a (new) (va) development of infrastructure projects to address regional and national transportation, energy and communication needs.
source: PE-488.041
|
| 15 |
2011/2017(BUD) 2012 budget: priorities - other sections
2011/02/18
BUDG
15 amendments...
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Underlines the difficult situation with respect to the heading 5 expenditure ceiling for 2012, and is fully aware of the fact that the institutions may encounter problems in meeting all financing requirements while maintaining budgetary discipline and self- restraint in order to comply with the multiannual financial framework;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Sets the principle of
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Believes that accuracy, simplicity, clarity and transparency must be the result of the implementation of the principles of good management; requests
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Takes the view that Parliament and the other institutions should
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Recalls the need for a fully integrated knowledge management system;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Calls for a ‘one-stop shop’ for Members’ casework queries regarding issues in other Member States to be integrated in to the knowledge management system;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Asks for use to be made of staff redeployment and of retraining in order to enhance mobility; recommends that new staff only be recruited after internal re
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16.
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20a. Expects the Bureau to submit realistic requests when presenting the estimates; is ready to examine its proposals on a fully needs-based and prudent basis in order to ensure an appropriate and efficient functioning of the institution; stresses 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;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 b (new) 20b. Takes note of the proposed 5,2 % increase for the European Parliament’s 2012 budget as compared to the 2011 budget; considers, however, that in the present economic context this increase must be reduced in order to reflect efforts being made by Member States to make savings in public administration;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 c (new) 20c. Highlights the fact that the timetable foreseen for the approval of the guidelines and the draft estimates for the EP budget 2012 will not allow the report on the guidelines to be adopted in plenary before the adoption of the draft estimates by the Bureau and thus not allow Members to work in a proper and informed way;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Takes the view that, as already decided, a fully functioning wifi service must be implemented so as to enable the goal of reducing the use of paper to be met; considers that the use of videoconferencing for meetings should be encouraged, as should the use of new environmentally friendly technologies; requests a cost benefit analysis of such measures;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 a (new) 23a. Underlines the need for further information regarding the House of European History; in particular, calls for a detailed business plan to be submitted to the Committee on Budgets; reiterates the need to receive information concerning the global cost of this project as well as the future financial and legal implications for the EP and requests further information regarding the architectural design competition which has been ongoing since 2009; stresses that all decisions relating to the project are subject to standard parliamentary procedure;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 a (new) 27a. Is concerned by the proposal to create a Parliamentary Budget Office to measure the cost of non-Europe; questions whether such an office is necessary; requests more detailed information regarding the creation of this office;
source: PE-458.814
|
| 13 |
2011/2018(BUD) 2012 budget: estimates of revenue and expenditure - section I, Parliament
2011/03/17
BUDG
13 amendments...
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Calls for a long-term review of the European Parliament's budget; asks for future potential savings to be identified in order to reduce costs and create resources for the long-term running of the Parliament as part of a legislative authority;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Reaffirms that, in the light of the difficult economic and budgetary conditions in Member States, the Parliament should show its budgetary responsibility and self-
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Is of the opinion that the European Parliament and the other institutions should show budgetary responsibility and self- restraint in the context of economic crisis and the heavy burden of public debt and restraint in times of ongoing national budgetary consolidation efforts without undermining the goal of legislative excellence;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Is of the opinion that the European Parliament and the other institutions should show budgetary responsibility and self- restraint in the context of economic crisis and the heavy burden of public debt and restraint in times of ongoing national budgetary consolidation efforts without undermining the goal of legislative excellence;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10.
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Calls for the contingency reserve to remain at 2011 levels; therefore proposes to cut
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Notes the proposal in the preliminary draft estimates to increase spending by EUR 7.2 million for the information campaign for the 2014 elections; calls for this amount to be spent over the period of two years; therefore proposes that half the appropriations earmarked for this purpose be withdrawn from the 2012 estimates;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 b (new) 11b. Calls for item 2022 'Building maintenance and cleaning' to remain at 2011 levels; proposes therefore to cut the amount in the preliminary draft estimates by EUR 4 million;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 c (new) Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Calls for the financing of the Konrad-Adenauer building (KAD) to be cut; insists that spending on this project in 2012 be limited to a maximum of EUR 20 million;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Welcomes the detailed information received concerning the continuation of the realisation of the House of European History;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15a. Does not support the creation of a new budget line at this stage specifically for the House of European History; considers that any creation of such a line should be part of a transparent procedure and approved by the budgetary authority;
source: PE-460.913
|
| 3 |
2011/2019(BUD) 2012 budget: mandate for the trilogue
2011/04/18
REGI
3 amendments...
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Considers that the indisputable added value of European cohesion policy offers the best means of creating jobs and promoting economic growth; stresses the fact that programmes that started after 2007 are becoming fully operational and therefore require higher payment appropriations, and that this need must be reflected accordingly in the EU Budget for 2012;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Recalls Parliament's conviction that whilst the budgetary resources under headings 1a and 1b should be used so as to align policy areas with the objectives of the EU2020 Strategy, the objectives of cohesion policy, namely the reduction of regional disparities, are of equal importance; further notes that whilst EU2020 is important, the needs and objectives of regions are varied and this should be reflected in policy objectives which ensure flexibility for regions;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Underlines and reiterates Parliament's position that cohesion policy must be given adequate and sufficient resources in order to achieve its purpose under the Treaties; is therefore of the view that a real terms increase in the Cohesion Policy budget is required for 2012.
source: PE-462.876
|
| 17 |
2011/2020(BUD) 2012 budget: all sections
2011/06/10
BUDG
17 amendments...
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 64 64. Votes therefore the
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 67 67. Notes that the general expenditure allowance
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 67 b (new) 67b. Considering the current financial, economic and social situation, calls furthermore on the Bureau to freeze all the Members' allowances (including the "daily" allowance) in absolute terms at 2011 level until the end of the seventh legislature;
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 68 Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 68 a (new) 68a. Believes that in times of increasing financial difficulties for numerous Europeans and ongoing austerity policies, Parliament should give an example of restraint by reducing its number of business flights; calls in this context on the Bureau to examine the effectiveness of travel costs, to present proposals encouraging Members to buy economy / flexi-economy class airfares, to ensure a proper treatment of the Frequent Flyer Points and to revise the rules of the Members' Registry opening hours, in particular on Fridays;
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 71 71. Approves, the following measures contained in the Amending Letter, which have been offset by other savings: - the release of appropriations from the reserve for the new security policy; - offsetting of the carbon emissions generated by administrative activities; -
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 72 72.
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 72 a (new) 72a. Believes that the project of the House of European History requires an active cooperation and financial contribution of other institutions; welcomes the commitment of the President of the European Commission expressed in his letter of 28 September 2011 to contribute substantially to the project and ensure support to the functioning of the House of European History; recalls its resolution of 6 April asking for a business plan setting out the long-term business strategy of the House of European History and notes that the administration has provided the requested information; reiterates that decisions relating to the project should be subject to an open debate and a fruitful dialogue and should ensure a transparent decision making process; requests to be informed as soon as possible on the building project according to Article 179(3) of the Financial Regulation; calls on the Bureau to ensure that the cost plan contained in the business plan will be strictly adhered to;
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 73 73. Regrets the delay in the opening of the new visitors centre Parlamentarium and the total costs of setting up the project which are much higher than the initially intended; notes a large increase on this budget line (3243) for 2012; calls for a better planning and asks for a timely consultation of the Committee on Budgets on any further financial implications;
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 73 a (new) 73a. Believes that, in view of making long-term savings, making the organisation more modern and efficient, the budget of the European Parliament should be subject to a comparative study with the budgets of a representative sample of Member States and with the budget of the United States Congress;
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 74 74. Welcomes the putting into place of concrete incentives to make more use of less polluting means of transport by introducing the 50 % Jobcard system in Brussels; points out that the reserve on the different lines for
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 74 a (new) 74a. Calls for further measures to be taken to reduce energy, water and paper consumption in view of making savings in Parliament's budget;
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 82 b (new) 82. Notes th
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 82 a (new) 82a.Takes into account the clarifications received from the EEAS in the letter sent to the Committee on Budgets chair on 30 September 2011 concerning the share of EU officials in the establishment plan, in line with the committment taken by HR/VP; therefore, decides to restore the EEAS establishment plan as proposed in Commission Draft Budget, and believes that all reserves related to recruitment and the setting up of an EU delegation in the United Arab Emirates should be lifted;
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 83 83.
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 84. Notes that the EEAS is constantly growing since its creation in 2010;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 85. Concerning the other lines, decides to increase appropriations
source: PE-473.841
|
| 30 |
2011/2035(INI) EC 5th Cohesion Report and Strategy for the post-2013 Cohesion Policy
2011/03/28
CONT
4 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Recalls that the European Court of Auditors has for many years reported that payments in the area of cohesion are affected by an error rate exceeding 5%, although notes that this fell from 11% for the last discharge procedure, and that the supervisory and control systems are only partially effective; calls in addition for clarification on the method of calculating errors, as discrepancies in figures provided by the European Court of Auditors and by the Commission lead to confusion and distrust of official figures;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Considers that common rules on the management, eligibility, auditing and reporting of projects financed by the ERDF, the ESF, the Cohesion Fund and of projects supporting the economic diversification of rural and fisheries areas under the EAFRD and the EFF would play a key role in simplifying the management of funds, reducing the risk of error and facilitating participation in cohesion policy programmes by smaller stakeholders, as well as easier absorption of available funding;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Calls, furthermore, for the supervisory role of the Commission to be strengthened by introducing automatic interruption and suspension of payments as soon as evidence suggests a significant deficiency in the functioning of the accredited authorities; calls on the Commission also to put in place more robust plans for increasing the rate of recoveries of erroneous payments;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Notes that around 50 % of errors in spending on cohesion policy occur in the field of procurement; calls on the Commission to come forward with clear and transparent rules on the procurement procedure as a way of cutting down on the error rate;
source: PE-462.582
2011/04/20
REGI
26 amendments...
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Emphasises however that there is a pressing need to address the accuracy and availability of data on regional participation in Framework Programmes and other EU research and innovation funding programmes, to enable local and regional authorities to benchmark their performance at EU level, and to enable structural weaknesses in performance to be identified accurately;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Sees the achievement of European objectives in accordance with the principle of multi-level governance as one of the major advantages of cohesion policy and thus as a form of added value in itself; calls for this partnership principle to be further strengthened; the new rules should require Member States to involve, in a structured and systematic way, the local and regional level in planning, decision-making, implementation, monitoring and evaluation;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Emphasises that, despite the trend towards a narrowing of inter-regional disparities, major imbalances still exist – and in some Member States are actually growing – so cohesion policy must continue to concentrate on evening out differences between regions' levels of development; regardless of the member state in which they are located;
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Recognises the special needs of regions particularly disadvantaged by virtue of their geographical situation or natural environment; reiterates its call to Member States for special forms of preference to continue to apply in respect of those types of region, mentioned in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which are particularly disadvantaged (including, but not limited to outermost regions, northernmost regions and regions with very low population density and island, mountain and cross-border regions);
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Stresses however that cohesion policy is not merely an implementing tool for EU 2020. Continued focus on the core principles of cohesion policy will have the added value of sustaining the achievements of Europe 2020 even after the strategy has come to an end;
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Sees macroregional strategies as affording a major opportunity to harness forms of trans-regional potential and adopt a joint approach to challenges stemming from the natural environment, e.g. in relation to environmental protection; considers that better coordination of existing support mechanisms can create scope for more targeted use of the EU Structural Funds; further notes that Local Development Plans could prove to be the most efficient method of achieving cohesion policy objectives, through integrated development of projects at an infra-regional level based on a bottom-up methodology;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9.
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Stresses the key role of towns and cities in achieving the economic, environmental and social EU 2020 objectives; calls for support for ideas and projects which can serve as models, on the basis of place- based integrated local development plans, and for the upgrading of urban-rural links;
Amendment 171 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) 10a. Calls on the Commission to continue to allow Member States and regions to define urban areas as appropriate to them;
Amendment 208 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Sees scope under the Structural Funds for specifically supporting investment in energy infrastructure
Amendment 271 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Calls for Objective 2 (Regional Competitiveness and Employment), which is based on a cross-cutting approach, to be upgraded; stresses that the proven system of
Amendment 282 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23.
Amendment 318 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Draws attention to the synergies achievable through integrated approaches, notably linking the ESF and the ERDF, and calls for the option of cross-financing between these funds – specifically with a view to place-based integrated development planning – to be facilitated;
Amendment 333 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Suggests, in this context, that reintegration of the regionally oriented EAFRD (Axes 3 and 4) programmes be considered, and calls for
Amendment 335 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 Amendment 363 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 33. Calls for the mandatory involvement of
Amendment 374 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 35. Calls, in the event that binding priorities are set for all Member States, for these to cover innovation, infrastructure and resource management and to be tailored in each case to regions' specific needs; stresses that it must be possible to suggest and pursue additional priorities on a voluntary basis
Amendment 390 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 36. Calls for delays in launching programmes to be avoided and for decision-making and evaluation processes to be expedited as a matter of course; calls, too, for the technical equipment available to the relevant administrative authorities to be improved and for them to be more closely networked, for disclosure requirements to be re
Amendment 396 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 37. Calls for the funding under investment partnerships to be made conditional on the implementation of reforms by the Member States, in order to ensure that it is used efficiently in areas directly related to cohesion policy
Amendment 425 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 40 40. Regards co-financing as one of the basic principles of cohesion policy;
Amendment 432 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41 41. C
Amendment 469 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46 46. Sees global grants at subregional level as an appropriate tool for developing independent innovation strategies in line with European structural-policy objectives;
Amendment 473 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46 a (new) 46a. Supports the creation of a flexibility reserve established on the basis of appropriations automatically de- committed during the programming period, and aimed at triggering the Structural Funds in an economic, social or environmental crisis in conjunction with the Globalisation Adjustment Fund and the European Union Solidarity Fund;
Amendment 491 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 50 50. Regards post-2013 cohesion and structural policy as the decisive policy arena for cross-sectoral implementation of the EU 2020 strategy and therefore calls for
Amendment 498 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 51 51. Calls, in respect of Member States that are falling significantly short of the EU stability criteria requirements and also have a poor record on the use of monies from the Structural Funds, for a proposal
Amendment 523 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 54 54. Calls, in the interests of reducing red tape, for the more general application of standardised procedures, with higher standardised units of cost and declaration of overheads on a flat-rate basis where this system is appropriate; calls for greater account to be taken of the principle of proportionality, i.e. for the implementation of smaller programmes to be subject to significantly reduced reporting and auditing requirements;
source: PE-462.896
|
| 1 |
2011/2042(BUD) 2012 budget: general guidelines for the preparation
2011/09/03
BUDG
1 amendments...
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Emphasises the urgent need to address the issue of the growing level of outstanding commitments (RAL) at the end of 2010 (EUR 194 billion, see table in annex); regrets the attitude of the Council, deciding on the level of payments á priori, without taking into account an accurate assessment on the actual needs; highlights that the level of RAL is particularly high under Heading 1b; does not consider the Council’s option of reducing EU budget commitments in order to decrease the level of RAL to be a sustainable solution, since this would be detrimental to the achievement of previously agreed EU objectives and priorities; underlines in this respect the commitment of the Council to the joint declaration with Parliament on the possibility to solve arising needs in payments during 2011 through an amending budget;
source: PE-460.801
|
| 4 |
2011/2043(INI) Seventh EU programme for research, technological development and demonstration
2011/03/16
BUDG
4 amendments...
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. While fully respecting the rights of the budgetary and discharge authorities, welcomes the RSFF and other innovative financial instruments which strengthen the leverage of the EU budget; emphasises the need for working delivery mechanisms for these; asks the Commission to improve access for primary target groups such as SMEs and Higher Education Institutions;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Calls on the Commission to explore ways of strengthening links between research institutions and industry as a way of creating jobs and increasing productivity by harnessing the full potential of R&D funding.
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Stresses that the current risk-averse culture of EU research policy prevents funding of high-risk research ideas with the highest potential for breakthroughs, and therefore suggests a trust-based approach with higher tolerance for risk and failure, as opposed to a purely results-based approach which could hamper innovative research;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Welcomes the simplifications concerning the acceptability of personnel costs and asks the Commission to explore further simplification measures; reaffirms its commitment to further simplifying the rules applicable to the implementation of the EU budget and to research spending in particular; calls on the Commission to apply further simplification measures to the application process including providing researchers with assistance in finding partners;
source: PE-460.900
|
| 3 |
2011/2068(INI) Resource-efficient Europe
2011/07/14
REGI
3 amendments...
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the flagship initiative on resource efficiency and points to its crucial influence on the quality of life for present and future generation; Notes that any strategy must include all of Europe's vast resources including raw materials such as fuels, minerals and metals and also resources such as food, soil, water, air, and the natural environment;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Points to the crucial role of regional policy in supporting initiatives aiming at efficient use of resources, owing to its long-term development programmes, decentralised administration system and the incorporation of the EU's priorities for sustainable development; Calls for a review of current programmes and practices to ensure that the most efficient use of resources is a key consideration within regional policy;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Recommends to the Members States that they involve the sub-national levels from the outset in defining priorities, planning of measures and in their implementation; Further recommends that a consultation with citizens is undertaken to provide a platform for discussion and information as the public will be key to implementing these measures and will be the ultimate beneficiaries of a resource efficient Europe;
source: PE-469.854
|
| 7 |
2011/2107(INI) Green Paper: From challenges to opportunities: towards a common strategic framework for EU research and innovation funding
2011/06/20
BUDG
7 amendments...
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Considers that the Structural and Cohesion Funds can complement EU research and innovation funds but cannot replace them, and, because the principal aims of the respective funds differ, they should continue to be separate during the future multi-annual financial framework (MFF); further, synergies between these funds are a vital way of ensuring European added value;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Welcomes the Commission's proposals on extending the use of innovative financial instruments to strengthen the leverage of the EU budget while fully respecting the rights of the budgetary and discharge authorities; asks the Commission to improve access for primary target groups such as SMEs; demands that any SME-specific bank should function under the umbrella of the EIB
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Stresses that a risk-averse culture of EU research funding would prevent financing of high-risk research ideas with the greatest potential for breakthroughs, and therefore advocates a trust-based approach with higher tolerance for risk and failure – involving, for example,
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Is convinced that horizontal simplification activities throughout all research and innovation programmes should be one of the highest priorities for the new programme period, and draws attention to the important decisions on simplification to be taken in the ongoing procedure of revising the Financial Regulation, on issues including simplifying the rules on pre-financing and on eligibility of costs and in
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Asks the Commission to build ‘stairways to excellence’ for all potential research and innovation players in those Member States with a low rate of participation in FP 7, including by encouraging more effective and flexible use of the Structural and Cohesion Funds in this respect, including ways of maximising synergies between funds;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Reiterates its position that, with regard to the MFF post-2013, the financial resources dedicated to large-scale projects such as ITER and Galileo should be fixed for the whole programming period and ring-fenced so that any cost overrun must be financed with fresh money through employing budgetary flexibility, as opposed to the redeployment of funds at the expense of other programmes such as research and innovation, and Structural and Cohesion funds;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Strongly supports a further increase in the EU's annual budgets for research and innovation, as these have been proven to deliver excellent European added value and to aid recovery from the economic crisis; emphasises that the Europe 2020 strategy for growth and jobs, adopted by the Council, clearly states the need for additional funds for research and innovation
source: PE-467.184
|
| 9 |
2011/2288(INI) Attractiveness of investing in Europe
2012/03/05
ECON
3 amendments...
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Believes that cohesion policy is key to addressing macroeconomic and regional imbalances at EU level and should be a key internal market policy for enhancing competitiveness, productivity, growth and job creation, which in turn has the potential to increase the attractiveness of investing in the EU; highlights that through cohesion policy investment in infrastructure and labour-market skills attractiveness for prospective investors can be significantly increased;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Stresses that it is crucial to maintain strategic European investors' interest in conducting their activities within the EU, bearing in mind that
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Points out that difficult access to finance remains one of the top concerns for SMEs; is particularly worried about the fact that healthy companies cannot acquire the funding they are planning for; calls on the Commission and Member States to swiftly
source: PE-487.746
2012/03/29
REGI
6 amendments...
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Highlights that
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Stresses that
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3.
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Underlines that
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6.
source: PE-486.150
|
| 20 |
2011/2312(INI) Optimising the role of territorial development in cohesion policy
2012/09/26
REGI
20 amendments...
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. recognises, in order to achieve this collaboration, the importance of the code of conduct for Member States consulting with regions and local authorities during the preparation stages of funding programmes;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Highlights the need for the focus on a results-led system to include flexibility at member state and regional level, taking into account simplification, programming priorities and partnership, so that results- led systems are regional-specific in order to achieve the best possible efficiency;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Stresses the need to ensure a flexib
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Emphasises that
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Recognises that cohesion policy can make a valuable contribution to delivering EU2020 targets
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Expresses concern regarding the definition of cities and urban areas given the differing size, resources and social and economic aspects of cities in the EU; welcomes a definition decided at Member State or regional level
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) 10 a. Stresses that territorial cohesion also applies to cohesion within territories i.e. ensuring that the whole area makes an economic contribution and not just the large cities and emphasises that the potential of small and medium sized towns in rural areas to make a significant contribution to the region should not be overlooked;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 b (new) 10 b. Highlights that developing better integration between cities and surrounding rural areas requires a strong multi-level focus and collaboration between rural and urban stakeholders;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11 a. Highlights that a stronger and more integrated territorial approach to European funding, with an efficient and strategic approach to implementing funds at the level closest to the citizen, is a positive way of ensuring that money is directed towards addressing Europe's long-term social and economic challenges;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15 a. Stresses the need for clear and well defined Partnership Contracts, with the involvement of actors at local and regional level, so that all parties can contribute to the preparation and delivery of programmes;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Welcomes the proposals for a regulatory framework with a
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Stresses that, following the Commission's proposals,
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 a (new) 18 a. highlights the need to keep the application of the proposed instrument as simple as possible to avoid adding to the administrative burden of local authorities and to keep in line with simplification objectives;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Highlights the example of the sub- delegation to councils in the Netherlands, which includes parts of funding programmes (e.g. ERDF) being delegated from the regional authority to large local authorities, with actions implemented at local level to address local needs; stresses that allocating management responsibility to local authorities gives greater potential to integrate the best combination of funds tailored to local needs; emphasises that, with the management structures already in place at local level, this approach could benefit the delivery of ITIs,
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21 a. recognises the past success of LEADER as an important tool for the delivery of rural development policy and believes that through CLLD this delivery mechanism can be instrumental in responding to local and regional challenges;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Calls for the Commission to clarify its proposals on CLLD in the implementation phase in order to allow potential participants to fully determine the likely purpose, scope and effect of CLLD
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Stresses the importance of ensuring that these instruments are developed alongside the CLLD in order to ensure that the CLLD grows into more than merely a strategic tool
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31 31. Highlights the example of a proposed model for ITIs from Greater Manchester, which integrates funding from as many relevant sources as possible to achieve better value from investment; highlights the fact that the development of this model is ongoing and could potentially be used to support a strategy bringing many economic and social benefits to the city region; emphasises that the proposed ITI would integrate ERDF priorities with ESF measures and that, given the increased focus of ERDF on SMEs and innovation, there is potential for the ITI to
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 a (new) 34 a. stresses that in the future funding framework Financial Instruments should have the ability to lever private funding and offer flexibility to Member States and regions to tailor target sectors and implementation methods to their specific needs;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 b (new) source: PE-494.845
|
| 9 |
2012/2001(BUD) 2013 budget, other sections: guidelines
2012/01/31
BUDG
9 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas the ceiling for Heading 5 of the multiannual financial framework (MFF) for the EU's budget in 2013 is EUR 9
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas in a context of a heavy burden of public debt and of restraint in times of ongoing national budgetary consolidation efforts the European Parliament, and all institutions, should show budgetary responsibility and self-restraint; whereas it takes note of the letter from Commissioner Lewandowski to the Presidents of the European Institutions dated 23 January 2012;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6.
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Believes that, in order to make significant long-term savings, an independent evaluation of the EP budget should be considered; believes the setting up of a working group should be considered; calls on the Secretary General and the Bureau to come forward with concrete proposals on the establishment of such a group as soon as possible; also calls for the speedy implementation of any conclusions reached by the group;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8.
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Calls for a freeze on budget lines related to all travel in 2013 and no indexation of any of the Members' individual allowances until the end of the legislature; awaits with interest the Secretary General's report on travel, due to be delivered to the Bureau and Committee on Budgets by the 31st March 2012;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Believes that savings should not jeopardise the legislative activity of the EP; is convinced that Members' legislative activities can be enhanced by the completion of the knowledge management system (KMS); welcomes the information provided by the Administration, requests updated information on the state of play of the project and expects the system to be fully operational and accessible to EU citizens
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Recalls the Parliament's budgetary resolutions, including its most recent resolution of 26 October 2011 (P7_TA(2011)0461), calling for early information, dialogue and a transparent decision-making process in the field of building policy;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Understands the challenges that faced the EEAS in drawing up its first budget for 2011;
source: PE-480.738
|
| 9 |
2012/2006(BUD) 2013 budget: estimates of revenue and expenditure - section I, Parliament
2012/09/03
BUDG
9 amendments...
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Notes that the level of the preliminary draft estimates for the 2013 budget, as suggested by the Secretary-General in its report to the Bureau, amounts to EUR 1 768 731 441
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Welcomes efforts made to present realistic estimates and acknowledges the fact that the Bureau adopted further savings as compared to the original level suggested in the Secretary-General's report; notes that the Bureau adopted the preliminary draft estimates for the 2013 budget at its meeting on 12 March 2012, at the rate of increase of xx % over the 2012 budget; further notes that, pursuant to the agreement reached by the Bureau and the Committee on Budgets at the conciliation meeting of 13 March 2012, this rate is currently set at xx % over the 2012 budget; insists on the need for strict budgetary control, close cooperation with the Committee on Budgets and identifying further possible savings during this budgetary procedure;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Welcomes the Secretary General's initiative taken in 2011 proposing the reorganisation of translation and interpretation activities; believes that such an initiative will lead to significant savings in the 2012 budget and calls for this initiative to be continued in 2013; defends, however, the principle of multilingualism, and highlights the unique nature of the European Parliament with regard to interpretation and translation needs; furthermore highlights the importance of inter-institutional cooperation in this field;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Notes the high level of appropriations proposed for the continuation of the multiannual ICT strategy; understands that it could take several years for projects currently being undertaken to be completed; welcomes the launch of the e- committee programme; understands that a pilot scheme for the e-meetings programme is currently underway; requests further information about the possible costs of this programme and when it will be fully implemented; calls for a cost benefit analysis of the paperless meetings project to be presented to the Committee on Budgets; encourages its administration to pursue the policies which will enable Members to use effective tools based on new technologies and support the legislative process more effectively, in particular through bringing the Knowledge Management System to fruition; by the same token calls for the increased use of video conferencing which could help to further reduce the travel costs of both Members and staff.
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Notes that the creation of a Directorate for democracy support seeks to enhance the synergy between the different in-house services dealing with issues relating to democracy; expects that the decision taken will make the organisation of the services more transparent, coherent and efficient; insists that this reorganisation of services must be budget neutral; calls therefore for a freeze of the appropriations from article 323 at the 2012 level without jeopardising relations with parliaments of third countries and support for parliamentary democracy;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12 a. Notes the conditions set out in the regulation concerning the financing of political parties1; is concerned that "the principles on which the European Union is founded, namely the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law" are not being fully respected; insists that the granting of European Parliament funding should only go to those parties that rigorously uphold the founding principles of the EU and the Charter of Human Rights; __________________ 1 Regulation (EC) No 2004/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4th November 2003 on the regulations governing political parties at European level and the rules regarding their funding (OJ L 297, 15.11.2003, p. 1).
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Taking into account the 2011 and 2010 outturn levels
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13 a. Insists that the EUR 3 million reserve for priority projects under development (Chapter 106) be withdrawn from the estimates;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Is concerned about the costs of the KAD project underway
source: PE-483.863
|
| 2 |
2012/2016(BUD) 2013 budget: mandate for trilogue
2012/05/31
BUDG
2 amendments...
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 57 a (new) 57a. Acknowledges that most institutions, including the European Parliament, have made an effort to restrict their administrative budgets to an increase below the expected inflation rate, excluding the cost of enlargement to Croatia; in this context, underlines the need for long term rationalisation of administrative resources and insists on the need to strengthen inter-institutional cooperation in areas such as human resources, translation, interpretation, buildings, and information technology;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 58 58. Stresses that th
source: PE-489.697
|
| 1 |
2012/2092(BUD) 2013 general budget: all sections
2012/08/10
BUDG
1 amendments...
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 81 81. Recognis
source: PE-497.798
|
Derek VAUGHAN on
Activities
Term 7 14.07.2009 / ...
All references link to europarl.euHistory
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
| active | changed |
Old
New
True |