Victor BOŞTINARU

General
Contact
Committees
Dossiers (6)
Bio
Amendments (253)
History
Links

Constituencies

Romania Partidul Social Democrat 2009/07/14 - 9999/12/31

Show earlier Constituencies...

Groups

S&D Member Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament 2009/07/14 - 9999/12/31

Show earlier groups...

Committees

Role	Committee	Start	End
Member of	Committee on Petitions	2012/01/19	9999/12/31
Member of	Committee on Regional Development	2012/01/19	9999/12/31

Show earlier commitees...

Role	Committee	Start	End
Member of	Committee on Petitions	2009/07/16	2012/01/18
Member of	Committee on Regional Development	2009/07/16	2012/01/18
Member of	Committee on Petitions	2007/12/12	2009/07/13
Member of	Committee on Regional Development	2007/12/12	2009/07/13
Substitute of	Committee on Culture and Education	2007/12/12	2009/07/13

Delegations

Role	Delegation	Start	End
Vice-Chair of	Delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China	2012/02/16	9999/12/31
Member of	Delegation for relations with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo	2012/02/15	9999/12/31

Show earlier delegations...

Role	Delegation	Start	End
Member of	Delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China	2012/02/14	2012/02/15
Vice-Chair of	Delegation for relations with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo	2009/09/17	2012/02/14
Substitute of	Delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China	2009/09/16	2011/04/06
Member of	Delegation for relations with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo	2009/09/16	2009/09/16
Member of	Delegation for relations with the countries of south-east Europe	2007/12/13	2009/07/13
Substitute of	Delegation to the EU-Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Joint Parliamentary Committee	2007/12/12	2009/07/13

Contact

Online

Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/bostinaru
Mail
[javascript protected email address]

Brussels

Phone
+322 28 45832
Fax
+322 28 49832
Office
Bât. Altiero Spinelli 13G257
Full Address
- City
  Bruxelles/Brussel
- Zip
  B-1047
- Street
  60, rue Wiertz / Wiertzstraat 60

Strasbourg

Phone
+333 88 1 75832
Fax
+333 88 1 79832
Office
Bât. Louise Weiss T08139
Full Address
- City
  Strasbourg
- Zip
  CS 91024 - F-67070
- Street
  1, avenue du Président Robert Schuman

Postal

Parlamentul European
Rue Wiertz
Altiero Spinelli 13G257
B-1047 Bruxelles

Rapporteur

Shadow	2012/2264(INI)	Special Report of the European Ombudsman concerning his inquiry into complaint 2591/2010/GG against the European Commission (Vienna Airport)
Opinion	2012/2043(INI)	EU Strategy for the Protection and Welfare of Animals 2012-2015
Responsible	2011/0274(COD)	Cohesion Fund 2014-2020
Shadow	2010/2295(INI)	Activities of the Committee on Petitions in 2010
Opinion	2010/2087(INI)	EU Strategy for the Black Sea
Opinion	2009/2108(INI)	Report on the implementation of EU legislation aiming at the conservation of biodiversity

Born

1952/05/17 Valea Mare

Graduate of the Faculty of History and Geography, University of Bucharest (1974); Graduate of the Faculty of History and Philosophy, University of Bucharest (1981).
Teacher of history and geography, General School, Greci, Dâmboviţa county (1974-1977); Teacher of history, General School No 3, Găieşti, Dâmboviţa county (1977-1989).
Vice-President, National Salvation Front (FSN) (1991); Vice-President, Democratic Party (1991); International Secretary, Democratic Party (1993-2000); Member, Party for Social Democracy in Romania (PDSR) (2001).
Head, Department of International Relations, Social Democratic Party (PSD) (2001-2003); International Secretary, PSD (2003-2007); Vice-President, Department for External Policy and European Affairs (2005-2007);
President, FSN Council, Găieşti, Dâmboviţa county (1989-1990); President, Provisional National Unity Council, Găieşti, Dâmboviţa county (1990-1990).
Member of Parliament for Dâmboviţa (1990-2000); Member, Committee on External Relations, Chamber of Deputies, Romanian Parliament (1990-2000); Parliamentary group leader, Democratic Party (April-December 1992); Member, Romanian delegation to the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly (1992-1996); Deputy parliamentary group leader, Democratic Party (April 1994); Secretary (1996) and President (1996-2000), Committee on External Relations, Chamber of Deputies; Member (1996-2000) and President (July-December 2000), Committee on European Integration, Chamber of Deputies; Adviser on external policy and international relations to the President of the Chamber of Deputies (March 2001-October 2004 and January 2005-April 2006);
State Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs (November-December 2004).
Member of the European Parliament (December 2007-).
PSD representative, Coordination Group of the Party of European Socialists (from 2004) and the Socialist International's Committee for South-East Europe (from 2004); PSD delegate to the Council of the Socialist International (Geneva 2007, Athens 2006), the Congress of the Party of European Socialists (Brussels 2004 and 2006), and the Council of the Socialist International (Madrid 2004, Rome 2003, Casablanca 2002 and Santo Domingo 2001).
Founder and Vice-President, National Advisory Council for Euro-Atlantic Integration (1993-1996); Founder member and Secretary-General, Romanian Atlantic Council (1993-1996); Participant in USIA programme (March 2003); Member, Manfred Wörner Foundation; Founder member, 'Casa NATO' Association; Participant in meetings of the Atlantic Treaty Association.

Amendments

Amendments	Dossier
1	2009/2096(INI) A sustainable future for transport 2010/03/02 REGI 1 amendments... Amendment 24 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 5a (new) 5a. Highlights the need for adequate research in the field of transport innovation, with the aim of, among other things, reducing energy consumption and carbon emissions and increasing the use of renewable energies; source: PE-438.466
1	2009/2138(INI) SOLVIT 2010/08/01 PETI 1 amendments... Amendment 9 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 10 a (new) 10a. Supports, furthermore, the development of a common website of the European institutions designed to assist citizens and refer them directly to the institution or body competent to handle their complaint. source: PE-430.886
3	2009/2151(INI) Report on the Commission communication: 'A community approach on the prevention of natural and man made disasters' 2010/02/03 REGI 3 amendments... Amendment 1 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Stresses the crucial role played by regional and local authorities in the disaster management cycle; strongly believes that active involvement of those authorities in the design and implementation of disaster prevention strategies is the best way to ensure that the most effective and functional solutions are devised; stresses also the importance of consulting and involving public and private stakeholders, including voluntary organizations, in this process; Amendment 19 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 3a (new) 3a. Is of the opinion that adequate education and training of the population in the kind of behaviour to adopt in the event of disasters are essential for life- saving purposes; attaches, therefore, great importance to the creation and implementation of Community guidelines for the various possible calamities; considers a thorough awareness on the part of EU citizens of the European Emergency Number 112 to be extremely relevant; Amendment 24 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 4a (new) 4a. Notes that climate change is progressively worsening natural calamities, including floods and hydrology-related disasters, for which adequate and well-coordinated prevention is essential; calls for research in these fields and the exchange of experiences between all the local, regional, and national actors involved in the disaster management cycle, so that the best possible prevention measures are adopted; source: PE-439.323
6	2009/2230(INI) European Union strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and the role of macro-regions in the future cohesion policy 2010/03/30 REGI 6 amendments... Amendment 15 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Emphasises the need for an environmental impact assessment of the Northern Gas Pipeline ~~and other similar projects as well as the need to ensure that the construction of the pipeline does not affect~~, the results of which must be communicated without further delay to the European Parliament; calls on the European Commission for the design of an adequate reaction plan for technical accidents and any other possible catastrophes, providing also for the way to deal with these events from the economic point of view; underlines that the same approach must be taken for any future similar project, so that safety, environment and shipping conditions a~~dversely~~re not endangered; Amendment 36 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Draws attention to the significant ~~economic~~ disproportion that exists in the Baltic Sea Region ~~and~~ in terms of economy and innovation, and to the necessity ~~to increase the potential of highly developed areas and eliminate inequality in order to create a permanent~~of eliminating this disparity; believes that in order to reach this aim, it is necessary to increase and exploit the potential of all areas, including the more developed ones, as they can help pulling the less advantageous regions, thus creating a durable area of common prosperity with a high level of competitiveness~~, which is crucial in the face of an aging population~~; Amendment 42 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls for the renewal and deepening ~~of relations as par~~, in the context of the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region ~~between the European Union and neighbouring countries not belonging to the Union whose territories are part of the functional spaces of a given macro-region or affect~~as well as of the future macro-regional strategies, of the relations between the European Union and the non-EU states whose territories are part of the functional spaces in question, so that they can be adequately involved and consequently contribute towards a full achievement of the objectives of those s~~paces directly~~trategies; Amendment 49 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Believes that in order to achieve an effective protection of the environment and of biodiversity, agreements should be reached with the non-EU states that are part of the functional areas interested by the strategies, so that they can share the same values, rights and duties contained in the relevant European Union legislation; Amendment 89 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Considers that the idea of macro- regions combines the considerable potential for optimising the response to the challenges and problems appearing in a given region with that of ~~using~~an effective and efficient use of the resources available; Amendment 96 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. For the benefit of future macro-regional strategies, draws attention to the need for the European Commission to remake sure it solves the issue of ~~its own appropriate~~having adequate internal human and financial resources, in order to be able to fulfil its duties, including the supervision of the implementation of the strategies; source: PE-440.046
3	2009/2233(INI) Achieving real territorial, social and economic cohesion within the EU - a sine qua non condition for global competitiveness? 2010/01/07 REGI 3 amendments... Amendment 44 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Endorses the views expressed in the Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion on the main factors in territorial cohesion; makes specific reference to respect for regional diversity and the development of regional potential and competitiveness, emphasising the importance of accessibility through public services and suitable infrastructure~~, and~~; calls on the Commission to bring forward concrete proposals for the definition and consequent implement~~ing~~ation of the objective of territorial cohesion; Amendment 71 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Takes the view that the key indicator in deciding which areas are eligible for EU financial assistance should continue to be the level of GDP, and that the introduction of other indicators ~~can~~should only be admitted for the purpose of ex post evaluation of Cohesion Policy results and added value, after studies have been conducted on their relevance and on the way in which that information is collected and processed; Amendment 83 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Emphasises the decisive role of regional development and territorial cohesion in enhancing the economic competitiveness of the EU and meeting the EU 2020 targets, with the place-based approach being one of the main ways of achieving economic balance; stresses on the importance of an adequately financed post-2013 Cohesion Policy, with a budget at least equivalent to the current one, both in absolute and relative terms; source: PE-443.146
1	2010/0074(COD) Citizens' initiative 2010/11/17 PETI 1 amendments... Amendment 106 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. The European Parliament shall organise a public hearing, if possible during the first month after the submission of the initiative to the Commission, at which the organisers shall have the opportunity to explain in detail the matters raised by the initiative. To that end, the Commission shall cooperate with the European Parliament and ensure appropriate representation at the hearing. source: PE-452.817
4	2010/2010(INI) Developing the job potential of a new sustainable economy 2010/12/05 REGI 4 amendments... Amendment 6 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. considers that EU cohesion policy plays a crucial role in developing the job potential of a sustainable economy, as it helps eliminate regional differences, boost the economy and create a society with full employment; stresses that the potential of the European Structural Funds can ~~encourage the regions to take initiatives to create new, sustainable jobs~~d of the Cohesion Fund for the creation of new and sustainable jobs should be exploited; Amendment 12 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. emphasizes that in the context of the current economic crisis and of the climate change issue, it is of utmost importance to support the development of a green economy; stresses that for this purpose the EU Cohesion Policy represents a key tool, that can help in the creation of new jobs; Amendment 33 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. stresses the importance of the geographical mobility of workers in accordance with the Treaties; recognises that an improvement in mobility through good local transport increases access to job opportunities; therefore encourages the regions to use resources from the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund for infrastructure measures; Amendment 46 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. reiterates its support for the pilot project ‘Erasmus for elected local and regional representatives’, which could help local and regional authorities to exchange best- practice models and could also have a multiplier effect in the area of labour market policy; calls on the Commission to accelerate the process for the implementation of this pilot project; source: PE-441.220
4	2010/2087(INI) EU Strategy for the Black Sea 2010/10/11 REGI 4 amendments... Amendment 1 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Considers the Black Sea region to be a strategically crucial area and deems an EU Strategy for the Black Sea essential to its sustainable and coordinated development, as well as to the stability and security of the region and of the whole EU; Amendment 14 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Encourages the development, in the context of the Strategy, of an integrated approach and the use of the well- established principles of the EU's Cohesion Policy, which can help deliver effective results while facilitating the capacity building process for the regions lagging behind; in particular, believes that cross- border cooperation between regions should be promoted, in order to exchange best practices and tackle common problems through coordinated action; Amendment 20 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Recognizes the importance of regional and local authorities and stakeholders for the planning and the implementation of the strategy, considering their close link with the territory and with the people; calls therefore for the identification of their needs and for their full involvement in the strategy; Amendment 37 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Given that the Black Sea is highly polluted, and that pollution knows no frontiers, calls for a joint solution to be found to the problem through the use of all existing instruments and on the basis of EU standards, with the aim of tackling and reducing pollution, as well as further safeguarding the environment through prevention. source: PE-452.698
6	2010/2088(INI) GDP and beyond - Measuring progress in a changing world 2010/07/10 REGI 6 amendments... Amendment 6 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. ~~Approves~~Regards positively the Commission’s proposal to ~~make~~reflect upon a set of indicators – in addition to GDP figures – to be made available for EU policies ~~with a view to improving both the circumstances in which decisions are taken and the response to the concerns of citizens in Europe’s various regions; to that end, supports Eurostat’s activities~~; acknowledges, however, that at scientific level no additional criteria have until now proved to be as reliable as GDP; Amendment 10 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 2 ~~2. Takes the view that GDP is an essential measurement of economic growth, but is insufficient to assess regional development and establish cohesion policies;~~deleted Amendment 30 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. IBelieves that in the light of the ~~ever closer degree of~~ interdependence between economic, social and environmental issues, ~~takes the view that focusing on~~further studies should be conducted aiming at identifying additional parameters to complement GDP, a~~lone is likely to provide an incomplete impression that takes no account of the actual situations in the regions, and could result in poor choices being made and inappropriate decisions being taken~~nd able to give a more complete picture of the actual situations in the regions, and in particular of the added value produced by EU policies; Amendment 39 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Reiterates that the condition of natural environments, environmental sustainability, fairness and social integration are now just as important as the economy among the key issues underpinning the European model for development; states, furthermore, that an overarching approach should be taken with regard to assessing people’s wellbeing and quality of life, as well as regions’ vulnerabilities;deleted Amendment 58 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. ~~Call~~Is onf the ~~Commiss~~opinion, th~~erefo~~at Member States should be fre,e to introduce, a~~s a matter of priority and urgency~~t national level, indicators in addition to GDP ~~for~~in order to take into account environmental and social issues, w~~ith a view to establishing a more comprehensive picture of regional cohesion policies, at the latest by the start of the 2014-2020 programming period~~hen implementing EU policies; Amendment 77 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. ~~Propos~~Strongly believes that the criteriaon governing regions’ eligibility for EU funding should ~~be considered in the light of the set of indicators th~~continue to be GDP, at least until when the studies conducted and the scientific evidence will prove the ability of additional criteria to GDP to sat is ~~brought in; calls for environmental and social indicators to be given the same status as GDP whe~~fy the need for other social and environmental aspects to be taken into consideration iat ~~comes to classifying the regions~~EU policies level. source: PE-450.612
2	2010/2139(INI) Report 2010 on the implementation of the Cohesion Policy programmes for 2007-2013 2011/07/02 REGI 2 amendments... Amendment 76 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Considers that good practices in policy implementation must be highlighted and their exchange promoted, in order to improve efficiency and effectiveness and avoid repeating past mistakes; Amendment 87 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Believes that simplification of provisions and procedures at EU and national level should continue without creating major difficulties for beneficiaries and should contribute to increased efficiency; regrets that, due to superfluous bureaucracy, overcomplicated rules subject to frequent changes, and a lack of harmonised procedures, many funds remain unused; source: PE-458.491
3	2010/2155(INI) Objective 3: A challenge for territorial cooperation - the future agenda for cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation 2011/02/22 REGI 3 amendments... Amendment 40 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls for ~~fund~~projects for territorial cooperation ~~no longer to be allocated by Member State, but at EU level and on a programme-by-programme basis, on the basis of the criteria laid down in Annex 2, paragraph 5 of the basic regulation~~to be coordinated at EU level, so as to provide a strategic, integrated response to the needs of ~~each~~the territoryies or areas involved; invites the Commission to consider other relevant, strategic and measurable criteria that could reflect the needs of territories and reduce the emphasis on the most important criterion: demography; Amendment 69 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Points out that the concept of macro- regions, a Council initiative, came into being as an experimental, logical way of coordinating common projects covering a very large territory, with a view to exploiting the advantages of an integrated and multisectoral approach based on common strategic actions receiving support from existing funds; points out that these strategies ~~must neither~~are not generateing additional expenditure for the EU budget, ~~nor necessitat~~and do not foresee the establishment of new institutions or the application of new rules; Amendment 84 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Points out that territorial cooperation concerns both the EU's internal and external borders; asks the Commission to consider how to create more effective synergies between initiatives under the ERDF, the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA), the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) and the European Development Fund (EDF); calls for a simplification and harmonization of the rules governing the access to the different sources of financing, in order to ensure compatibility and facilitate their use by beneficiaries; source: PE-458.829
4	2010/2211(INI) Investing in the future: a new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for a competitive, sustainable and inclusive Europe 2010/12/17 REGI 2 amendments... Amendment 10 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Takes the view that cohesion policy is a~~n important compon~~ key component for the accomplishment of the EU 2020 strategy and that a sound cohesion policy is the prerequisite for successful joint action by the EU; Amendment 98 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 17 17. Underscores the considerable European added value of the act of solidarity represented by cohesion policy; stresses that solidarity is not a one-way process, and th~~erefore emphasises that~~at even though efforts must continue to be concentrated on the most disadvantaged regions in order to reduce disparities, all EU regions must have access to cohesion policy measures; source: PE-454.695 2011/04/27 SURE 2 amendments... Amendment 932 # Ivailo KALFIN, Ana GOMES, Kinga GÖNCZ, Zigmantas BALČYTIS, Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 92 a (new) 92 a. Considers that some large-scale projects, where the financial needs could not be clearly determined from the outset tend to divert funds from smaller successful programmes, hampering their proper implementation; proposes, therefore, to create a separate sub heading within Heading 1 for large sized projects, exceeding EUR 1bn+ of EU funding, in order to assure the elaboration of more predictable financing schemes and guarantee the proper implementation of both large-scale and visible projects as well as smaller ones; Amendment 961 # Ivailo KALFIN, Kinga GÖNCZ, Ana GOMES, Zigmantas BALČYTIS, Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 98 98. Proposes, therefore, the following structure for the next MFF: 1. Smart, sustainable and inclusive growth (Europe 2020) 1a. Knowledge for growth and employment Including research and innovation, education and lifelong learning, internal market ~~and social policies.~~ 1b. Sustainable development Including ~~agriculture, fisheries,~~ environment, climate change, energy, and transport policies. 1c. Cohesion for growth and employment Including cohesion policy (economic, social and territorial). 1d. Large-scale projects (above EUR 1 bln financing from the EU budget) 2. Citizenship Including culture, youth, communication and freedom, security and justice policies. 3. Global Europe Including external action, neighbourhood and development policies. 4. Financial Governance Including a link to the European Stability Mechanism. 5. Administration source: PE-462.732
4	2010/2276(INI) EU strategy on Roma inclusion 2010/10/12 DEVE 4 amendments... Amendment 4 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Recognises that Roma communities continue to be victims of persistent discrimination in many Member States and that this situation is exacerbated by the current economic and financial crisis; calls on ~~those~~all Member States ~~which~~, and particularly the ones that the EU Fundamental Rights Agency identified as having severe problems, to ~~fully exploit~~cooperate with the EU and representatives of the Roma population for the setting up of integrated policies that, while making use of all the EU resources available under the Structural Funds, and in particular the ERDF and ESF, should guarantee the sustainable inclusion of Roma communities and their protection against discrimination; Amendment 11 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Denounces the discriminatory measures taken by some Member States, and in particular by France, against the Roma population on the sole basis of their ethnic origins; calls on the Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, to take prompt and severe measures should similar cases occur again in the future; Amendment 20 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Recognises that~~, in times of demographic change,~~ the Roma population, which has been part of our common heritage for centuries and is the largest ethnic minority in the EU, should be given the means through good quality education, decent housing and job opportunities to fully integrate the work place and contribute to economic development as foreseen in the EU 2020 strategy; calls on the Member States, therefore, to increase their efforts ~~now~~, by reinforcing their effective strategies for addressing the specific circumstances (deep poverty, lack of education and social services, poor health conditions) of marginalised communities, in order to ensure their social and economic integration; Amendment 25 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Believes that for a successful establishment and implementation of the above-mentioned policies and strategies, it is necessary to improve awareness and full understanding of the problem at the level of national, regional and local authorities; in this regard, considers the technical assistance funds to be the right tool; emphasises, however, that policies and strategies for the Roma population should, at least in the long run, be mainstreamed into general policies, in order to ensure effectiveness, real inclusion, and sustainability; source: PE-454.583
6	2010/2295(INI) Activities of the Committee on Petitions in 2010 2011/05/27 PETI 6 amendments... Amendment 16 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Stresses, however, that, in spite of the large number of petitions concerning the rights contained in the Charter, the Commission consistently refuses, owing to a lack of legal instruments, to take action to prevent flagrant breaches of fundamental rights in the Member States; Amendment 24 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Considers that the Commission should monitor compliance with and implementation of European environmental legislation more strictly at every point in the proceedings, and not only when a final ruling has been given; Amendment 25 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Considers that, tohe Commission should ensure correct implementation of the EIA, SEIA, Habitats and Birds Directives, by the~~re is a need for stricter guidelin~~ Member States, based on recommendations from Parliament’s own competent committee, with which the Committee on Petitions will readily work to ensure that citizens’ concerns are better reflected in future environmental action; Amendment 26 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Points out that, in many instances, petitions have uncovered problems related to the transposition and enforcement of European law and recognises that launching infringement proceedings does not necessarily provide citizens with immediate solutions to their problems; notes, however, that there are other means of monitoring and applying pressure that could be used; Amendment 27 # Victor BOŞTINARU, Nikolaos SALAVRAKOS Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Stresses that ~~closer~~the participation and the close and systematic cooperation ~~with~~of the Member States is extremely important for the work of the Petitions Committee; encourages Member States to play a proactive role in responding to petitions related to the implementation and enforcement of European law, and considers the presence of Member State representatives at Petitions Committee meetings to be of the utmost importance; Amendment 31 # Victor BOŞTINARU, Nikolaos SALAVRAKOS Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Stresses the need to bring greater transparency to the management of petitions: internally by giving Members direct access to petition files via the E- petition application, by simplifying the internal procedure and by close cooperation between the members, the chair and the secretariat of the Committee on Petitions, and externally by establishing an interactive Web portal for petitioners; source: PE-466.956
6	2010/2305(INI) Absorption of Structural and Cohesion Funds: lessons learnt for the future cohesion policy of the EU 2011/09/06 REGI 6 amendments... Amendment 2 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas absorption capacity is the extent to which a Member State is able to spend the financial resources allocated from the Structural and Cohesion Funds in an effective and efficient manner, and whereas this capacity is necessary for making a maximum contribution to the economic ~~and soc~~, social and territorial cohesion with the resources available from the EU funds, Amendment 16 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Recital C a (new) Ca. whereas administrative capacity, especially in terms of projects planning and implementation, is a key issue for the absorption capacity and needs to be strengthened, with particular emphasis on those Member States lagging behind and with low absorption rates, Amendment 61 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses the paramount importance of timely adoption of the multiannual financial framework and clear and definitive rules and guidance for the Member States in order to avoid start-up difficulties at the beginning of the next programming period; underlines that the duration of the multiannual financial framework is a key issue for Cohesion Policy and for the absorption capacity, because a too short MFF creates obstacles to those projects that are at the same time the ones of longer duration and the most substantial ones from the development point of view; Amendment 67 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Underlines the importance that certain reforms can have in some Member States to increase the absorption capacity, and therefore the need that they are negotiated between the Commission and the Member States concerned when defining the development and investment partnership contract, so as to make them a binding condition for the states; in particular, points out the importance of decentralisation, and of the empowerment of regional and local authorities; Amendment 69 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Calls on the Member States to make further efforts to attract, well train and retain qualified staff to manage EU funds, and to avoid any replacement of the staff done simply on a political basis; Amendment 74 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) 10a. Calls on the Commission to enhance its assistance to those Member States whose absorption rates, being under the EU's average, show a lack in terms of absorption capacity; believes that such enhanced assistance and close cooperation should continue at least until the countries concerned reach a level of expertise sufficient to produce results without external special aid; source: PE-467.037
1	2011/0195(COD) Common Fisheries Policy 2012/06/14 REGI 1 amendments... Amendment 179 # Vasilica Viorica DĂNCILĂ, Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Annex III – table – title 1 a (new) Black Sea Area of competence – GFCM geographical sub-area as defined in resolution GFCM/33/2009/2 source: PE-491.301
5	2011/0268(COD) European Social Fund (ESF) 2014-2020 2012/05/06 REGI 5 amendments... Amendment 236 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – title ~~Transnat~~Cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation Amendment 241 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall support ~~transnat~~cross- border, transnational and interegional cooperation with the aim of promoting mutual learning and thereby increasing the effectiveness of policies supported by the ESF. Transnational cooperation shall involve partners from at least two Member States. Amendment 245 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 2 2. Member States may select themes for ~~transnat~~cross-border, transnational and interregional co-operation from a list proposed by the Commission and endorsed by the ESF Committee. Amendment 250 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 3 3. The Commission shall facilitate ~~transnat~~cross- border, transnational and interegional cooperation on the themes referred to in paragraph 2 through mutual learning and coordinated or joint action. In particular, the Commission shall operate an EU-level platform to facilitate the exchange of experience, capacity building and networking, as well as dissemination of the relevant outcomes. In addition, the Commission shall develop a coordinated implementation framework, including common eligibility criteria, types and timing of actions, and common methodological approaches for monitoring and evaluation, with a view to facilitating t~~ransnational~~he cooperation. Amendment 251 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation supported by the ESF should be aligned with Regulation (EU) No [...] [ETC] in order to ensure coordination between the funds as provided for in that Regulation. source: PE-491.059
57	2011/0274(COD) Cohesion Fund 2014-2020 2012/06/06 REGI 4 amendments... Amendment 23 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Recital 7 (7) ~~A common set of indicators~~In order to assess progress of programme implementation ~~should be set out before the Member States draft their operational programmes. These~~, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission in respect of a common set of indicators. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control, by Member States, of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers1. Common indicators should be complemented by programme-specific indicators. _________________ 1 OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13. Amendment 94 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 4 – paragraph 1 1. CThe Commission shall adopt a list of common indicators, as ~~set out in the Annex to this Regulation, shall be used where relevant and in accordance with Article 24(3) of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR]~~referred to in Article 24(3) of Regulation (EU) No [...]/2012 [CPR] by means of implementing acts. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 5 a(2). For common indicators, baselines shall be set at zero and cumulative targets shall be set for 2022. Amendment 96 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 5 a (new) Article 5 a Committee procedure 1. The Commission shall be assisted by the Coordination Committee of the Funds. That committee shall be a committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. 2. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply. Amendment 97 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Annex Deleted source: PE-491.027 2013/06/03 REGI, REGI 53 amendments... Amendment 1 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Recital 1 (1) Article 174 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provides that the Union ~~should~~is to develop and pursue its actions leading to the strengthening of its economic, social and territorial cohesion. The Cohesion Fund should therefore provide a financial contribution to projects in the field of the environment and to trans- European networks in the area of transport infrastructure. Amendment 2 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Recital 2 (2) The provisions common to the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European Social Fund (ESF) and the Cohesion Fund are set out in Regulation (EU) No […]/20123 of […] laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund covered by the Common Strategic Framework and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 [Common Provisions Regulation - CPR]. The CPR establishes a new framework for the action of the European Structural ~~Funds and~~and Investment Funds including the Cohesion Fund. It is necessary therefore to specify the objectives of the Cohesion Fund in relation to the new framework for its action and in relation to the purpose assigned to it in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Amendment 3 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Recital 3 (3) The Union may, through the Cohesion Fund, contribute to actions in pursuit of the Union'’s environmental objectives specified in Articles 11 and 191 of the T~~reaty~~FEU, namely energy efficiency and renewable energy and, in the transport sector outside the trans-European networks, rail, river and sea transport, intermodal transport systems and their interoperability, management of road, sea and air traffic, clean urban transport and public transport. Amendment 4 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Recital 3 a (new) (3a) The Cohesion Fund should support transport infrastructure projects of European added value provided for by Regulation (EU) No […]/2013 establishing the Connecting Europe Facility. Support should be provided in accordance with Article [84 (4)] of Regulation (EU) No [...]/2013 [CPR], and should be available to Cohesion Fund Member States only, with the co- financing rates applicable to this Fund. Amendment 5 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Recital 3 b (new) (3b) Article 192(5) of the TFEU provides for an exception to the general principle contained in Article 191(2) of the Treaty. It should therefore be ensured, to the highest possible extent, that damage is prevented and that, if nevertheless pollution occurs, polluters pay. Amendment 6 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Recital 4 a (new) (4a) The European Union and most Member States are party to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities while the other Member States are in the process of ratifying it. It is important in the implementation of relevant projects that accessibility for persons with disabilities as mentioned in Article 9 of the Convention is considered in the specification of the projects. Amendment 7 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Recital 5 (5) Specific provisions concerning the type of activities which may be supported by the Cohesion Fund under the thematic objectives defined in Regulation (EU) No […]/20123 [CPR] should be laid down. At the same time, expenditure outside the scope of the Cohesion Fund should be defined and clarified, including as regards the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in installations falling under Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC. Amendment 8 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Recital 5 a (new) (5 a) Investments to achieve the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from the activities listed in Annex I to Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC should not be eligible for support from the Cohesion Fund as they already benefit financially from the application of that Directive. This exclusion should not restrict the possibility to use the Cohesion Fund to support the activities not listed in Annex I to Directive 2003/87/EC even if implemented by the same economic operators, such as, energy efficiency investments in co-generation of heat and power and in the district heating networks, smart power distribution, storage and transmission systems, measures aimed at reducing air pollution etc, even if one of their indirect effects is the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions or if they are listed in the national plan referred to in Article 10c(1) of Directive 2003/87/EC. Amendment 9 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Recital 5 b (new) (5 b) Investments in housing except for promoting energy efficiency and renewable energy use cannot be eligible for support from the Cohesion Fund as they fall outside the scope of support from the Cohesion Fund as defined in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Amendment 10 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Recital 5 c (new) (5 c) It is important to ensure that, in promoting risk management investments, specific risks at regional, cross border and transnational level are taken into account. Amendment 11 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Recital 5 d (new) (5 d) Complementarity and synergies between interventions supported by the Cohesion Fund, the ERDF, the ETC and the CEF should be ensured, in order to avoid duplication of efforts and guarantee the optimal linkage of different types of infrastructure at local, regional and national levels, and across the European Union. Amendment 12 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Recital 6 (6) In order to address the specific needs of the Cohesion Fund, and in line with the Europe 2020 strategy that cohesion policy should support the need to deliver smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, it is necessary to set out investment priorities within the scope of the thematic objectives laid down in Regulation (EU) No […]/20123 [CPR]. These investment priorities should set out detailed objectives, which are not mutually exclusive, to which the Cohesion Fund shall contribute. Furthermore, these investment priorities should form the basis for the definition of specific objectives within operational programmes that take into account the needs and characteristics of the programme area. Amendment 13 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Recital 8 (8) This Regulation replaces Council Regulation (EC) No 1084/2006 of 11 July 2006 establishing the Cohesion Fund ~~and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1164/94. In the interest of clarity,~~. That Regulation should therefore be repealed. Nevertheless, this Regulation should not affect either the continuation or modification of assistance approved by the Commission on the basis of Regulation (EC) No 1084/2006 or any other legislation applying to that assistance on 31 December 2013, which should consequently apply thereafter to that assistance or the projects concerned until their closure. Applications to receive assistance made or approved under Regulation (EC) No 1084/2006 should therefore ~~be repe~~remain valeid. Amendment 14 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Recital 8 a (new) (8 a) Since the economic, social and territorial cohesion objectives cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States by reason of the extent of the disparities between the levels of development of the various regions and the backwardness of the least favoured regions and the limit on the financial resources of the Member States and regions and can therefore be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives. Amendment 15 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new) In the context of the trilogues, the three Institutions agreed on the substance of this amendment but decided that it should be introduced as Article 2a (new), which text will be provided by the Commission at a later stage.(b a) transport infrastructure projects of European added value provided for by Regulation (EU) No[...]/2012 [establishing the Connecting Europe Facility] for an amount of EUR XX, in accordance with Article [84 (4)] of Regulation (EU) No [...]/2012 [CPR]; Or. enJustification Amendment 16 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a (a) the decommissioning and the construction of nuclear power stations; Amendment 17 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point b (b) investment to achieve the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions ~~in installation~~from activities falling under Annex I of Directive 2003/87/EC; Amendment 18 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c (c) housing. except for promoting energy efficiency and renewable energy use; Amendment 19 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new) (ca) the manufacturing, processing and marketing of tobacco and tobacco products; Amendment 20 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c b (new) (cb) undertakings in difficulties as defined under Union State aid rules; Amendment 21 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c c (new) (cc) investment in airport infrastructure other than that related to environmental protection. Amendment 22 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – introductory part In accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No […]/20123 [CPR], the Cohesion Fund shall support the following investment priorities within the thematic objectives set out in Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No […]/20123 [CPR] in accordance with needs and potentials described in the Partnership Agreement referred to in Article 14(1)(a)(i) of that Regulation: Amendment 23 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – point a – introductory part (a) supporting the shift towards a low- carbon economy in all sectors bythrough: Amendment 24 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – point a – point i (i) promoting the production and distribution of energy derived from renewable ~~energy~~ sources; Amendment 25 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – point a – point ii (ii) promoting energy efficiency and renewable energy use in ~~small and medium-sized enterprise~~enterprises, primarily in SMEs; Amendment 26 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – point a – point iii (iii) supporting energy efficiency, smart energy management and renewable energy use in public infrastructures, including in public buildings, and in the housing sector; Amendment 27 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – point a – point iv (iv) developing and implementing smart distribution systems at low and medium voltage levels ; Amendment 28 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – point a – point v (v) promoting low-carbon strategies for ~~urban area~~all types of territories, in particular for urban areas, including the promotion of sustainable multi-modal urban mobility and mitigation relevant adaptation measures; Amendment 29 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – point a – point v a (new) (va) promoting the use of high efficiency cogeneration of heat and power based on useful heat demand; Amendment 30 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – point b – introductory part (b) promoting climate change adaptation, risk prevention and management bythrough: Amendment 31 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – point b – point i (i) supporting ~~dedicated~~ investment for adaptation to climate change including eco-system based approaches; Amendment 32 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – point c – introductory part (c) protecting the environment and promoting resource efficiency bythrough: Amendment 33 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – point c – point i (i) ~~addressing the significant needs for~~ invest~~ment~~ing in the waste sector to meet the requirements of the Union's environmental acquis and to address needs identified by the Member States for investment going beyond those requirements; Amendment 34 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – point c – point ii (ii) ~~addressing the significant needs for~~ invest~~ment~~ing in the water sector to meet the requirements of the Union'’s environmental acquis and to address needs identified by the Member States for investment going beyond those requirements; Amendment 35 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – point c – point iii (iii) protecting and restoring biodiversity, soil protection and restoration and promoting ecosystem services including through NATURA 2000 and green infrastructures; Amendment 36 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – point c – point iv (iv) action to improv~~ing~~e the urban environment, ~~including regeneration of brownfield sites and reduction of air pollution~~revitalisation of cities, regeneration and decontamination of brownfield sites (including conversion areas), reduction of air pollution and promotion of noise-reduction measures; Amendment 37 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – point d – introductory part (d) promoting sustainable transport and removing bottlenecks in key network infrastructures, bythrough: Amendment 38 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – point d – point i (i) supporting a multi-modal Single European Transport Area by investing in the Trans-European Transport (TEN-T) Network; Amendment 39 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – point d – point ii (ii) developing and improving environment-friendly (including low- noise) and low-carbon transport systems including ~~promoting sustainable urban~~inland waterways and maritime transport, ports, multimodal links and airport infrastructure, in order to promote sustainable regional and local mobility; Amendment 40 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – point d – point iii (iii) developing and rehabilitating comprehensive, high quality and interoperable railway systems, and promoting noise-reduction measures; Amendment 41 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 4 1. Common output indicators, as set out in the Annex to this Regulation, ~~shall be used where relevant and in accordance with Article 24(3~~programme- specific result indicators and, where relevant, programme-specific output indicators shall be used in accordance with Article 24(3) and Article 87(2)(b)(ii) and (iv) of Regulation (EU) No […]/20123 [CPR]. 2. For common ~~indicators, baselines shall be set at zero and cumulative targets shall be set for 2022. 2. For~~and programme-specific output indicators, baselines shall be set at zero ~~and c~~. Cumulative ~~target~~quantified target values for these indicators shall be fixed for 2022. 3. For programme-specific result indicators, which relate to investment priorities, baselines shall use the latest available data and targets shall be fixed for 2022~~, but~~. Targets may be expressed in quantitative or qualitative terms. 3a. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt a delegated act in accordance with Article 5a to amend the list of common output indicators in the Annex to this Regulation, in order to make adjustments, where justified to ensure effective assessment of progress in programme implementation. Amendment 42 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph 2 2. Applications to receive assistance made or approved under Regulation (EC) No 1084/2006 shall remain valid. Amendment 43 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 5 a (new) Article 5 a Exercise of the delegation 1. The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the conditions laid down in this Article. 2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 4(3a) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from 1 January 2014. 3. The delegation of power referred to in Article 4(3a) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force. 4. As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council. 5. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 4(3a) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of 2 months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by 2 months at the initiative of the European Parliament or the Council. Amendment 44 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 6 Without prejudice to the provisions laid down in Article 5, Regulation (EC) No 1084/2006 is hereby repealed with effect from 1 January 2014. References to the repealed Regulation shall be construed as references to this Regulation and shall be read in accordance with the correlation table set out in Annex X. Amendment 45 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 7 The European Parliament and the Council shall review this Regulation by 31 December 2022,0 in accordance with Article 177 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Amendment 46 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Annex – heading 1 – subheading 1 UNIT NAME Solid waste tons nes/year Additional waste recycling capacity Amendment 47 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Annex – heading 1 – subheading 2 – row 2 UNIT NAME 3 m Estimated reduction of leakage in water distribution networkdeleted deleted Amendment 48 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Annex – heading 1 – subheading 4 – row 2 UNIT NAME Risk prevention and management persons Population benefiting from forest fire protection ~~and~~ ~~other protection~~ measures Amendment 49 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Annex – heading 1 – subheading 6 UNIT NAME ~~Soil sealing~~deleted ~~hectares Change in land sealed due to development~~ deleted deleted Amendment 50 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Annex – heading 1 – subheading 7 UNIT NAME Nature and biodiversity hectares Surface area of habitats in ~~better~~supported to attain a better conservation status Amendment 51 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Annex – heading 2 – subheading 3 UNIT NAME GHG reduction tons of Estimated decrease of GHG CO2eq ~~in CO2 equivalents~~ Amendment 52 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Annex – heading 3 – subheading 3 UNIT NAME Urban transport ~~passenger Increase of passenger trips~~km Total length of new or ~~trips~~ ~~using supported urban~~ improved tram and metro ~~transport service~~lines Amendment 53 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Annex – heading 3 – subheading 4 UNIT NAME Inland waterways ~~tonne-km Increase of cargo transported on improved inla~~km Total length of improved or created inland waterway Or. en EXPLANATORY STATEMENT The Commission's proposal on the Cohesion Fund In the context of the legislative package for Cohesion Policy as proposed by the Commission, the Cohesion Fund is part of the new Common Strategic Framework Funds, which will cover the Structural Funds, the Cohesion Fund, as well as the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund. All those funds will be subject to common provisions in several areas of programming and financial management. Moreover, and like in the current programming period, the Cohesion Fund, the ERDF and the ESF will continue subject to a further set of common specific rules regarding programming, management and monitoring. Although the Commission proposes a new framework for the funds, the scope and objectives specific to the Cohesion Fund are not dramatically changed as compared to the current programming period1. In its proposal for a regulation laying down the common provisions for all the funds which will replace the current General Regulation ("the CPR"), the Commission proposes a different structure of missions and goals for the funds, by submitting all the Funds to the goal of Investment for growth and jobs, in order to contribute to the Union strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. The Cohesion Fund will contribute to this goal and this mission by supporting Member States whose gross national income (GNI) per capita is less than 90% of the average GNI per capita of the EU-27. However, the scope of action of the Cohesion Fund will continue to be directed to the provision of financial support to projects in the field of the environment and to trans-European networks in the area of transport infrastructure, while ensuring an appropriate balance, and according to the investment and infrastructure needs specific to each Member State (Article 2 of the proposal for a Regulation on the Cohesion Fund). The scope of the support is nevertheless slightly modified, as Article 2(2) of the proposal for a Regulation on the Cohesion Fund modifies the cases of exclusion of support, by adding the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in installations falling under Directive 2003/87/EC. The references to interest on debt, the purchase of land for an amount exceeding 10 % of the total eligible expenditure for the operation concerned, and recoverable value added tax, currently provided for in Article 3(a), (b) and (e) of the General Regulation, are now included in Article 59(3) of the CPR, which is a common provision applicable to all the CSF funds. One of the new features as compared to the current regulation is in Article 3 of the proposal for a Regulation on the Cohesion Fund, which in accordance with the principle of thematic concentration as provided for in Article 16 of the CPR, provides that the Cohesion Fund support is subject to a list of investment priorities, within the scope as defined above and in relation to the thematic objectives as defined in Article 9 of the CPR, and in particular: (a) supporting the shift towards a low-carbon economy in all sectors; (b) promoting climate change adaptation, risk prevention and management; (c) protecting the environment and promoting resource efficiency; (d) promoting sustainable transport and removing bottlenecks in key network infrastructures; and, (e) enhancing institutional capacity and an efficient public administration. Each of these objectives is then divided into a specific subset of investment priorities as listed below each of those objectives. There is now an explicit provision providing for the support to improving institutional capacity, as this is deemed to be a particular need in the field of Cohesion Policy given the size and the significance of the projects that are to be supported1. Like for the current transitional scheme provided for in Article 8(3) of the General Regulation, the CPR stipulates that those Member States eligible for the Cohesion Fund financing in 2013, but whose nominal GNI per capita exceeds 90% of the average GNI per capita of the EU-27 shall receive support from the Cohesion Fund on a transitional and specific basis. The provisions on conditionality contained in Article 4 of the General Regulation are now part of the CPR (Title II, Chapters III and IV). The proposal for a Regulation on the Cohesion Fund contains other new elements, as compared to the Regulation currently in force. In the context of the pursuit for a more results- oriented process to ensure that cohesion policy programmes are oriented towards results, and the effective implementation of the Funds, and like in the case of the ERDF, the Commission introduces common indicators for the Cohesion Fund (Article 4 and Annex of the proposal for a Regulation on the Cohesion Fund), in order to assess progress of programme implementation towards the achievement of the objectives (Article 24(3) of the CPR). The outcome of the trilogue The Cohesion Fund trilogue was conducted by following to the maximum possible extent in the negotiations the position voted by the REGI Committee on 12 July 2012. The outcome is a truly satisfactory one, as it was possible to keep the line drawn by most of the Parliament's amendments, and by the most important ones in particular. It was also sought to have a good degree of coordination and synergy with the other regulations, and this is particularly true with regard to the ERDF, where the efforts made it possible to align the corresponding investment priorities, so as to guarantee simpler rules and easier interpretation for the beneficiaries. The scope of the Cohesion Fund (Article 2 of the proposal for a Regulation on the Cohesion Fund) wa~~terways~~s broadened, in line with the mandate, to include the support to energy efficiency and renewable energy use in the housing sector - as already foreseen for public infrastructures and enterprises - and to allow for the insertion in the investment priorities of support for high efficiency district heating and cogeneration of heat and power. The main reason is that according to the latest available figures, including the European Commission's ones, with the current trends the EU would be able to achieve only less than half of the set target of 20% increase in energy efficiency by 2020. The Cohesion Fund's support for energy efficiency and renewable energy use in private housing represents the most cost-effective way to achieve the objectives of the Europe 2020 Strategy. A similar observation can be made concerning high efficiency district heating and cogeneration of heat and power, having in mind their importance in the Cohesion Fund Member States, their ample margins of development, and the highly positive impact on the environment that can be achieved through increased energy efficiency and use of renewable energies, thus benefitting emissions reduction and energy security. Despite of the initial resistance opposed by the Council and the Commission, a reference was maintained in relation to the support that might be granted by the Cohesion Fund to the Connecting Europe Facility's transport infrastructure projects in Cohesion Member States. This was done given that if Cohesion Fund resources are actually transferred, this cannot be done without a reference in this Regulation, even though the actual rules regulating the transfer are to be decided in art. 84 CPR. It must be pointed out that all this matter is subject to the final outcome of the CPR and MFF negotiations, both in terms of feasibility of the transfer, and of actual amounts to be transferred. In the spirit of alignment with the ERDF regulation, it was decided to introduce also in the Cohesion Fund regulation the explicit exclusion of support for the manufacturing, processing and marketing of tobacco and tobacco products, and for undertakings in difficulties as defined under Union State aid rules. An important change, once again in line with what requested by the Parliament, concerns the enterprises to be made eligible for support for energy efficiency and renewable energy projects, as an agreement has been reached so as to make it possible also for enterprises other than SMEs to receive support. In the investment priorities (Article 3), particular attention has been paid to environmental issues. Apart from the support to energy efficiency and renewable energy in housing, and to district heating and cogeneration, an important agreement has been reached for the waste and water sectors, implying that investments in these sectors will be possible not only to meet the requirements of the Union's environmental acquis but also to go beyond that and address the needs identified by the Member States. The support for Natura 2000 and for environmental friendly transport are as well the result of such approach. The issue of the macroeconomic conditionality has been discused thoroughly, and an agreement has finally been reached so as to leave any decision on such topic to the CPR negotiations, deemed to be the best place to address the problem from a more general point of view. Finally, common indicators have been discussed several times with the Negotiating Teams of the other regulations in order to find a solution common to ERDF, ETC and the Cohesion Fund. The final agreement reached with Council and Commission foresees an interinstitutional agreement between the three institutions, so as to guarantee the the original proposal made for the annexes by the Commission after long consultations with experts remains unchanged. Any future changes, where needed, will anyway be possible through delegated acts. source: PE-486.124
9	2011/0275(COD) European Regional Development Fund (ERDF): support to the Investment for growth and jobs goal 2012/07/06 REGI 9 amendments... Amendment 225 # Vasilica Viorica DĂNCILĂ, Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 In more developed regions, the ERDF shall not support investments in infrastructure providing basic services to citizens in the areas of environment, transport, and ICT, but shall be open to innovative solutions in the fields of ecosystem services, biodiversity, smart and green infrastructures, environmental friendly transport solutions and green ICT. Amendment 242 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new) The provision of the previous subparagraph shall not apply, by way of derogation, to those regions whose GDP per capita for the 2007-13 period was less than 75% of the average GDP of the EU- 25 for the reference period but which are eligible under the category of transition or more developed regions as defined in Article 82(2)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) No [ ]/2012 [CPR] in the 2014-2020 period. Amendment 333 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a (a) enhancing research and innovation infrastructure (R&I) and capacities to develop R&I excellence ~~and promoting centres of competence, in particular those of European interest~~; Amendment 336 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a a (new) (a a) promoting centres of of competence, in particular those of European interest; Amendment 484 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point e a (new) (e a) promoting high efficiency cogeneration and district heating and cooling and supporting their distribution network; Amendment 535 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point e (e) action to improve the urban and rural environment, including regeneration of brownfield sites and reduction of air pollution; Amendment 568 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point c (c) developing environment-friendly and low-carbon transport systems and promoting sustainable ~~urban~~and accessible public mobility; Amendment 578 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d (d) developing comprehensive, high quality , accessible and interoperable railway system; Amendment 624 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – introductory part (9) promoting social inclusion ~~and~~, combating poverty and fighting against discrimination: source: PE-491.053
22	2011/0276(COD) Structural instruments: common provisions for ERDF, ESF, Cohesion Fund, EAFRD and EMFF; general provisions applicable to ERDF, ESF and Cohesion Fund 2012/04/06 REGI 5 amendments... Amendment 196 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Recital 11 a (new) (11a) The European Union and most Member States are party to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities while the remaining Member States are in the process of ratifying it. It is important in the implementation of the relevant projects that accessibility for persons with disabilities as mentioned in article 9 of the Convention is considered in the specification of the projects. Amendment 235 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Recital 19 (19) Establishing a closer link between cohesion policy and the economic governance of the Union will ensure that the effectiveness of expenditure under the CSF Funds is underpinned by sound economic policies and that the CSF Funds can, if necessary, be redirected to addressing the economic problems a country is facing. This process has to be gradual, starting with amendments to the Partnership Contract and to the programmes in support of Council recommendations to address macroeconomic imbalances and social and economic difficulties. Where, despite the enhanced use of CSF Funds, a Member State fails to take effective action in the context of the economic governance process, the Commission should have the right to suspend all or part of the payments and commitments. Decisions on suspensions should be proportionate and effective, taking into account the impact of the individual programmes for addressing the economic and social situation in the relevant Member State and previous amendments to the Partnership Contract. When deciding on suspensions, the Commission should also respect equality of treatment between Member States, taking into account in particular the impact of the suspension on the economy of the Member State concerned. The suspensions should be lifted and funds be made available again to the Member State concerned as soon as the Member State takes the necessary action.deleted Amendment 464 # Vasilica Viorica DĂNCILĂ, Victor BOŞTINARU, Catherine BEARDER Proposal for a regulation Part 2 – article 8 – paragraph 2 The Member States and the Commission shall, based on existing environmental legislation, ensure that environmental protection requirements, resource efficiency, biodiversity and ecosystem protection, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and ecosystem-based disaster resilience and risk prevention and management are promoted in the preparation and implementation of Partnership Contracts and programmes. Member States shall provide information on the support for climate change and biodiversity objectives using the methodology adopted by the Commission. The Commission shall adopt this methodology by means of an implementing act. The implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 143(3). Amendment 498 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Part 2 – article 9 – paragraph 1 – point 9 (9) promoting social inclusion ~~and~~, combating poverty and fighting against discrimination; Amendment 686 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Part 2 – article 17 – paragraph 5 5. The Commission shall assess the information provided on the fulfilment of ex ante conditionalities in the framework of its assessment of the Partnership Contract and programmes. It may decide, when adopting a programme, to suspend all or part of interim payments to the programme pending the satisfactory completion of actions to fulfil an ex ante conditionality which is instrumental to the objectives of the programme. The failure to complete actions to fulfil an ex ante conditionality by the deadline set out in the programme shall constitute a basis for suspending payments by the Commission. source: PE-489.656 2012/05/06 REGI 4 amendments... Amendment 1291 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 The support from the Cohesion Fund for transport infrastructure under the Connecting Europe Facility shall be EUR ~~10 000 000 000~~XX. This amount shall be used only for projects to be implemented in Member States eligible for funding under the Cohesion Fund, and the applicable co- financing rate shall be the one foreseen by Article 110(3). Amendment 1298 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 4 Support from the Cohesion Fund under the Connecting Europe Facility shall be implemented in accordance with Article [131] of Regulation (EU) […]/2012 on establishing the Connecting Europe Facility35 in respect of projects listed in Annex 1 to that Regulation, giving greatest possible priority to projects respecting the national allocations under the Cohesion Fund. By way of exception, until 31 December 2016 the selection of projects eligible for financing shall be done respecting the national allocations transferred from the Cohesion Fund to the Connecting Europe Facility. Amendment 1398 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 87 – paragraph 2 – point f – point ii (ii) an assessment of the administrative burden for beneficiaries and the actions planned to achieve a reduction accompanied by targets and deadlines; Amendment 1401 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 87 – paragraph 2 – point f – point iii (iii) an indicative list of major projects for which the estimated start date for the execution of the main works is before 1 January 2018; source: PE-491.056 2012/06/06 REGI 2 amendments... Amendment 1611 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 110 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 The co-financing rate at the level of each priority axis of operational programmes under the European territorial cooperation goal shall be no higher than 785%. Amendment 1643 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Part 3 – article 111 a (new) Article 111a Maximum level of transfers from the Funds In order to contribute to the objectives of adequately concentrating cohesion funding on the least developed regions and Member States and reducing disparities in average per capita aid intensities resulting from capping, the maximum level of transfer from the Funds to each individual Member State pursuant to this Regulation will be as follows: — for Member States whose average XXXX to XXXX GNI per capita (PPS) is under 40 % of the EU-27 average: 3,7893 % of their GDP — for Member States whose average XXXX to XXXX GNI per capita (PPS) is equal to or above 40 % and below 50 % of the EU-27 average: 3,7135 % of their GDP — for Member States whose average XXXX to XXXX GNI per capita (PPS) is equal to or above 50 % and below 55 % of the EU-27 average: 3,6188 % of their GDP — for Member States whose average XXXX to XXXX GNI per capita (PPS) is equal to or above 55 % and below 60 % of the EU-27 average: 3,5240 % of their GDP — for Member States whose average XXXX to XXXX GNI per capita (PPS) is equal to or above 60 % and below 65 % of the EU-27 average: 3,4293 % of their GDP — for Member States whose average XXXX to XXXX GNI per capita (PPS) is equal to or above 65 % and below 70 % of the EU-27 average: 3,3346 % of their GDP — for Member States whose average XXXX to XXXX GNI per capita (PPS) is equal to or above 70 % and below 75 % of the EU-27 average: 3,2398 % of their GDP — thereafter, the maximum level of transfer is reduced by 0,09 percentage points of GDP for each increment of 5 percentage points of average XXXX to XXXX per capita GNI (PPS) as compared to the EU-27 average. source: PE-491.057 2012/08/06 REGI 11 amendments... Amendment 1887 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Annex -I (new) – Part 1 – Section 1.1 – Paragraph 1.1.4 1.1.4 At all stages of the implementation of the Funds covered by the CPR, partnership must be organised so as to directly involve regional and local authorities in the preparation and eventual modification of Partnership Contracts, and also in the preparation, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of programmes. Social and economic partners, other public authorities, as well as bodies representing civil society, including environmental partners, non-governmental organisations and bodies responsible for promoting equality and non-discrimination must also be included in all phases mentioned above in order to ensure partnership in all phases of policy implementation. Amendment 1894 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Annex -I (new) – Part 1 – Section 1.2 – Paragraph 1.2.2 1.2.2 Sustainable Development considerations as well as the polluter pays principle must, therefore, be an integral part of every plan, from design to delivery, and monitoring to evaluation. Non- application of the polluter pays principle may be permitted only in exceptional cases foreseen by EU's primary legislation and provided that clear mitigating measures are in place. Amendment 1924 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Annex -I (new) – Part 1 – Section 1.4 – Paragraph 1.4.3 a (new) 1.4.3a Member States and region should take appropriate steps to ensure accessibility for persons with disabilities during the preparation and implementation of programmes and operations co-financed by the Funds covered by the CPR, and put in place positive actions to be supported by the Funds covered by the CPR to promote equal opportunities. Amendment 1931 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Annex -I (new) – Part 1 – Section 1.5 – Paragraph 1.5.4 1.5.4 In drawing up their programmes, Member States and regions must take account of the long-term challenges of demographic change. In those regions most affected by demographic change, they must identify measures to: a) support demographic renewal through better conditions for families and an improved balance between working and family life; b) boost employment; raise productivity and economic performance through investing in education and research; c) focus on the adequacy and quality of education, social protection and social support structures; and d) ensure cost-effective provision of health care, social services and long-term care including investment in infrastructure. Amendment 1940 # Vasilica Viorica DĂNCILĂ, Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Annex -I (new) – Part 1 – Section 1.6 – Paragraph 1.6.3 1.6.3 When developing their strategies and programmes with a view to identifying the most appropriate interventions, Member States and regions must pay particular attention to predominant territorial, structural and institutional features, such as mobility within the region, the employment patterns and labour structure; local potential for energy savings, sustainable use of resources and of renewable energies, biodiversity protection; rural- urban linkages; the local interdependencies between different sectors; cultural heritage; ageing and demographic shifts,; etc. Amendment 1966 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Annex -I (new) – Part 2 – Section 2.3 – Paragraph 2.3.4 2.3.4 The use of Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs), Sustainability Impact Assessments (SIAs), Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEAs) and other relevant instruments must be enhanced in order to prevent and take account of biodiversity loss and of the effects of climate change in territorial planning (including macro-regional strategies) and regional and local decision-making. Amendment 1970 # Vasilica Viorica DĂNCILĂ, Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Annex -I (new) – Part 2 – Section 2.3 – Paragraph 2.3.5 2.3.5 Member States and regions must promote green infrastructure, eco- innovation, ecosystem based solutions and the adoption of innovative technologies in order to create a greener economy. Amendment 1985 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Annex -I (new) – Part 2 – Section 2.5 – Paragraph 2.5.1 2.5.1 In order to maximise European added value, complementarity and coordination must be ensured, in the common fields of intervention, between the ERDF and the Cohesion Fund, Trans-European Networks and the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF), so as to ensure that optimal links of different types of infrastructure (in Transport, Energy and Telecommunications) at local, regional and national levels, and across the Union are provided for. Maximum leverage of funds must be ensured for projects with a European and Single Market dimension, in particular priority transport, energy and digital networks. Amendment 1990 # Vasilica Viorica DĂNCILĂ, Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Annex -I (new) – Part 2 – Section 2.5 – Paragraph 2.5.4 2.5.4. The white Paper on Transport sets out a vision for a competitive and resource-efficient transport system, highlighting that a 60% reduction in greenhouse gases is required from the transport sector by 2050 compared to 1990 figures. (...) The identified investments should be prioritised according to their contribution to mobility, sustainability, reduced environmental impact especially, reduced greenhouse gas emissions and the Single European Transport Area. Amendment 1995 # Vasilica Viorica DĂNCILĂ, Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Annex -I (new) – Part 2 – Section 2.5 – Paragraph 2.5.6 2.5.6. With regards to maritime transport, ports should be developed as efficient entry points through full integration with land infrastructure. Priority should be given to projects concerning port access and hinterland connections. The development of inland waterways should asses their environmental impact while reinforcing their contribution to sustainable European freight transport networks. Amendment 1996 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Annex -I (new) – Part 2 – Section 2.5 – Paragraph 2.5.7 2.5.7 In particular, complementarity must be sought between infrastructure investments by the ERDF and the Cohesion Fund, under shared management, and by the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF), which is a centrally managed facility with competitive project selection. The CEF will fund projects mostly on the core network (the strategically most important parts of the comprehensive network) that have the highest European added-value and appear to be the most complex with regard to the TEN-T in terms of implementation: cross-border missing links, key bottlenecks and interconnection of transport modes. The Cohesion Fund will concentrate on high European added- value projects in transport networks by supporting TEN-T infrastructure, for both the core and the comprehensive network. source: PE-491.163
24	2011/0302(COD) Connecting Europe Facility 2012/09/20 REGI 24 amendments... Amendment 26 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Recital 2 (2) A fully functioning single market depends on modern, integrated, highly performing infrastructure connecting Europe particularly in the areas of transport, energy and telecommunications. These growth enhancing connections would provide better access to the internal market and consequently contribute to a more competitive market economy in line with Europe 2020 Strategy's objectives and targets. Amendment 38 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Recital 13 (13) Experience with the current financial framework shows that ~~many~~some Member States, which are eligible to the Cohesion Fund, are facing significant obstacles in delivering on time complex cross-border transport infrastructure projects with a high Union added value. Therefore, in order to improve the delivery of transport projects, in particular cross-border ones, with a high Union added value, part of the Cohesion Fund ~~allocation (EUR 10 billion22 ) should be transf~~should be allocated, upon prior agreement between the Commission and the Member States concerrned, to finance transport projects on the transport core network in the Member States eligible to the Cohesion Fund under the Connecting Europe Facility. The Commission should support Member States eligible to the Cohesion Fund to develop an ~~adequate pipeline of projects in order to give greatest possible priority to the national allocations under the Cohesion Fund~~d implement agreed projects. Amendment 42 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Recital 13 a (new) (13a) Institutional and administrative capacity are essential prerequisites for an effective delivery of the objectives of the Connecting Europe Facility. The Commission should ensure that they are always at a sufficient level to design and implement projects, and wherever necessary it should offer appropriate means to the Member State concerned. Amendment 49 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Recital 44 (44) On the basis of the sector specific guidelines laid down in separate Regulations, a list of priority areas for which this Regulation should apply has been drawn up and should be included in the Annex. In order to take into account possible changes in political priorities and technological capabilities, as well as traffic flows, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of adopting amendments to the Annex. ~~It is of particular importance that t~~The Commission should carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Commission, when preparing and drawing-up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and to the Council. Amendment 61 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i (i) removing bottlenecks and bridging missing links both within transport infrastructure and at the connecting points at cross-border level, to be measured by the number of new and improved cross-border connections and removed bottlenecks on transport routes which have benefited from the Connecting Europe Facility; Amendment 76 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. The financial envelope for the implementation of the Connecting Europe Facility for the period 2014 to 2020 shall be EUR ~~50 000 000 00043~~XXX. That amount shall be distributed among the sectors referred to in Article 3 as follows: Amendment 77 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) transport: EUR ~~31 694 000 000~~XXX, out of which EUR ~~10 000 000 000 shall be transferred~~XXX shall be made available from the Cohesion Fund to be spent in line with this Regulation, with Regulation (EU) No [...]/2012 [CPR], and with Regulation (EU) No [...]/2012 [Cohesion Fund], in Member States eligible for funding from the Cohesion Fund; Amendment 81 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) energy: EUR ~~9 121 000 000~~XXX; Amendment 82 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) telecommunications: EUR ~~9 185 000 000~~XXX. Amendment 83 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph 3 3. Following the mid-term evaluation according to Article 26(1), the Commission may transfer appropriations between the sectors of the allocation set out in paragraph 1 up to a maximum of 10% per sector, with the exception of the EUR ~~10 000 000 000 transferred~~XXX made available from the Cohesion Fund to finance transport sector projects in the Cohesion Fund eligible Member States. Amendment 92 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new) The Commission shall stimulate and facilitate the achievement of the agreement referred to in the previous subparagraph, and shall report every year to the Parliament on the cases where problems are encountered, and on the nature of the difficulties. Amendment 94 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 8 – paragraph 7 7. Not recoverable VAT shall ~~not~~ be an eligible cost. Amendment 99 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point b – point i (i) rail and inland waterways: the amount of Union financial aid shall not exceed 20% of the eligible cost; the funding rate may be increased to 30% for actions addressing bottlenecks; the funding rate may be increased to 40% for actions concerning cross-border sections; 20% of the funding under the CEF shall be earmarked for programmes on border crossing points; Amendment 112 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 11 – title ~~Specific calls for funds transferred from~~ Projects financed withe Cohesion Fund resources in the field of transport Amendment 113 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 11 – paragraph 1 1. As regards the EUR 10 000 000 000 transferred from the Cohesion Fund [Regulation XXX Article XX] to be spent in Member States eligible for funding from the Cohesion Fund, specific calls shall be launched for projects implementing the core network exclusively in Member States eligible for funding from the Cohesion FundXXX made available from the Cohesion Fund to be spent for projects implementing the core network exclusively in Member States eligible for funding from the Cohesion Fund, the Commission shall adopt a decision by implementing act after a prior agreement with the Member State concerned, setting out the amount to be allocated and the transport infrastructure projects of European added value that will be carried out by each Member State. Amendment 115 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 11 – paragraph 2 2. Applicable rules for the transport sector under this Regulation shall apply to these specific calls. When implementing these calls, greatest possible priority shall be given to projects respecting the national allocations under the Cohesion Fund.deleted Amendment 121 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 11 – paragraph 3 – introductory part 3. By the way of derogation from Article 10, and as regards the EUR ~~10 000 000 000 transferred~~XXX made available from the Cohesion Fund [Regulation XXX Article XX] to be spent in Member States eligible for funding from the Cohesion Fund, the maximum funding rates shall be those applicable to the Cohesion Fund referred to in Article 22 and Article 110(3) of Regulation (EU) No XXX/2012 [Regulation laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund covered by the Common Strategic Framework and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006]45 for the following actions: Amendment 130 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 11 – paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. To ensure the highest possible absorption of the funds made available from the Cohesion Fund for Member States eligible to the Cohesion Fund, particular support shall be given to programme support actions under the Connecting Europe Facility aimed at strengthening institutional capacity and the efficiency of public administrations and public services related to the development and implementation of projects referred to in paragraph 1. Amendment 132 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 11 – paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. The resources of the Cohesion Fund used to finance for transport sector projects in the Cohesion Fund eligible Member States shall not count against the Cohesion Policy's capping system. Amendment 133 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point c (c) following an evaluation of the progress of the project, in particular in the event of major delays in the implementation of the action resulting from direct responsibility of the beneficiaries. Amendment 134 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 15 – paragraph 1 1. Actions supported by means of financial instruments shall be selected on a first come first served basis and shall seek sectoral diversification in accordance with Articles 3 and 4 as well as ~~gradual~~ensure geographical diversification across the Member States. Amendment 136 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 21 – paragraph 2 Member States shall for projects related to transport ~~and~~, energy and telecommunications sectors, undertake the technical monitoring and financial control of actions in close cooperation with the Commission and shall certify the reality and the conformity of the expenditure incurred in respect of projects or parts of projects. The Member States may request the participation of the Commission during on-the-spot checks. Amendment 137 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 21 – paragraph 3 In the field of telecommunications ~~in particular,~~ the national regulatory authorities shall also make every effort to ensure the required legal certainty and investment conditions facilitating the implementation of the projects receiving Union financial aid under this Regulation. Amendment 138 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a regulation Article 23 – paragraph 1 1. The Commission shall take appropriate measures ensuring that, when actions financed under this Regulation are implemented, the financial interests of the Union are protected by ensuring that costs are not disproportionate for infrastructure of the same type in the different Member States taking into due consideration local prices, by the application of preventive measures against fraud, corruption and any other illegal activities, by effective checks and, if irregularities are detected, by the recovery of the amounts wrongly paid and, where appropriate, by effective, proportional and deterrent penalties. source: PE-496.462
1	2011/2020(BUD) 2012 budget: all sections 2011/06/24 PETI 1 amendments... Amendment 7 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Encourages the Ombudsman to continue the good cooperation with the Committee on Petitions as well as with SOLVIT and the national ombudsmen with a view to sending complaints that do not fall within his remit rapidly and efficiently to the appropriate authority so as to best defend the rights of European citizens; source: PE-467.288
4	2011/2034(INI) Energy infrastructure priorities for 2020 and beyond 2011/03/24 REGI 4 amendments... Amendment 3 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Underlines that the upgrading and renewal of energy infrastructure are essential factors for achieving the objectives of the Europe 2020 Strategy; points out, in particular, the need to focus on renewable energies infrastructure, in order to reduce dependence over fossil fuels and reduce polluting emissions; notes that regional and local authorities play the most important role in the authorisation processes as well as in promoting EIPs to the general population; Amendment 15 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Stresses the need for a thorough environmental impact assessment of energy infrastructure projects, and the importance of preparing adequate reaction plans for the event of emergencies related to energy infrastructure, in particular to avoid environmental disasters. emphasizes that the reaction plans should foresee the way to deal with these events from the technical and economic point of view. Amendment 26 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Emphasiszes that cooperation between regions in the Member States and in the EU is a necessary component for successful implementation of EIPs and takes the view that macro-regional strategies can serve as cooperation platforms for cross-border projects; in this regard, underlines the importance that infrastructure projects are well coordinated, so as to guarantee the best possible cost-benefit ratio, and the maximum efficiency of the EU funds expenditure; Amendment 65 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission to ensure that financing of infrastructure investments is market-based and that unjustified fluctuations between Member States are therefore avoided, provided, however, that public interest – especially at local and regional level – is also safeguarded. source: PE-462.568
7	2011/2035(INI) EC 5th Cohesion Report and Strategy for the post-2013 Cohesion Policy 2011/04/20 REGI 7 amendments... Amendment 129 # Victor BOŞTINARU 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~~wards common challenges, thus permitting a more efficient, balanced and sustainable development; considers that better coordination of existing support mechanisms can create scope for more targeted use of the EU Structural Funds; Amendment 335 # Georgios STAVRAKAKIS, Constanze Angela KREHL, Derek VAUGHAN, Victor BOŞTINARU, Evgeni KIRILOV, María IRIGOYEN PÉREZ, Salvatore CARONNA, Francesco DE ANGELIS, Andrea COZZOLINO Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 30. Calls, in the interests of efficiency, for the elimination or merger of funds relevant to both regional development and cohesion; recommends that the Globalisation Fund be abandoned as a stand-alone instrument and that appropriate provision for its functions be included in the Social Fund; calls for consideration of whether a merger of the Cohesion Fund and the Regional Development Fund would be compatible with the European Treaties; points out that, as a rule, monies from the Regional Development Fund and the Cohesion Fund are spent on the same types of project;deleted Amendment 391 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 a (new) 36a. Points out that the exchange of best practices between the regions must be further strengthened, in consideration of the fact that it helps pursuing the objectives of a better and more efficient use of the funds; calls for the creation and timely implementation of programmes favouring this type of exchange, following the example of the Erasmus for elected local and regional representatives, for which requests that it is swiftly put into effects; Amendment 402 # Victor BOŞTINARU 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 State~~to be linked to conditionalities set out in the development and investment partnership contracts, requesting Member States to undertake reforms, in order to ensure that ~~it is~~funds are used efficiently in areas directly related to cohesion policy; considers it fair for such conditions to include, in particular, full implementation of existing EU legislation (e.g. on price regulation, tendering procedures, transport, the environment and health) in order to prevent irregularities and ensure effectiveness; rejects, however, the imposition of conditions requiring Member States to undertake fundamental social and economic reform; Amendment 432 # Georgios STAVRAKAKIS, Constanze Angela KREHL, María IRIGOYEN PÉREZ, Victor BOŞTINARU, Derek VAUGHAN Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41 41. C~~onsiders that the maximum level of support must not exceed 75%, otherwise applications will be driven less by the case for the projects than by the prospect of the funding they can attract~~alls on the Commission to examine and to establish the most appropriate maximum level of support on the basis of a thorough analysis of the development situation and the specific needs of the regions in the framework of each objective, in order to ensure that applications will respond to the real needs of each region and will aim to sustainable results in a long-term perspective; calls for it to be made easier for regions to use private co- financing and market-oriented credit options to cover their share of project financing; Amendment 473 # Georgios STAVRAKAKIS, Constanze Angela KREHL, Derek VAUGHAN, Victor BOŞTINARU, Patrice TIROLIEN 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 517 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 53 53. ~~Envisages that~~Calls for the Commission ~~will, in future, have~~to have, already in the next programming period, a greater responsibility for the improvement of national administrative procedures; takes the view, therefore, that it will be incumbent on the Commission to implement accreditation procedures for national or federal-state administrative and auditing bodies; ~~envisages linkage between, on the one hand,~~considers, that a successful accreditation and a reduction in the error rate ~~and, on the other,~~should lead to the entitlement to simplified ~~and less frequent~~ reporting; source: PE-462.896
17	2011/2317(INI) Annual Report of the activities of the Committee on Petitions 2011 2012/05/24 PETI 17 amendments... Amendment 10 # Michael CASHMAN, Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas the Committee on Petitions has the duty to constantly review and, where possible, to enhance its role, notably with regard to the development of democratic principles,; increased citizen participation in the EU decision-making process, improving transparency and accountability and whereas in its regular activity the Committee works closely with the Commission acting as the ‘Guardian of the Treaty’ which defines the Commission's role and prevents it from intervening in matters not covered by EU legislation; Amendment 20 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Recital F F. whereas the number of submissions by citizens to the European Parliament continues to increase, 998 petitions were declared admissible and 416 inadmissible, and whereas the Committee on Petitions should remain the main point of contact within the European Parliament regarding allegations of infringement of individual and collective rights; Amendment 28 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Recital I I. whereas petitions alleging a breach of fundamental rights lead the petitions league table, athe~~ad of the environment and the internal market, and whereas it is noteworthy that~~se rights being an important concern for European citizens as, using the crisis as a pretext, such rights are being increasingly neglected by the Member States, and whereas petitions regarding economic and monetary affairs have seen a sharp increase, which correlates with ~~the~~a similar increase in petitions ~~expressing the acute concern of citizens generally with the present economic and financial crisi~~concerning the present economic and financial crisis; the environment and the internal market remain key concerns; Amendment 30 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Recital K K. bearing in mind that the EIA Directive is presently under review and that the report by the Committee on Petitions on waste issues exposes serious shortcomings in several Member States; however, the implementation of this Directive remains insufficient and this problem will not be solved by the review but by more effective control by the European Commission; Amendment 34 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Recital M M. whereas in 2011 there were 70 petitions outstanding relating to the Spanish Ley de Costas; and whereas petitions relating to the Ley de Costas concerned specific regions of Spain as follows: Valencia 23, Andalusia 11, Catalonia 10, Balearic and Canary Islands 9 each, Asturias and Cantabria 3 each, Galicia and Basque Country 2 each, and Murcia 1, with 51 identifiable as coming from Spanish citizens or groups of Spanish citizens; while 19 came from other nationalities as follows: 3 from miscellaneous nationalities, 11 from German citizens, 3 from French citizens, 2 from British citizens; Amendment 38 # Michael CASHMAN, Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Recital O O. whereas the shortcomings and problems faced by people as a result of the malfunctioning of the internal market, as illustrated by petitions, are confirmed by the European Citizenship Report 20108 , in particular as regards free movement of EU citizens and their family members, access to social security entitlements, mutual recognition of qualifications, obstacles faced by the disabled, family law issues including same-sex couples and their children and mass expulsions on the basis of ethnic or national origin such as those affecting the Roma, including also double- taxation issues; Amendment 42 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Recital P P. bearing in mind, as regards the scope of the Committee’s action, that the legal service of the European Parliament has confirmed that its ‘...field of activity can be considered to be even wider than the mere sum of the competencies exercised by the Union’;Deleted Amendment 49 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Confirms the key role of the Committee on Petitions in identifying non-judicial remedies for citizens, in providing a reality check on the way in which EU legislation is transposed by the Member States and the way in which the European Union is seen by the people of Europe, and as a reflection of citizens’ views regarding whether European legislation actually delivers the expected result and responds to what people expect of the Union; Amendment 53 # Michael CASHMAN, Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Believes, therefore, that this role and responsibility should lead Parliament to consider ways of revitalising this fundamental part of parliamentary work ~~both~~ in terms of its visibility, accountability and transparency and in terms of improving its ability to raise issues of importance to European citizens in plenary, as well as by reinforcing its competence to call witnesses and investigate more independently issues raised by citizens; Amendment 61 # Michael CASHMAN, Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Welcomes Parliament's decision to develop a much more practical and visible petitions portal on its website, which will facilitate access for citizens to the petitions process, provide them with information and allow them to submit petitions in a more user-friendly environment; considers that this portal should also provide practical links to other forms of redress which are available at European and national or regional level as well as a comprehensive overview of the competence of the Petitions Committee; Amendment 64 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Confirms its determination to continue to promote and defend citizens’ fundamental rights by making use of its political influence regarding such admissible cases as may be raised with the committee, in close cooperation with the relevant authorities within the Member States of the Union and with the European Commission; Amendment 72 # Michael CASHMAN, Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9 a. Reiterates its numerous calls on the Member States to comply with their obligations under the Free Movement Directive 2004/38/EC on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the EU; reminds Member States of their obligation to facilitate entry and residence without any discrimination including for same-sex couples and their children, Roma and other minority groups; Amendment 76 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Nevertheless notes with concern that the issue of the Spanish Ley de Costas continues to be a major problem for European citizens, and for Spanish citizens in particular, and that no satisfactory solution has yet been offered to ensure that property owners within the reach of the jurisdiction of the Ley de Costas can safely assume proper title to homes which they have acquired through the correct legal process;deleted Amendment 84 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Continues to support the efforts of petitioners to ~~put pressure on the Spanish Government and local authorities to~~ resolve the problems surrounding the ~~Ley de Costas and its application~~application of the Ley de Costas; to this end supports the decision of the Petitions Committee to establish a working group at political level to consider the issue; Amendment 86 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Reiterates its belief that in the current economic circumstances it is in the interests of everyone to ensure the resolution of the legal uncertainty which surrounds properties potentially affected by the Ley de Costas;Deleted Amendment 94 # Michael CASHMAN, Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Urges the Spanish Government to revise the Ley de Costas in such a way as to guarantee title to those who have properly and in good faith acquired property within the reach of the jurisdiction of the Ley de Costas; in particular, calls for a reform of the Ley de Costas which ensures due process, a right of appeal, ~~proper~~satisfactory compensation, and the right to reliable information and which protects against retroactive or discriminatory actions; Amendment 103 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 ~~17. Reiterates its undertaking that Parliament will answer all citizens’ submissions, provided they do not contain offensive language or lack relevance;~~Deleted source: PE-489.586
22	2012/0297(COD) Assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment: provisions concerning the quality of the EIA 2013/05/13 PETI 22 amendments... Amendment 53 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Recital 3 (3) It is necessary to amend Directive 2011/92/EU in order to strengthen the quality of the environmental assessment procedure, streamline the various steps of the procedure and enhance coherence and synergies with other Union legislation and policies, as well as strategies and policies developed by Member States in areas of national competence. The ultimate purpose of amending this Directive is to bring about more effective implementation at Member State level. Amendment 58 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) Over the last decade, environmental issues, such as resource efficiency~~, biodiversity, climate change, and~~ and sustainability, biodiversity protection, combating climate change, and natural and man-made disaster risks, have become more important in policy making ~~and~~. They should therefore also constitute critical elements in the assessment and decision- making processes for any public or private project likely to have a significant impact on the environment, especially for infrastructure projects. Amendment 62 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Recital 5 (5) In its Communication entitled ‘Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe’, the Commission committed itself to including broader resource efficiency and sustainability considerations in the context of the revision of Directive 2011/92/EU. Amendment 63 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Recital 7 (7) The United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity ("the Convention"), to which the European Union is party, requires assessment~~, as far as possible and as appropriate,~~ of the significant adverse effects of projects on biological diversity, which is defined in Article 2 of the Convention, with a view to avoiding or minimising such effects. This prior assessment of impacts should contribute to attaining the Union headline target adopted on 2010 of halting biodiversity loss and the degradation of ecosystem services by 2020 and restoring them where feasible. Amendment 65 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) The measures taken to avoid~~, reduce and, if possible, offset~~ significant adverse effects on the environment should contribute to avoiding any deterioration in the quality of the environment and any net loss of biodiversity, in accordance with the Union’s commitments in the context of the Convention and the objectives and actions of the Union Biodiversity Strategy up to 2020. Amendment 68 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9) Climate change will continue to cause damage to the environment and compromise economic development. Accordingly, the environmental, social and economic resilience of the Union should be promoted so as to deal with climate change throughout the Union’s territory in an efficient manner. Climate change adaptation and mitigation responses need to be addressed now across many of the sectors of Union legislation. Amendment 70 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) Experience has shown that in cases of civil emergency compliance with the provisions of Directive 2011/92/EU may have adverse effects, and provision should therefore be made to authorise Member States not to apply that Directive in appropriate but strictly defined and limited cases. Amendment 74 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16) When determining whether significant environmental effects are likely to be caused, the competent authorities ~~should identif~~must define clearly and strictly the most relevant criteria to be considered and use the additional information that may be available following other assessments required by Union legislation in order to apply the screening procedure effectively and transparently. In this regard, it is appropriate to specify the content of the screening decision, in particular where no environmental assessment is required. Amendment 78 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Recital 18 (18) The environmental report of a project to be provided by the developer should include an assessment of all reasonable alternatives relevant to the proposed project, including the likely evolution of the existing state of the environment without implementation of the project (baseline scenario), as a means to improve quality of the assessment process and to allow integrating environmental considerations at an early stage in the project’s design. Amendment 83 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Recital 20 (20) With a view to ensuring transparency and accountability, the competent authority should be required to substantiate comprehensively and in detail its decision to grant development consent in respect of a project, indicating that it has taken into consideration the results of the consultations carried out ~~and the relevant information gathered~~with the public concerned and all the relevant information gathered. Should that condition not be met, the public concerned should have the right to appeal against the decision. Amendment 92 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b 2011/92/EU Article 1, paragraph 2, point g "environmental impact assessment" shall mean the process of preparing an environmental report on a public or private project, drawn up by an expert who is independent of both the competent authority and the project manager, carrying out mandatory consultations (including with the public concerned and the environmental authorities), ~~the assessment by the competent authority,~~ taking into account the environmental report and the results of the consultations in the development consent procedure as well as the provision of information on the decision in accordance with Articles 5 to 10. Amendment 105 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 2011/92/EU Article 3 – point d (d) the interaction between the factors referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) and the cumulative and cross-border effects of these factors; Amendment 107 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point a a (new) 2011/92/EU Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new) (aa) The following paragraph is inserted after paragraph 2: ‘2a. In setting the thresholds and criteria referred to in paragraph 2, the Member States shall endeavour to set flexible minimum thresholds and criteria so as not to exclude any public or private project that may have a significant impact on the environment;' Amendment 110 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point a 2011/92/EU Article 4 – paragraph 4 4. When a case-by-case examination is carried out or thresholds or criteria are set for the purpose of paragraph 2, the competent authority shall take account of selection criteria related to the characteristics and location of the project and its potential impact on the environment. The results of this examination must be published, and the individuals affected must be able to appeal. The detailed list of selection criteria to be used is specified in Annex III. Amendment 113 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point b 2011/92/EU Article 4 – paragraph 5 – point c (c) include a description of the measures envisaged to avoid~~, prevent~~ and pre~~duce~~vent any significant effects on the environment, where it is decided that no environmental impact assessment needs to be carried out pursuant to Articles 5 to 10; Amendment 117 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 2011/92/EU Article 5 – paragraph 1 ‘1. Where an environmental impact assessment must be carried out in accordance with Articles 5 to 10, the developer shall make use of the services of an accredited independent expert to prepare an environmental report. The environmental report shall be based on the determination pursuant to paragraph 2 of this Article and include the information that may reasonably be required for making informed decisions on the environmental impacts of the proposed project, taking into account current knowledge and methods of assessment, the characteristics, technical capacity and location of the project, the characteristics of the potential impact, alternatives to the proposed project and the extent to which certain matters (including the evaluation of alternatives) are more appropriately assessed at different levels including the planning level, or on the basis of other assessment requirements. The detailed list of information to be provided in the environmental report is specified in Annex IV. Amendment 125 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 2011/92/EU Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 The competent authority m~~ay also seek assistance from~~ust ensure that the report has been drafted or verified by accredited and technically competent experts referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article. Subsequent requests to the developer for additional information may only be made if these are justified by new circumstances and duly explained by the competent authority. Amendment 131 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 2011/92/EU Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 The detailed arrangements for the use and selection of accredited and technically competent experts (for example qualifications required, assignment of evaluation, licensing, and disqualification), shall be determined by the Member States. The Commission reserves the right to verify the independence of such experts and ensure that the selection process is carried out properly. Amendment 136 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b 2011/92/EU Article 6 – paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. In order to ensure the effective participation of the individuals affected in the decision-making procedures, as referred to in paragraph 4, the competent authority or authorities must show that due attention has been paid to the comments made and opinions expressed by the public. A genuine debate must be held and the competent authority or authorities must answer all questions from the public concerned. Amendment 137 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 2011/92/EU Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) a summary of the comments, opinions, questions and answers received pursuant to Articles 6 and 7; Amendment 138 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 2011/92/EU Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 For projects likely to have significant adverse transboundary effects, the competent authority shall ~~provide information for not having~~ taken into account comments received by the affected Member State during the consultations carried out pursuant to Article 7. Amendment 148 # Victor BOŞTINARU Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point a 2011/92/EU Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new) (da) the public concerned must be able to challenge the information provided, and the Member State must ensure that there is an effective procedure for appealing against the decision made; source: PE-510.694
14	2012/2099(INI) Role of EU cohesion policy and their actors in implementing the new European energy policy 2012/11/30 REGI 14 amendments... Amendment 2 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Recital A a (new) Aa. whereas the European Energy Policy should also ensure safety of the energy resources, diversification of the supplies, and affordable prices for the end user; Amendment 4 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas the ~~common~~primary objectives of the EU cohesion policy are the economic, social and territorial cohesion of Europe's regions through investment in growth and jobs; Amendment 7 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas the cohesion policy investments in the area of energy cshould contribute to the realisation of the objectives of both policies byand promot~~ing~~e growth in ~~underdeveloped regions~~regions lagging behind and local jobs creation, ~~and~~while ensuring security of energy supply across the whole EU; Amendment 25 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises, ~~in view~~as a consequence of the crisis' negative effect of increasing local and regional disparities in Europe, the need for strong EU support for cohesion; believes that European energy projects could contribute to regional development through investments in decentralised energy sources, energy efficiency and other measures which result in supporting growth and jobs; Amendment 39 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Believes that the regions of Europe should be able to focus on those energy sources which are best suited to the local conditions and that the EU should start ~~measur~~implementing European energy objectives on an EU-wide scale; Amendment 54 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Points out, with regard to large-scale energy projects, the possible capacity deficiencies of various regional and local authorities, which might seriously hamper implementation; believes, therefore, not only that JESSICA, ELENA and IEE- MLEI should be strengthened, but that ~~any energy allocations within the cohesion policy should be reviewed by 2018 in light of their absorption rate~~other support programmes should be envisaged; Amendment 59 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses, while supporting new financial instruments for energy projects, that this should be in addition to direct grants and co-financing of energy projects and not a replacement for them; draws the attention of the Member States and the Commission to the fact that individuals, small and medium-sized towns and rural communities should be eligible for direct funding aid for energy efficiency, use of renewable energies and building renovation projects as they are likely to lack the administrative capacity to use other financial instruments fully; Amendment 82 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Notes that, while Member States are changing their energy mixes in accordance with the EU's climate goals, many regions are dependent on fossil fuels; believes, therefore, that not only low-carbon, but all low-emission sources of energy, ~~such as shale gas~~including those of a transitional nature, ought to be accepted, i~~ncluding those of a transitional nature~~f they are proved not to have side-effects or negative consequences on the territories and people where they are produced or used; Amendment 89 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. Calls on the Commission to provide, on the basis of in-depth studies and case- analysis, on whether the production of natural gas from shale should be allowed and under which conditions. Believes that until when EU specific legislation is in place, such activity should be avoided; Amendment 91 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 b (new) 12b. Stresses the necessity to support research and innovation in the energy sector, as a tool to ensure secure, safe, competitive and sustainable new energy sources; underlines the important role Cohesion Policy can play in this field; Amendment 103 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Believes that excluding projects which might come under Directive 2003/87/EC from the ERDF and the CF support is likely to have a disproportional effect on less developed regions and delay their transition to low- emission regions; asks the Commission to further clarify and define which energy sectors would not be eligible for cohesion policy funding and to withdraw this exclusion from projects located in convergence regions; Amendment 104 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16a. Notes that district heating and cogeneration plants are widely present especially in Central-Eastern Europe; believes that their upgrade and the one of their distribution network, and where necessary the creation of high efficiency new plants, would have a positive environmental impact and should therefore be encouraged and supported by Cohesion Policy; Amendment 109 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Agrees that energy efficiency is vital to the EU's energy goals and should be promoted above all within the thematic concentration structure; believes that EU measures should support energy efficiency in ~~both energy consumption and production~~the production, distribution and consumption phases; Amendment 116 # Victor BOŞTINARU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Stresses that any EU energy policy requires the development of an integrated and interconnected energy system, and of local and regional smart distribution and transmission networks for electricity and gas, together with gas storage facilities; believes that the energy thematic concentration should support grid creation and renovation; source: PE-501.895
5	2012/2104(INI) Improving the delivery of benefits from EU environment measures: building confidence through better knowledge and responsiveness 2012/11/14 PETI 5 amendments... Amendment 1 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 1 2. Urges the Member States to ~~balance the needs of a heal~~take all the measures required to safeguard thye e~~conomy with those of the environ~~nvironment and encourage sustainable development; emphasises that local communities must have a strong say in deciding the best balance between the needs of people and the needs of wildlife; Amendment 7 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Believes that, since citizens and residents of Member States are best placed to judge the most appropriate priorities for their local neighbourhoods, the subsidiarity principle should be applied to environmental issues wherever possible and that consideration should be given to consulting the citizens concerned before any political decision is taken which would have an impact on their immediate environment; Amendment 8 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Considers that the ‘gold-plating’ of EU environmental legislation by Member States can have a perverse effect in terms of reducing the acceptance of such legislation; calls on the Member States to go further than required by EU directives only where there is a clear and popularly accepted need to do so;deleted Amendment 14 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Stresses the overwhelming need to develop new clean energy production capacities in the EU; recognises that this cannot be done without some impact on the environment, and urges the Union and the Member States to prioritise good landscaping post-production; Amendment 22 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Applauds the introduction of environmental impact assessments; nevertheless, urges that they be developed in full coherence with more traditional impact assessments, in particular with respect to their effect on the needs of small businesses and residents, as well as on flora and fauna and calls on the Member States to ensure that the relevant legislation is implemented more effectively, taking better account of the needs of small businesses and residents and of flora and fauna; expresses concern at the slowness with which Member States often carry out such assessments and calls, in the context of the future revision of the directive, for guarantees to be introduced concerning their impartiality and objectivity; source: PE-500.498
1	2012/2256(INI) European Semester for economic policy coordination: Annual Growth Survey 2013 2012/04/12 REGI 1 amendments... Amendment 18 # Vasilica Viorica DĂNCILĂ, Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. Iinvites Member States to pay particular attention to long life learning and retraining programs in order to avoid, in the following decades, a shortage of manpower in areas of interest; source: PE-501.919
4	2012/2259(INI) Current challenges and opportunities for renewable energy on the European internal energy market 2013/01/29 REGI 4 amendments... Amendment 1 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Maintains that investment in, and the exploitation of, renewable energy will promote economic development, new innovations, and sustainable growth in the EU's regions ~~and, moreover~~; moreover, this will ensure the diversification of energy supply and contribute to energy security, whille createing new jobs; Amendment 30 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Underlines that investments in the field of renewable energy sources are essential to allow their price become more competitive and comparable against traditional energy sources; Amendment 32 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Deems essential that investments in renewable energy sources are complemented by investments in a smart and interconnected distribution network, including smart grids; Amendment 48 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Points to the importance of self- sufficiency in energy and to the major role of European renewable energy sources, including slowly renewable sources, for regional economies; points out that the efforts to replace fossil and imported energy with locally produced European renewable energy are important ~~in the long~~already in the short-medium term in order to meet the targets set in the Energy Roadmap 2050 and the Europe 2020 strategy; source: PE-504.185
3	2012/2293(INI) Social housing in the European Union 2013/02/25 REGI 3 amendments... Amendment 13 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Welcomes the Commission's proposals for a regulation laying down common provisions (COM(2012)0496), a regulation on specific provisions concerning the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) (COM(2011)0614), a regulation on the Cohesion Fund (CF) (COM(2011)0612), and a regulation on the European Social Fund (ESF) (COM(2011)0607 final/2), which make full provision for priority investment in energy- efficiency improvements, the promotion of renewable energy sources, integrated sustainable urban development measures and action to combat exclusion by providing marginalised communities with access to high-quality housing and social services at affordable prices; Amendment 24 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Encourages the Member States to cooperate with local and regional authorities, in accordance with the principle of multi-level governance, to establish priorities and methods of using – on a joint basis, wherever possible – the ERDF, the CF, the ESF, and, in the case of social housing in rural areas and small and medium-sized towns, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD); considers that greater integration of the Structural and Investment Funds could encourage the sustainable development of disadvantaged areas, thus avoiding the pernicious effects of segregation and promoting social homogeneity and cohesion; hopes that technical assistance programmes and specialised funds will be maintained and extended; Amendment 32 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Notes that investment in social housing plays a part in more far-reaching policies and has a beneficial impact on the local economy in terms of job creation, social inclusion, wealth, support for local SMEs, public health and environmental protection; points out that energy efficiency and renewable energy measures in social housing can also play a fundamental role in achieving the EU 2020 goals; source: PE-506.057
3	2013/2017(BUD) 2014 budget: mandate for trilogue 2013/04/25 REGI 3 amendments... Amendment 3 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Is concerned that the uncertainty linked to the adoption of the MFF constitutes an obstacle for any serious budgetary planning, which is quite worrying as 2104 is the start of the new programming period and ~~affects~~ Cohesion Policy ins particularly affected; Amendment 5 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. Points out that the idea of creating a Connecting Europe Facility is not viable without the adoption of the new MFF, and that its link with the Cohesion Fund would only be realistic if sufficient resources are made available and adequate requirements are in place; Amendment 6 # Victor BOŞTINARU Draft opinion Paragraph 2 b (new) 2 b. Expresses its concern that suspensions of payments exerted by the Commission might in some cases be linked to the shortfall in available resources, with the consequent application of stricter criteria; source: PE-510.577

Victor BOŞTINARU on

Activities

Term 7 14.07.2009 / ...

Term 6 20.07.2004 - 13.07.2009

All references link to europarl.eu

History

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

2013-06-04

RSS

deleted

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/rss/mep/victor.bostinaru/en.xml

2013-05-03

2013-05-02

Committees/0	added	end 9999-12-31 committee_id PETI start 2012-01-19 role Member abbr PETI Organization Committee on Petitions
Committees/1	added	end 9999-12-31 committee_id REGI start 2012-01-19 role Member abbr REGI Organization Committee on Regional Development
Committees/2/end	added	2012-01-18
Committees/2/start	added	2009-07-16
Committees/3	added	end 2012-01-18 committee_id PETI start 2009-07-16 role Member abbr PETI Organization Committee on Petitions
Committees/4/end	added	2009-07-13
Committees/4/start	added	2007-12-12
Committees/5	added	end 2009-07-13 committee_id REGI start 2007-12-12 role Member abbr REGI Organization Committee on Regional Development
Committees/6	added	end 2009-07-13 committee_id CULT start 2007-12-12 role Substitute abbr CULT Organization Committee on Culture and Education
Constituencies/0/end	added	9999-12-31
Constituencies/1	added	party Partidul Social Democrat end 2009-07-13 start 2007-12-10 country Romania
Delegations/0/abbr	deleted	D-CN
Delegations/0/end	added	9999-12-31
Delegations/0/start	added	2012-02-16
Delegations/1/abbr	deleted	DSEE
Delegations/1/end	added	9999-12-31
Delegations/1/start	added	2012-02-15
Delegations/2	added	Organization Delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China end 2012-02-15 role Member abbr None start 2012-02-14
Delegations/3	added	Organization Delegation for relations with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo end 2012-02-14 role Vice-Chair abbr None start 2009-09-17
Delegations/4	added	Organization Delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China end 2011-04-06 role Substitute abbr None start 2009-09-16
Delegations/5	added	Organization Delegation for relations with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo end 2009-09-16 role Member abbr None start 2009-09-16
Delegations/6	added	Organization Delegation for relations with the countries of south-east Europe end 2009-07-13 role Member abbr None start 2007-12-13
Delegations/7	added	Organization Delegation to the EU-Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Joint Parliamentary Committee end 2009-07-13 role Substitute abbr None start 2007-12-12
Groups/0/end	added	9999-12-31
Groups/0/start	added	2009-07-14
Groups/1	added	Organization Socialist Group in the European Parliament end 2009-07-13 role Member groupid PSE start 2007-12-10
RSS	added	http://www.europarl.europa.eu/rss/mep/victor.bostinaru/en.xml
active	changed	Old True New

2012-11-05

2012-09-27

2012-09-26

2012-04-02

2012-03-14

2012-03-09

2012-03-08

2012-02-17

2012-02-15

2012-02-10

Committees/0	added	Organization Regional Development role Member abbr REGI committee_id REGI
Committees/0	deleted	end 2014-01-31 committee_id REGI start 2009-01-14 role Member abbr REGI Organization Regional Development
Committees/1	added	Organization Petitions role Member abbr PETI committee_id PETI
Committees/1	deleted	end 2014-01-31 committee_id PETI start 2009-01-14 role Member abbr PETI Organization Petitions
Constituencies/0	added	country Romania party Partidul Social Democrat start 2009-07-14
Constituencies/0	deleted	country Romania end 2014-01-31 start 2009-01-14 party Partidul Social Democrat
Delegations/0	added	Organization Delegation for relations with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo role Vice-Chair abbr DSEE
Delegations/0	deleted	start 2009-01-14 role Vice-Chair end 2014-01-31 abbr DSEE Organization Delegation for relations with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo
Groups/0	added	Organization Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament role Member groupid S&D
Groups/0	deleted	Organization Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament role Member end 2014-01-31 groupid S&D start 2009-01-14
Staff/0	added	Organization European Parliament role Member abbr PE
Staff/0	deleted	start 2009-01-14 role Member end 2014-01-31 abbr PE Organization European Parliament

2012-01-21

Addresses	added	Brussels Phone +322 28 45832 Fax +322 28 49832 Address Building Bât. Altiero Spinelli City Bruxelles/Brussel Office 13G257 Zip B-1047 building_code ASP Street 60, rue Wiertz / Wiertzstraat 60 Organization Parlement européen Postal Parlamentul European Rue Wiertz Altiero Spinelli 13G257 B-1047 Bruxelles Strasbourg Phone +333 88 1 75832 Fax +333 88 1 79832 Address Building Bât. Louise Weiss City Strasbourg Office T08139 building_code LOW Street 1, avenue du Président Robert Schuman Zip2 F-67070 Organization Parlement européen Zip1 CS 91024
Birth	added	date 1952-05-17 place Valea Mare
CV	added	Graduate of the Faculty of History and Geography, University of Bucharest (1974); Graduate of the Faculty of History and Philosophy, University of Bucharest (1981). Teacher of history and geography, General School, Greci, Dâmboviţa county (1974-1977); Teacher of history, General School No 3, Găieşti, Dâmboviţa county (1977-1989). Vice-President, National Salvation Front (FSN) (1991); Vice-President, Democratic Party (1991); International Secretary, Democratic Party (1993-2000); Member, Party for Social Democracy in Romania (PDSR) (2001). Head, Department of International Relations, Social Democratic Party (PSD) (2001-2003); International Secretary, PSD (2003-2007); Vice-President, Department for External Policy and European Affairs (2005-2007); President, FSN Council, Găieşti, Dâmboviţa county (1989-1990); President, Provisional National Unity Council, Găieşti, Dâmboviţa county (1990-1990). Member of Parliament for Dâmboviţa (1990-2000); Member, Committee on External Relations, Chamber of Deputies, Romanian Parliament (1990-2000); Parliamentary group leader, Democratic Party (April-December 1992); Member, Romanian delegation to the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly (1992-1996); Deputy parliamentary group leader, Democratic Party (April 1994); Secretary (1996) and President (1996-2000), Committee on External Relations, Chamber of Deputies; Member (1996-2000) and President (July-December 2000), Committee on European Integration, Chamber of Deputies; Adviser on external policy and international relations to the President of the Chamber of Deputies (March 2001-October 2004 and January 2005-April 2006); State Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs (November-December 2004). Member of the European Parliament (December 2007-). PSD representative, Coordination Group of the Party of European Socialists (from 2004) and the Socialist International's Committee for South-East Europe (from 2004); PSD delegate to the Council of the Socialist International (Geneva 2007, Athens 2006), the Congress of the Party of European Socialists (Brussels 2004 and 2006), and the Council of the Socialist International (Madrid 2004, Rome 2003, Casablanca 2002 and Santo Domingo 2001). Founder and Vice-President, National Advisory Council for Euro-Atlantic Integration (1993-1996); Founder member and Secretary-General, Romanian Atlantic Council (1993-1996); Participant in USIA programme (March 2003); Member, Manfred Wörner Foundation; Founder member, 'Casa NATO' Association; Participant in meetings of the Atlantic Treaty Association.
Committees	added	end 2014-01-31 committee_id REGI start 2009-01-14 role Member abbr REGI Organization Regional Development end 2014-01-31 committee_id PETI start 2009-01-14 role Member abbr PETI Organization Petitions
Constituencies	added	country Romania end 2014-01-31 party Partidul Social Democrat start 2009-01-14
Delegations	added	start 2009-01-14 end 2014-01-31 role Vice-Chair abbr DSEE Organization Delegation for relations with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo
Gender	added	M
Groups	added	Organization Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament end 2014-01-31 role Member groupid S&D start 2009-01-14
Mail	added	victor.bostinaru@europarl.europa.eu
Name	added	aliases bostinaruvictor victorbostinaru boştinaru victor victor bostinaru VictorBOSTINARU BOSTINARU BOŞTINARUVictor victor boştinaru Victor BOŞTINARU BOŞTINARU bostinaru BOSTINARUVictor VictorBOŞTINARU victorboştinaru bostinaru victor boştinaruvictor Victor BOSTINARU boştinaru BOŞTINARU Victor BOSTINARU Victor full Victor BOŞTINARU sur Victor family BOŞTINARU familylc boştinaru
Photo	added	http://www.europarl.europa.eu/mepphoto/39711.jpg
RSS	added	http://www.europarl.europa.eu/rss/mep/victor.bostinaru/en.xml
Staff	added	start 2009-01-14 end 2014-01-31 role Member abbr PE Organization European Parliament
UserID	added	39711
active	added	True
assistants	added	local CHIRULESCU Oana CIOLACU Anca-Stefana DONICI Iulian DUMITRU Angela-Ramona HIRICA Iuliana-Cristina accredited CAPEZZUTO Dario MATEI Oana

Committees/0/Organization	changed	Old Regional Development New Committee on Regional Development
Committees/1/Organization	changed	Old Petitions New Committee on Petitions
Staff	deleted	Organization European Parliament role Member abbr PE

Parltrack