REPORT on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an action programme for the enhancement of quality in higher education and the promotion of intercultural understanding through co-operation with third countries (Erasmus Mundus) (2009-2013)

7.7.2008 - (COM(2007)0395 – C6‑0228/2007 – 2007/0145(COD)) - ***I

Committee on Culture and Education
Rapporteur: Marielle De Sarnez
Draftsmen (*): Samuli Pohjamo, Committee on Foreign Affairs,
Alessandro Battilocchio, Committee on Development
(*) Procedure with associated committees - Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an action programme for the enhancement of quality in higher education and the promotion of intercultural understanding through co-operation with third countries (Erasmus Mundus) (2009-2013)

(COM(2007)0395 – C6‑0228/2007 – 2007/0145(COD))

(Codecision procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–   having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2007)0395),

–   having regard to Articles 251(2) and Article 149(4) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6‑0228/2007),

–   having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

–   having regard to the report of the Committee on Culture and Education and the opinions of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Development, the Committee on Budgets, the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs and the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality (A6‑0294/2008),

1.  Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

2.  Considers that the financial envelope indicated in the legislative proposal must be compatible with the ceiling of heading 1a of the new multiannual financial framework (MFF) and points out that the annual amount will be decided within the annual budgetary procedure in accordance with the provisions of point 37 of the IIA of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management[1];

3.  Notes that the mandate of the Education and Culture Executive Agency does not cover the proposed extension of the Erasmus Mundus programme; stresses that implementation of the programme by the Executive Agency will only be possible after a duly approved extension of the mandate, in accordance with the legal provisions in force;

4.  Notes that the indicative overall amount of EUR 460 million proposed for the financing of Action 2 of the programme would be covered by the financial envelopes of the respective external policy instruments;

5.  Stresses that financing of the activities foreseen under Action 2 must not be detrimental to other activities financed under the respective instruments; reiterates its position that new actions should only be financed from the EU budget when additional financial means are provided for them; calls on the Commission to provide the Parliament with an annual report presenting detailed data on the activities under Action 2 and their breakdown by financial instrument and among the regions and countries concerned;

6.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

7.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.

Amendment  1 Proposal for a decision Title
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an action programme for the enhancement of quality in higher education and the promotion of intercultural understanding through co-operation with third countries (Erasmus Mundus) (2009-2013)	Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Erasmus Mundus 2009-2013 programme for the enhancement of quality in higher education and the promotion of intercultural understanding through co-operation with third countries
Amendment  2 Proposal for a decision Recital 2 a new
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(2a) The new programme is consistent with the objective of excellence set out in the 2004-2008 programme. It helps attract the best students from third countries through the quality of the studies on offer, the quality of the reception arrangements and a scholarship scheme that can compete with any in the world.
Amendment  3 Proposal for a decision Recital 2b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(2b) In the course of negotiating the external assistance instruments and the Interinstitutional Agreement on budgetary discipline and sound financial management, the European Parliament and the Commission reached a number of understandings on democratic scrutiny and the coherence of external action, set out in the declarations annexed to the Interinstitutional Agreement. The consultation process and dialogue with the European Parliament will operate in accordance with the latter's rights under Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission1, and in particular Article 8 thereof.
	___________________________________ 1 OJ L 184, 17.7.1999, p. 23. Decision as amended by Decision 2006/512/EC (OJ L 200, 22.7.2006, p. 11).
Justification
The agreement on the new external assistance instruments (the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument - ENPI, the Instrument for Stability - IfS, and the Pre-Accession Instrument - IPA) grants the European Parliament increased scrutiny over the implementation of Community assistance.
Amendment  4 Proposal for a decision Recital 7
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(7) Enhancing the quality of European higher education, promoting understanding between peoples as well as contributing to the sustainable development of third countries in the field of higher education avoiding brain-drain whilst favouring vulnerable groups are the core objectives of a higher education cooperation programme aimed at third countries. The most effective means to achieve these aims in a programme of excellence are highly integrated study programmes at postgraduate level, collaborative partnerships with third countries, scholarships for the most talented students and projects to enhance the worldwide attractiveness of European higher education.	(7) Enhancing the quality of European higher education, promoting understanding between peoples as well as contributing to the sustainable development of higher education in third countries whilst avoiding brain-drain are the core objectives of a higher education cooperation programme aimed at third countries. The most effective means to achieve these aims in a programme of excellence are highly integrated study programmes at postgraduate level and, at all study levels, collaborative partnerships with third countries, scholarships for the most talented students and projects to enhance the worldwide attractiveness of European higher education. In its evaluation of the programme, the Commission will pay particular attention to potential brain-drain effects and to the socio-economic background of the people concerned.
Amendment  5 Proposal for a decision Recital 7 a new
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(7a) In order to ensure that the beneficiaries of the programme enjoy a high quality welcome and stay, administrative formalities should be eased and the Member States should therefore be encouraged to look into the introduction of a specific visa for beneficiaries of the Erasmus Mundus programme as part of the Regulation establishing a Community Code on visas currently under consideration.
Justification
It is important to make it easier for students from third countries to obtain visas, particularly for those moving around the EU. The best means of doing so would be to allow them to benefit during this period of mobility from a specific visa designed for students selected for the "Erasmus Mundus" programme.
Amendment  6 Proposal for a decision Recital 9
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(9) Promoting the teaching and learning of languages and linguistic diversity should be a priority of Community action in the field of higher education. The teaching and learning of languages is of special relevance in relation to third countries.	(9) Promoting the teaching and learning of at least two languages and linguistic diversity is a priority of Community action in the field of higher education. The teaching and learning of languages are of special relevance in relation to third countries and to the European students who go to those countries.
Amendment  7 Proposal for a decision Recital 9a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(9a) The objectives of the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue 2008 should also be promoted with regard to higher education, by means of education actions and programmes
Justification
The objectives of the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue 2008 are fully shared by the European Union and all the programmes implemented by it. With a view to achieving more effective results from this Year, the objectives of multiculturalism should also be adapted in the field of education programmes such as Erasmus Mundus.
Amendment  8 Proposal for a decision Recital 10
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(10) The Commission Communication “Europe in the world – some practical proposals for greater coherence, effectiveness and visibility”1 addresses the external challenges which Europe faces, including how to use available internal and external policies more coherently and effectively. Moreover, within the context of the Commission Communication "The Western Balkans on the road to the EU: consolidating stability and raising prosperity", the Commission has recommended expanding mobility opportunities for academics and students at all levels of higher education from that region. 1 COM (2006)0278	(10) To strengthen European Union relations with the Western Balkans, particular attention is paid to the mobility of students in higher education and academics from that region. The participation of universities from these countries in consortia and partnerships should be promoted.
Justification
Students and academics from countries moving towards pre-accession status should be able to be active participants in this programme so that they can add a European dimension to their courses and facilitate their future integration into the European Union.
Amendment  9 Proposal for a decision Recital 10 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(10a) The promotion of European common values and people-to-people contacts in the context of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), in particular through educational and youth exchanges, must lie at the core of the Erasmus Mundus programme, supported by a policy dialogue aimed at reinforcing modernisation and reform efforts by the partner countries in the area of education, and must contribute to an improvement in knowledge of foreign languages and cultures and to the fostering of intercultural dialogue, as well as to convergence with EU policies, including the Bologna and Copenhagen processes. Mobility of teaching staff and researchers is an essential part of increasing research cooperation between the EU and the ENP countries and improving excellence, but it is also important to take measures to prevent a brain drain in this field.
Justification
This year is the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue, and the European Union should also make use of the Erasmus Mundus programme to promote the learning of foreign languages and familiarisation with foreign cultures and to foster intercultural dialogue. At the same time, the importance should be stressed of moving ahead with the Bologna and Copenhagen processes and encouraging mobility and exchanges among the teaching profession to help improve the quality of education. Finally, emphasis should be placed on the need to avoid brain drain.
Amendment  10 Proposal for a decision Recital 11
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(11) In the period 2004-2008, country-specific scholarships funded from the Commission's external cooperation instruments complemented the Erasmus Mundus scholarships in order to extend the number of beneficiary students coming from specific third countries, such as China, India, the Western Balkan countries or the ACP countries, to study in Europe. Given the positive experience with this approach, similar opportunities could be envisaged in the future in accordance with the political priorities, rules and procedures of the external co-operation instruments in question.	(11) In the period 2004-2008, country-specific scholarships funded from the Commission's external cooperation instruments complemented the Erasmus Mundus scholarships in order to extend the number of beneficiary students coming from specific third countries, such as China, India, the Western Balkan countries or the ACP countries, to study in Europe. Similar opportunities could be envisaged in the future in accordance with the political priorities, rules and procedures of the external co-operation instruments in question, in line with the programme's objectives for academic excellence established by this decision and with a balanced geographical and social representation of beneficiaries.
Justification
The Erasmus Mundus label attached to joint programmes and partnerships should be a quality label. Compliance with the objectives for academic excellence provides such a guarantee. This programme should also be designed to benefit all geographical regions of the world in a balanced fashion.
Amendment  11 Proposal for a decision Recital 11b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(11b) The necessary measures and conditions must be put in place to enable undergraduates, doctoral students, postdoctoral researchers and academics from third countries to return home once their period of residence is over, thus preventing 'brain drain';
Amendment  12 Proposal for a decision Recital 13
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(13) There is a need to widen access for those from disadvantaged groups and to address actively the special learning needs of people with disabilities in the implementation of all parts of the programme, including through the use of higher grants to reflect the additional costs of disabled participants.	(13) There is a need to widen access for those from disadvantaged groups and persons coming from a poor or minority background, and address actively the special needs of people with disabilities including through the use of higher grants to reflect the additional costs of these participants.
Justification
Particular attention should be paid to students and academics with disabilities or those with learning difficulties so that they can also take part in this programme.
Amendment  13 Proposal for a decision Recital 13 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(13a) In order to give the programme more publicity inside and outside the EU, to achieve its objectives to a greater extent and disseminate the results of the programme, there is a need for an integrated public information policy to provide citizens with reliable and complete information on each of the actions and opportunities the programme offers and clarification of the procedures tobe followed. The information policy, which should primarily be conveyed through the participating higher education institutions, is of particular importance, principally in countries with low levels of participation in the programme.
Amendment  14 Proposal for a decision Recital 14
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(14) Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities as amended by Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1995/2006 and Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002 as amended by Commission Regulation No 478/2007 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation 1605/2002 as amended by Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1995/2006, which safeguard the Community’s financial interests, have to be applied taking into account the principles of simplicity and consistency in the choice of budgetary instruments and the required proportionality between the amount of resources and the administrative burden related to their use.	(14) Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities as amended by Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1995/2006 and Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002 as amended by Commission Regulation No 478/2007 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation 1605/2002 as amended by Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1995/2006, which safeguard the Community’s financial interests, have to be applied taking into account the principles of simplicity and consistency in the choice of budgetary instruments and in line with the programme's objectives for academic excellence and the required proportionality between the amount of resources and the administrative burden related to their use.
Justification
The financing of Action 2 activities ‘Erasmus Mundus partnerships’ should comply with the various EDF, DCI, ENPI, ICI and IPA rules and beneficiaries should always be selected in accordance with the excellence criteria.
Amendment  15 Proposal for a decision Recital 15 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(15a) The measures necessary for the implementation of this Decision should be adopted in accordance with Decision 1999/468/EC.
Amendment  16 Proposal for a decision Recital 15 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(15b) In particular power should be conferred on the Commission to define the general guidelines for implementation of the programme and the selection criteria. Since those measures are of general scope and are designed to amend non-essential elements of this Decision, or supplement this Decision by the addition of new non-essential elements, they should be adopted in accordance with the regulatory procedure with scrutiny provided for in Article 5a of Decision 1999/468/EC.
Amendment  17 Proposal for a decision Recital 16
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(16) The measures necessary for the implementation of actions referred to in Article 4(1)(a) and Article 4(1)(c) of this Decision should be adopted in accordance with Council Decision 1999/468/EC laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission[19]. The measures necessary for the implementation of the action referred to in Article 4(1)(b) of this Decision should be adopted in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1085/2006 of the Council establishing an Instrument for Pre-Accession, Regulation (EC) No 1638/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument, Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down general provisions establishing a financing instrument for development cooperation, Regulation (EC) No 1934/2006 of the Council establishing a financing instrument for cooperation with industrialised and other high-income countries and territories, the Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States and the European Community and its Member States, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000, as amended by the Agreement signed in Luxembourg on 25 June 2005 (Council Decision 2005/599/EC), and its Internal Agreement between the representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting with the Council, on the financing of Community aid under the multiannual financial framework for the period 2008 to 2013 in accordance with the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement and on the allocation of financial assistance for the Overseas Countries and Territories to which Part Four of the EC Treaty applies (Decision No 1/2006 of the ACP-EC Council of Ministers, 2006/608/EC).	(16) In line with the programme's objectives for academic excellence, the measures necessary for the implementation of actions referred to in Article 4(1)(a) and Article 4(1)(c) of this Decision should be adopted in accordance with Council Decision 1999/468/EC laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission[19]. The measures necessary for the implementation of the action referred to in Article 4(1)(b) of this Decision should be adopted in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1085/2006 of the Council establishing an Instrument for Pre-Accession, Regulation (EC) No 1638/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument, Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down general provisions establishing a financing instrument for development cooperation, Regulation (EC) No 1934/2006 of the Council establishing a financing instrument for cooperation with industrialised and other high-income countries and territories, the Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States and the European Community and its Member States, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000, as amended by the Agreement signed in Luxembourg on 25 June 2005 (Council Decision 2005/599/EC) (hereafter referred to as 'ACP-EC Agreement'), and its Internal Agreement between the representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting with the Council, on the financing of Community aid under the multiannual financial framework for the period 2008 to 2013 in accordance with the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement and on the allocation of financial assistance for the Overseas Countries and Territories to which Part Four of the EC Treaty applies (Decision No 1/2006 of the ACP-EC Council of Ministers, 2006/608/EC).
Amendment  18 Proposal for a decision Article 1 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. This Decision establishes a programme - ‘Erasmus Mundus’ (hereinafter ‘the programme’) - for the enhancement of quality in European higher education and the promotion of intercultural understanding through cooperation with third countries as well as for the development of third countries in the field of higher education.	1. This Decision establishes a programme - ‘Erasmus Mundus’ (hereinafter ‘the programme’) - both for the promotion of quality in European higher education and intercultural understanding through cooperation with third countries, and for the development of third countries in the field of higher education. The programme should be implemented in line with the objectives for academic excellence and with a balanced geographical representation.
Justification
The inspiration behind the programme set up in 2004 was to promote high quality European higher education to attract the best students from third countries. This should remain the primary objective of the 2009-2013 programme. The Commission should ensure that all the actions in the programme meet the objectives of academic excellence and a balanced geographical representation.
Amendment  19 Proposal for a decision Article 1 - paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. The development of human resources in specific third countries, and more particularly the action of the programme referred to in Article 4(1)(b), shall be implemented in accordance with Regulations (EC) No 1085/2006, 1638/2006, 1905/2006 and 1934/2006 and Decisions (EC) No 599/2005 and 608/2006.	4. The development of human resources in specific third countries, and more particularly the action of the programme referred to in Article 4(1)(b), shall be implemented in accordance with Regulations (EC) No 1085/2006, 1638/2006, 1905/2006, in particular Article 2(4) thereof, and 1934/2006, Decisions (EC) No 599/2005 and 608/2006 and the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement.
Justification
Ensures the Erasmus Mundus decision will be fully compatible with the Cotonou Agreement and DCI, particularly the DCI provision requiring 100% of geographical programme funding to meet the OECD/DAC requirements for classification as ODA.
Amendment  20 Proposal for a decision Article 2 - point 14
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
14. “mobility” means moving physically to another country, in order to undertake study, work experience, research, other learning or teaching or research activity or related administrative activity, supported as appropriate by preparation in the host language;	14. “mobility” means moving physically to another country, in order to undertake study, work experience, research, other learning or teaching or research activity or related administrative activity, supported wherever possible by preparation in the host language;
Justification
Language learning is one of the keys to familiarisation with other cultures and should be highlighted in this programme as a way for students to integrate.
Amendment  21 Proposal for a decision Article 3 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The programme's overall aim is to enhance the quality of European higher education and to promote dialogue and understanding between peoples and cultures through cooperation with third countries as well as to promote EU external policy objectives and the sustainable development of third countries in the field of higher education.	1. The programme's aim is to promote European higher education, to help improve and enhance the career prospects for young people and intercultural understanding through cooperation with third countries, in accordance with EU external policy objectives in order to contribute to the sustainable development of third countries in the field of higher education.
Amendment  22 Proposal for a decision Article 3 – paragraph 2 – introductory sentence
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The programme's specific objectives are:	2. The specific objectives of the programme are:
Amendment  23 Proposal for a decision Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
a) to foster structured cooperation between higher education institutions and academic staff in Europe and third countries with a view to creating centres of excellence and providing highly trained human resources;	a) to promote an offer of enhanced quality in higher education with a distinct European added value, attractive both within the European Union and beyond its borders, the aim being to create centres of excellence;
Amendment  24 Proposal for a decision Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
b) to contribute to the mutual enrichment of societies by developing a pool of well-qualified, open-minded and internationally experienced women/men through promoting mobility for the most talented students and academics from third countries to obtain qualifications and/or experience in the European Union and for the most talented European students and academics towards third countries;	b) to help highly qualified students and academics obtain qualifications and/or experience inside the European Union so that they are able to satisfy the requirements of the labour market and, within the specific framework of partnerships, encourage highly qualified students and academics to share their experience or qualifications upon their return to their country of origin;
Amendment  25 Proposal for a decision Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
c) to contribute towards the development of human resources and the international cooperation capacity of higher education institutions in third countries through increased mobility streams between the European Union and third countries;	c) to ensure a more structured international cooperation between higher education institutions thanks to greater mobility between the European Union and third countries;
Amendment  26 Proposal for a decision Article 3 - paragraph 2 - point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) to improve accessibility and enhance the profile and visibi­lity of European higher education in the world as well as its attractiveness for third-country nationals.	(d) to improve accessibility and enhance the profile and visibi­lity of European higher education in the world as well as its attractiveness for third-country nationals and citizens of Member States.
Justification
As the programme is now open on equal terms to citizens of Member States and third-country nationals, the campaign to promote higher education must be carried on within and outside the Union. Excellence must be promoted globally.
Amendment  27 Proposal for a decision Article 3 - paragraph 2 - point d a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	da) to achieve a regional balance in the support provided for partnerships with third countries, as provided for in the Annex.
Justification
The programme should seek to achieve a regional balance and support educational exchange with regions with less "excellent" HEIs and offer special support for these regions.
Amendment  28 Proposal for a decision Article 3 – paragraph 2a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. For actions funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006, the objectives shall be limited to those in conformity with that Regulation, particularly Article 2(4) thereof.
Justification
Ensures the continued applicability of the DCI provision requiring 100% of geographical programme funding to meet the OECD/DAC requirements for classification as ODA.
Amendment  29 Proposal for a decision Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) Erasmus Mundus joint masters programmes and joint doctoral programmes of outstanding academic quality, including a scholarship scheme;	(a) Action 1: Erasmus Mundus joint programmes (masters and doctorates) of outstanding academic quality, including a scholarship scheme;
Amendment  30 Proposal for a decision Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) partnerships between European and third-country higher education institutions as a basis for structural co-operation, exchange and mobility at all levels of higher education;	(b) Action 2: Erasmus Mundus partnerships between European and third-country higher education institutions as a basis for structural co-operation, exchange and mobility, including a scholarship scheme;
Justification
Clarification that this action is only open to students and academics with an excellent university education, in order to avert any misunderstandings in the calls for tender that might open this programme up to political refugees, asylum-seekers or persons working in private companies or administration, as has happened in the past.
Amendment  31 Proposal for a decision Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) measures enhancing the attractiveness of Europe as an educational destination.	(c) Action 3: promotion of European higher education through measures enhancing the attractiveness of Europe as an educational destination and a centre of excellence at world level.
Amendment  32 Proposal for a decision Article 4 – paragraph 1a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. For actions funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006, the actions shall be limited to those pursuing the objectives of that Regulation and in conformity with Article 2(4) thereof.
Justification
Ensures DCI funding cannot be used for objectives incompatible with DCI, especially any objectives or actions which do not fulfil the DCI provision requiring 100% of geographical programme funding to meet the OECD/DAC requirements for classification as ODA
Amendment  33 Proposal for a decision Article 4 – paragraph 2 – introductory sentence
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. These actions shall be implemented using the procedures described in the Annex and, as for the action of the programme referred to in Article 4(1)(b), the procedures laid down in the legal instruments mentioned in Article 1(4), and through the following types of approaches, which may be combined where appropriate:	2. These actions shall be implemented using the procedures described in the Annex. The measures relating to Action 2 referred to in Article 4(1)(b) within the framework of partnerships shall be implemented in accordance with the rules established by the EDF, DCI, ENPI, IPA and ICI legal instruments mentioned in Article 1(4). However, in the case of measures funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006 or the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, actions shall only benefit institutions, academics or other persons from developing countries. These actions shall:
Amendment  34 Proposal for a decision Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) support for the development of joint educational programmes and cooperation networks facilitating the exchange of experience and good practice;	(a) support the development of high quality joint educational programmes and cooperation networks facilitating the exchange of experience and good practice;
Amendment  35 Proposal for a decision Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) enhanced support for mobility, between the Community and third countries, of people in the field of higher education;	(b) enhance support for the mobility of people in the field of higher education selected on the basis of academic excellence, particularly from third countries to the Community, while respecting the principles of gender equality and a balanced geographical representation and taking into account the specific needs of disadvantaged or disabled people;
Amendment  36 Proposal for a decision Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) promotion of language skills, preferably providing students with the possibility of learning at least two of the languages spoken in the countries in which the higher education institutions are situated, and promotion of the understanding of different cultures;	(c) promote language skills, providing students with the possibility of learning at least two of the languages spoken in the countries in which the higher education institutions are situated, and promotion of the understanding of different cultures;
Justification
Language learning is a key tool for improving European higher education and as a factor in attracting students from third countries.
Amendment  37 Proposal for a decision Article 4 - paragraph 2 - point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) support for pilot projects based on partnerships with an external dimension designed to develop innovation and quality in higher education;	(d) support pilot projects based on partnerships with an external dimension designed to develop innovation and quality in higher education, as well as public-private partnerships between universities and enterprises, with a view to fostering excellence in research, producing innovations in both sciences and humanities and achieving the innovation objectives;
Justification
Partnerships between universities and private firms should be encouraged and implemented, given that they could help to foster excellence and create opportunities for the intellectually gifted to settle in Europe.
Amendment  38 Proposal for a decision Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point (e a) (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ea) support the development of infrastructures and help universities in third countries to adapt to the new technologies.
Amendment  39 Proposal for a decision Article 4 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3a. The Commission shall ensure the widest possible dissemination of information on activities and developments in the programme, mainly through the Erasmus Mundus information portal.
Justification
The Erasmus Mundus portal should be more visible on the Internet and set up as a direct link on as many European and third country university websites as possible. It should also be more attractive in terms of the number of user languages.
Amendment  40 Proposal for a decision Article 4 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. The actions referred to in this Article may be implemented by means of calls for proposals, calls for tenders, or directly by the Commission.	4. Support for the actions referred to in this Article may be granted by the Commission after examining the replies received to calls for proposals and/or tenders. With respect to the measures taken under paragraph 3, the Commission may, if necessary, implement these measures directly in accordance with Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002. It shall systematically inform the European Parliament and the Committee referred to in Article 8 thereof.
Justification
Actions shall only be supported once the replies to invitations to tender have been examined. It is just for technical support measures such as studies or expert meetings that the Commission may implement measures directly.
Amendment  41 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory sentence
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Under the conditions and arrangements for implementation specified in the Annex and bearing in mind the definitions in Article 2, the programme is aimed in particular at:	Under the conditions and arrangements for implementation specified in the Annex and bearing in mind the definitions in Article 2, the programme is aimed at:
Amendment  42 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
d) staff directly involved in higher education;	d) staff directly involved, by virtue of their functions, in the educational process in an establishment of higher education;
Justification
The beneficiaries of the programme may only be members of the teaching staff or highly qualified academics.
Amendment  43 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – subparagraph 1 – point e
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
e) other public or private bodies active in the field of higher education;	e) other public or private bodies active in the field of higher education under national legislation;
Amendment  44 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	The beneficiaries of the programme shall be persons enrolled and studying at a higher education establishment or who, by virtue of their functions, are directly involved in the educational process in an establishment of higher education.
Amendment  45 Proposal for a decision Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) ensure the effective and efficient implementation of the Community actions provided for by the programme in conformity with the Annex and, as regards the action of the programme referred to in Article 4(1)(b), with the legal instruments mentioned in Article 1(4);	(a) ensure the effective and transparent implementation of the Community actions provided for by the programme in conformity with the Annex and, as regards Action 2 of the programme referred to in Article 4(1)(b), with the EDF, DCI, ENPI, IPA and ICI legal instruments mentioned in Article 1(4), in particular their objectives and principles, and in compliance with the objectives of academic excellence in selecting the beneficiaries of the programme;
Justification
The legal instruments for financing Action 2 are mentioned for the sake of greater clarity.
Amendment  46 Proposal for a decision Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point (c a) (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ca) make sure, when determining the flat-rate amounts for the scholarships, to take into consideration the level of tuition fees, the estimated expenditure for the studies and costs relating to the student's stay in the destination country;
Justification
The cost of living can vary depending on the destination country. The tuition fees for masters or doctorate courses can account for a sizeable proportion of the monthly amount awarded to the student depending on the type of course followed (aeronautics or languages). Attempts should be made to adapt scholarships as well as possible to these different parameters.
Amendment  47 Proposal for a decision Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(cb) Consult the relevant European associations and organisations in the field of higher education about issues raised during the implementation of the programme and shall inform the Committee referred to in Article 8 of the results of such consultation.
Justification
The relevant European associations and organisations in the field of higher education should have a possibility to present their views on issues related to the implementation of the programme.
Amendment  48 Proposal for a decision Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(cc) provide support for an alumni association of all students (third-country and Europeans) graduating from Erasmus Mundus master's programmes and Erasmus Mundus doctoral programmes.
Amendment  49 Proposal for a decision Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) take the necessary steps to ensure the efficient running of the programme at Member State level involving all the parties concerned in higher education in accordance with national practice, including endeavours to adopt such measures as may be deemed appropriate to remove legal and administrative barriers;	(a) take the necessary steps to ensure the efficient running of the programme at Member State level involving all the parties concerned in higher education in accordance with national practice and endeavour to adopt such measures as may be deemed appropriate to remove legal and administrative barriers, particularly as regards visas for the students selected who need to be informed of their study destination at least 6 months prior to their departure;
Justification
Obtaining a visa can often be preceded by lengthy administrative procedures that have prevented students from starting their masters course on time. Everything possible should be done to ensure that in future students are informed well in advance of their host university.
Amendment  50 Proposal for a decision Article 6 - paragraph 2 - point b a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ba) in particular, take steps to simplify the obtaining and renewal of visas for Erasmus Mundus students;
Amendment  51 Proposal for a decision Article 6 - paragraph 2 - point c a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ca) mutually recognise both informal and non-formal qualifications gained within the framework of the Erasmus Mundus programme, as well as formal qualifications, on the basis of the common reference system embodied in the European Qualifications Framework.
Amendment  52 Proposal for a decision Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) appropriate information, publicity and follow-up with regard to actions supported by the programme;	(a) appropriate information, publicity and follow-up with regard to actions supported by the programme, that meets the objectives defined in this Decision;
Amendment  53 Proposal for a decision Article 6 - paragraph 3 - point b a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ba) that the communication strategy aimed at potentially interested European parties is intensified, and partnerships between universities, the social partners and non-governmental organisations are encouraged, with a view to developing the programme.
Justification
Communication strategy is of paramount importance for the success of the Erasmus Mundus programme. Contact between universities and the social partners and non-governmental organisations plays a central role in this regard.
Amendment  54 Proposal for a decision Article 7 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. All measures necessary for the implementation of the action referred to in Article 4(1)(b) are not governed by this Decision and are following the procedures of the legal instruments referred to in Article 1(4).	1. All measures necessary for the implementation of the action referred to in Article 4(1)(b) shall not be governed by this Decision and shall follow the procedures of the legal instruments referred to in Article 1(4).
Amendment  55 Proposal for a decision Article 7 – paragraph 1 a – introductory sentence (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. The following measures, designed to amend non-essential elements of this Decision, or supplement this Decision, should be adopted in accordance with the regulatory procedure with scrutiny provided for in Article 8(1a):
Amendment  56 Proposal for a decision Article 7 – paragraph 1 a – point a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(a) the general guidelines for implementing the programme;
Amendment  57 Proposal for a decision Article 7 – paragraph 1 a new – point b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(b) the selection criteria.
Amendment  58 Proposal for a decision Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point (b)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) the annual budget and the breakdown of funds among the different actions of the programme and indicative grant amounts;	(b) the annual allocations and the distribution of funds among the different actions of the programme, including information on their geographical distribution, and indicative grant amounts by actions and countries promoting access on an equal footing;
Justification
This is a clearer formulation, in line with earlier legislation within the policy area.
Amendment  59 Proposal for a decision Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) the general guidelines for implementing the programme;	deleted
Amendment  60 Proposal for a decision Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) the selection criteria and procedures, including the composition and the internal rules of procedure of the selection board;	(d) the selection procedures, including the composition and the internal rules of procedure of the selection board;
Amendment  61 Proposal for a decision Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. The selection decisions shall be taken by the Commission, which shall immediately inform the European Parliament and the Committee referred to in Article 8 thereof.
Amendment  62 Proposal for a decision Article 7 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2b. In the case of measures funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006, the objectives set out in Article 2 of that Regulation shall be achieved, particularly those set out in paragraph 4 thereof.
Justification
Ensures DCI funding is used in conformity with the DCI provision requiring 100% of geographical programme funding to meet the OECD/DAC requirements for classification as ODA.
Amendment  63 Proposal for a decision Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3a. The Commission shall inform the European Parliament and the Committee referred to in Article 8 on a regular basis of the measures taken.
Justification
Ensures appropriate feedback is provided from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Erasmus Mundus management committee
Amendment  64 Proposal for a decision Article 7 - paragraph 3 c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3c. The Commission shall consult the European Parliament in line with the Interinstitutional Agreement on budgetary discipline and sound financial management and Decision 1999/468/EC, in particular Article 8 thereof.
Justification
The agreement on the new external assistance instruments (ENPI, the Instrument for Stability - IfS, and IPA) grants the European Parliament increased scrutiny over the implementation of Community assistance. The consultation process and dialogue with Parliament will operate in parallel with Parliament's rights under Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 and in particular of Article 8 thereof, which provides that the Parliament may pass a resolution to the effect that the Commission has exceeded the implementation powers conferred on it.
Amendment  65 Proposal for a decision Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 5a(1) to (4) and Article 7 of Decision 1999/468/EC shall apply, having regard to the provisions of Article 8 thereof.
Amendment  66 Proposal for a decision Article 10 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) enhancing the knowledge base of European economy and contributing to strengthening the global competitiveness of the European Union;	(a) enhancing the European knowledge-based economy and society and contributing to creating more jobs in line with the Lisbon Strategy objectives and strengthening the global competitiveness of the European Union, its sustainable economic growth and its greater social cohesion;
Amendment  67 Proposal for a decision Article 10 - point a a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(aa) fostering culture, knowledge and skills for peaceful and sustainable development in a Europe of diversity;
Justification
An integrated approach for the programme entails providing deliberate support for culture, knowledge and skills. This will open up a wider horizon beyond the promotion of employment and the labour market.
Amendment  68 Proposal for a decision Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	In the case of measures funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006, point (a) of the first paragraph shall not apply and implementation shall be carried out with regard to the development policy of the Community and particularly to the objective of eradicating poverty in partner countries and regions.
Justification
Ensures DCI funding is used for development purposes and rules out the possibility of using it for purposes benefiting the EU but outside the realm of development policy.
Amendment  69 Proposal for a decision Article 10 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) promoting an awareness of the importance of cultural and linguistic diversity within Europe, as well as of the need to combat racism and xenophobia;	(b) promoting an awareness of the importance of cultural and linguistic diversity within Europe, as well as of the need to combat racism and xenophobia and promote intercultural education;
Amendment  70 Proposal for a decision Article 10 - point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) making provision for students with special needs, and in particular by helping to promote their integration into mainstream higher education;	(c) making provision for students with special needs, and in particular by helping to promote their integration into mainstream higher education, and promoting equal opportunities for all;
Justification
It is necessary to prevent high-flyers being left behind on account of economic difficulties or because they are denied the necessary access to information.
Amendment  71 Proposal for a decision Article 10 – point d a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(da) promoting the development of third countries,
Amendment  72 Proposal for a decision Article 11 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The Commission shall, in cooperation with the Member States, ensure overall consistency and complementarity with other relevant Community policies, instruments and actions, in particular with the Lifelong Learning Programme, the Seventh Framework Programme for Research, with external cooperation programmes and with the European Fund for the Integration of third-country nationals.	1. The Commission shall, in cooperation with the Member States, ensure overall consistency and complementarity with other relevant Community policies, instruments and actions, in particular with the Lifelong Learning Programme, the Seventh Framework Programme for Research, development policy, external cooperation programmes programmes, the ACP Association Agreements and the European Fund for the Integration of third-country nationals.
Amendment  73 Proposal for a decision Article 11 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The Commission shall keep the Committee referred to in Article 8(1) regularly informed about Community initiatives taken in relevant fields, ensure efficient linkage and, where appropriate, joint actions between the programme and the programmes and actions in the area of higher education undertaken within the framework of the Community's cooperation with third countries, including bilateral agreements, and the competent international organisations.	2. The Commission shall keep the European Parliament and the Committee referred to in Article 8(1) regularly informed about Community initiatives taken in relevant fields, ensure efficient linkage and, where appropriate, joint actions between the programme and the programmes and actions in the area of higher education undertaken within the framework of the Community's cooperation with third countries, including bilateral agreements, and the competent international organisations.
Justification
The rights of Parliament should be respected by keeping it regularly informed of initiatives that may be taken under this programme to meet the objectives thereof.
Amendment  74 Proposal for a decision Article 12 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The financial framework for the implementation of the actions of the programme referred to in Article 4(1)(a), 4(1)(c) and 4(3) and as set out in the Annex to the decision – Action 1, Action 3 and related technical support measures - for the period specified in Article 1(2) is hereby set at EUR 493.69 million.	1. The financial framework for the implementation of Actions 1 and 3 of the programme and related technical support measures for the 2009-2013 period is hereby set at EUR 493.69 million.
Amendment  75 Proposal for a decision Article 12 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The financial framework for the implementation of the actions of the programme referred to in Article 4(1)(b) and Article 4(3) and as set out in the Annex to the decision – Action 2 and related technical support measures - for the period specified in Article 1(2) is set in accordance with the rules and procedures laid down in the external cooperation instruments referred to in Article 1(4).	2. The financial framework for the implementation of Action 2 and related technical support measures should allow for the mobility of a maximum number of students from third countries selected on the basis of academic excellence in accordance with the rules and procedures laid down in the external cooperation and development instruments referred to in Article 1(4).
Justification
It is only possible to estimate the budget available for Action 2 on account of the specific nature of these financial instruments. The objective should, however, be to permit funding for a maximum number of beneficiaries from third countries selected on the basis of academic excellence.
Amendment  76 Proposal for a decision Article 12 - paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. The annual appropriations shall be authorised by the budgetary authority within the limits of the financial perspective.	3. The annual appropriations shall be authorised in accordance with the annual budgetary procedure by the budgetary authority within the limits of the financial perspective.
Amendment  77 Proposal for a decision Article 13 - paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The Commission shall regularly monitor the programme in cooperation with the Member States. The results of the process of monitoring and evaluation of the programme and of the previous programme shall be utilised when implementing the programme. This monitoring shall include the reports referred to in paragraph 3 and specific activities.	1. The Commission shall regularly monitor the programme in cooperation with the Member States. The results of the process of monitoring and evaluation of the programme and of the previous programme shall be utilised when implementing the programme. This monitoring shall include the reports referred to in paragraph 3 and specific activities. In addition, the Commission shall report to the European Parliament, on the geographical distribution of funding by actions for all participating countries, providing also an assessment of the efficiency of the implementation of actions judged against programme priorities.
Amendment  78 Proposal for a decision Article 13– paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The programme shall be evaluated regularly by the Commission having regard to the objectives referred to in Article 3, the impact of the programme as a whole and the complementarity between action under the programme and that pursued under other relevant Community policies, instru­ments and actions.	2. The programme shall be evaluated regularly by the Commission having regard to the objectives referred to in Article 3, the impact of the programme as a whole and the complementarity between action under the programme and that pursued under other relevant Community policies, instru­ments and actions. In this evaluation, account shall also be taken of the socio-economic background of the people concerned (both participants in the Erasmus Mundus masters courses and recipients of grants) and of potential brain-drain effects (e.g. by means of a survey carried out through the alumni network).
Justification
Further inquiries into the socio-economic background of the persons in question and potential brain-drain effects are needed with a view to further enhancement of the programme.
Amendment  79 Proposal for a decision Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. For actions funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006, evaluation shall include follow-up with the nationals of developing countries following expiry of their periods of study or research in the Union and shall assess their subsequent contribution to the economic or social development of their country of origin.
Justification
To assess how far Erasmus Mundus scholarships contribute to the development objectives of the financing instrument DCI, it will be necessary for follow-up to be carried out with former students.
Amendment  80 Proposal for a decision Article 13 – paragraph 3 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
a) (a) an interim evaluation report on the results achieved and on the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the implementation of the programme by 31 March 2012;	a) an interim evaluation report, that includes gender-disaggregated data, on the results achieved and on the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the implementation of the programme by 31 March 2011;
Justification
Given the amount of financial resources made available to this programme, an interim review should be conducted after two years.
Amendment  81 Proposal for a decision Article 13 – paragraph 3 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
b) a communication on the continuation of the programme by 30 June 2012;	b) a communication on the continuation of the programme by 30 January 2012;
Amendment  82 Proposal for a decision Article 15
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
This Decision shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.	(Does not affect English version.)
Amendment  83 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 1 – Section A – paragraph 2 – point g
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(g) shall establish stringent self-evaluation procedures and agree to be peer reviewed by external experts in order to ensure the continuing high quality of the masters programme;	(g) shall establish stringent self-evaluation procedures and agree to be peer reviewed by external experts (from European or third countries) in order to ensure the continuing high quality of the masters programme;
Amendment  84 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 1 – Section A – paragraph 2 – point i
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
i) shall establish transparent joint conditions for admissions which pay due regard, inter alia, to gender issues and equity issues;	i) shall establish transparent joint conditions for admissions which pay due regard, inter alia, to gender issues and equity issues and facilitate access for disadvantaged or disabled people;
Amendment  85 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 1 – Section A – paragraph 2 – point j
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
j) shall establish a joint tuition fee regardless of the actual place of study of the students within the masters programme;	j) shall be free to decide whether or not to establish tuition fees, in accordance with their national legislation and the agreement concluded in each consortium;
Justification
Whilst the level of tuition fees falls within the exclusive competence of the universities involved in the consortia, it is essential that the fees demanded do not de facto exclude nationals of countries such as Denmark where tuition fees do not exist or are illegal. These tuition fees should be identical for all students.
Amendment  86 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 1 – Section A – paragraph 2 – point l
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
l) shall put in place appropriate arrangements to facilitate access for, and hosting of, European and third-country students (information facilities, accommodation, assistance with visas, etc.);	l) shall put in place appropriate arrangements to facilitate access for, and hosting of, European and third-country students (information facilities, accommodation, assistance with visas, etc.). The Commission shall keep its delegations in the third countries concerned regularly informed of all updated provisions regarding the programme;
Justification
After Internet sites and the international relations offices at universities, it is to the European Commission's delegations in third countries that students turn with their requests for information. These delegations should therefore be fully involved in any measures that may be taken to make the process and personal life easier for students taking part in a mobility scheme.
Amendment  87 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 1 – Section A – paragraph 2 – point l a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(1a) The students selected should be informed of their study destination at least 6 months prior to their departure, so that they can take the necessary steps to obtain their visa within a reasonable time limit.
Justification
Obtaining a visa can often be preceded by lengthy administrative procedures that have prevented students from starting their masters course on time. Everything possible should be done to ensure that in future students are informed well in advance of their host university.
Amendment  88 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 1 – Section A – paragraph 2 – point m
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
m) without prejudice to the language of instruction, shall provide for the use of at least two European languages spoken in the Member States where the higher education institutions involved in the Erasmus Mundus masters programme are situated and, as appropriate, for language preparation and assistance for students, in particular by means of courses organised by the institutions in question.	m) without prejudice to the language of instruction, shall provide for the use of at least two European languages spoken in all or part of the territory of the Member States where the higher education institutions involved in the Erasmus Mundus masters programme are situated and offer language preparation and assistance for students, in particular by means of courses organised by the institutions in question.
Justification
Language courses should be offered so that students taking part in a mobility scheme can benefit from the cultural enrichment of studying in that country.
Amendment  89 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 1 – Section B – paragraph 2 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) may involve higher education institutions or other relevant partners from third countries;	(b) may involve higher education institutions or other relevant partners, such as research centres, from third countries;
Justification
All sides of the knowledge triangle (education - research - innovation) should be taken into account.
Amendment  90 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 1 – Section B – paragraph 2 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
d) where appropriate, shall encourage placements as part of the doctoral programme;	d) shall encourage placements as part of the doctoral programme and support public-private partnerships between universities and enterprises seeking to foster excellence in research and produce innovations in both sciences and humanities;
Amendment  91 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 1 – Section B – paragraph 2 – point i
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
i) shall establish transparent joint conditions for admissions which pay due regard, inter alia, to gender issues and equity issues;	i) shall establish transparent joint conditions for admissions which pay due regard, inter alia, to gender issues and equity issues and facilitate access for disadvantaged or disabled people;
Amendment  92 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 1 – Section B – paragraph 2 – point j
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
j) shall establish a joint tuition fee regardless of the actual place of study and research of the doctoral candidates within the doctoral programme;	j) shall be free to decide whether or not to establish tuition fees, in accordance with their national legislation and the agreement concluded in each consortium;
Justification
Whilst the level of tuition fees falls within the exclusive competence of the universities involved in the consortia, it is essential that the fees demanded do not de facto exclude nationals of countries such as Denmark where tuition fees do not exist or are illegal. These tuition fees should be identical for all students.
Amendment  93 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 1 – Section B – paragraph 2 – point n
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
n) without prejudice to the language of instruction, shall provide for the use of at least two European languages spoken in the Member States where the higher education institutions involved in the Erasmus Mundus doctoral programme are situated and, as appropriate, for language preparation and assistance for doctoral candidates, in particular by means of courses organised by the institutions in question.	n) without prejudice to the language of instruction, shall provide for the use of at least two European languages spoken in all or part of the territory of the Member States where the higher education institutions involved in the Erasmus Mundus doctoral programme are situated and offer language preparation and assistance for doctoral candidates, in particular by means of courses organised by the institutions in question.
Justification
Language courses should be offered so that students taking part in a mobility scheme can benefit from the cultural enrichment of studying in that country.
Amendment  94 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 1 – Section C – paragraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) The Community may provide full-study scholarships to third-country master students and doctoral candidates who have been admitted, through a competitive process, to Erasmus Mundus masters programmes and Erasmus Mundus doctoral programmes. These scholarships are for study at the European institutions involved in an Erasmus Mundus masters programme or an Erasmus Mundus doctoral programme..	(a) The Community may provide full-study scholarships to third-country master students and doctoral candidates who have been admitted, through a competitive process, to Erasmus Mundus masters programmes and Erasmus Mundus doctoral programmes. These scholarships are for study at the European institutions involved in an Erasmus Mundus masters programme or an Erasmus Mundus doctoral programme. The Commission shall, in accordance with the management procedure under Article 8(2), determine the content and form of those competitive processes within three months of the approval of the present text.
Amendment  95 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 1 – Section C – paragraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) The Community may provide full-study scholarships to European master students and doctoral candidates who have been admitted, through a competitive process, to Erasmus Mundus masters programmes and Erasmus Mundus doctoral programmes. These scholarships are for study at the European institutions involved in an Erasmus Mundus masters programme or an Erasmus Mundus doctoral programme and, if these also involve one or more third-country institutions, for study at one of these.	(b) The Community may provide full-study scholarships to European master students and doctoral candidates who have been admitted, through a competitive process, to Erasmus Mundus masters programmes and Erasmus Mundus doctoral programmes. These scholarships are for study at the European institutions involved in an Erasmus Mundus masters programme or an Erasmus Mundus doctoral programme and, if these also involve one or more third-country institutions, for study at one of these. The Commission shall, in accordance with the management procedure under Article 8(2), determine the content and form of those competitive processes within three months of the approval of the present text.
Amendment  96 Proposal for a decision Annex - Action 1 - Section C - paragraph 1 - point d a) (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	da) The Community will ensure and apply transparent criteria for the award of scholarships which take into account, inter alia, respect for the principles of equal opportunities and non-discrimination;
Amendment  97 Proposal for a decision Annex - Action 2 - paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The Community will select partnerships of high academic quality which, for the purposes of the programme, will be called ‘Erasmus Mundus partnerships’. They pursue and are in line with the objectives of article 3.	The Community will select partnerships of high academic quality which, for the purposes of the programme, will be called ‘Erasmus Mundus partnerships’. They pursue and are in line with the objectives of article 3, in so far as these are in conformity with the legal base from which the funding is derived.
Justification
Ensures respect for the provisions of DCI and the Cotonou Agreement in the selection of partnerships.
Amendment  98 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 2 - paragraph 2 - introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
For the purpose of the programme, Erasmus Mundus partnerships shall:	For the purpose of the programme, and in conformity with the legal base from which the funding is derived, Erasmus Mundus partnerships shall:
Justification
Ensures there are no contradictions between the Erasmus Mundus Decision and other legislation governing use of the same funds.
Amendment  99 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 2 – paragraph 2 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
c) exchange students at all levels of higher education (from bachelor to postdoctoral), academics and higher education staff for mobility periods of variable length, including the possibility of placement periods. Mobility must take European nationals to third countries and third-country nationals to European countries. The scheme will also allow the hosting of third-country nationals who are not linked to the third-country institutions involved in the partnerships, as well as include specific provisions for vulnerable groups, as appropriate to the political and socio-economic context of the respective region/country;	c) organise exchanges of students selected on the basis of academic excellence at all levels of higher education (from bachelor to postdoctoral), academics and higher education staff for mobility periods of variable length, including the possibility of placement periods. Mobility must mainly take third-country nationals to European countries. The beneficiaries of these exchanges will also be encouraged to return to their home country once the exchange has ended, in compliance with the provisions of the Regulations referred to in Article 1(4). With the exception of the cases in which measures are funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006 or the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, mobility may also take a smaller proportion of European nationals to third countries in the interests of mutual enrichment;
Justification
Cooperation windows have allowed a higher number of students from third countries to spend a short or long period of time in Europe during their studies. This possibility therefore exists but subject to specific selection conditions such as the academic excellence criteria, and it is only open to a lesser extent for exchanges of European students to third countries since the basic rationale behind the programme is to make European higher education attractive to students from third countries who would otherwise have gone to study in the USA, but at the same time avoiding brain drain.
Amendment   100 Proposal for a decision Annex − Action 2 − paragraph 2 − point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
d) have built-in mechanisms for the recognition of periods of study and research undertaken in partner institutions based on, or compatible with, the European credit transfer and accumulation system;	d) have built-in mechanisms for the mutual recognition of periods of study and research undertaken in partner institutions based on, or compatible with, the European credit transfer and accumulation system as well as equivalent systems in third countries;
Amendment  101 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 2 – paragraph 2 – point f
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
f) establish transparent conditions for the award of mobility grants which pay due regard, inter alia, to gender issues and equity issues;	f) shall establish transparent and merit-based joint conditions for admissions which pay due regard, inter alia, to gender issues, equity issues and linguistic abilities, and facilitate access for disadvantaged and disabled people;
Amendment  102 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 2 - paragraph 2 - point h
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
h) put in place appropriate arrangements to facilitate access for, and hosting of, European and third-country students, academics and higher education staff (information facilities, accommodation, assistance with visas, etc.);	h) put in place appropriate arrangements to facilitate access for, and hosting of, European and third-country students, academics and higher education staff (information facilities, accommodation, assistance with visas, including payment of visa fees, etc.);
Justification
Students should not be disadvantaged by differing visa requirements between Member States, and particularly the differing charges applied to visas. Provision is therefore made for the visa fees to be covered by the scholarship funding.
Amendment  103 Proposal for a decision Annex - Action 2 - paragraph 2 - point j a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	ja) in the case of measures funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006 or the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, ensure that nationals of developing countries study or carry out research in areas that are relevant to the economic development of their countries of origin;
Justification
Ensures the development objectives of DCI and the Cotonou Agreement are respected by ensuring students benefiting from funding under these instruments undertake study in areas relevant to the development of their countries of origin
Amendment  104 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 2 - paragraph 2 - point j b(new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	jb) in the case of measures funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006 or the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, put in place mechanisms to ensure that nationals of developing countries return to their countries of origin on the expiry of their periods of study or research to allow them to contribute to the economic development and welfare of the developing countries concerned.
Justification
To comply with the objectives of development instruments, incentives must be provided for recipients of scholarships financed from these instruments to return to their countries of origin and contribute to the development of the countries concerned.
Amendment  105 Proposal for a decision Annex - Action 2 - paragraph 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3a. In the case of partnerships including developing countries, priority shall be given to partnerships involving publicly funded higher education institutions in the developing countries.
Justification
To avoid concentration on the elites in third country societies and increase the possibility of Erasmus Mundus opportunities being opened to less wealthy and more disadvantaged groups, priority must be accorded to partnerships involving publicly-funded education institutions rather than just private universities.
Amendment  106 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 2 - paragraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. Scholarships will be open to European and third-country students and academics as defined in Article 2.	5. Scholarships will be open to European and third-country students and academics as defined in Article 2. In the case of measures funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006 or the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, scholarships will only be open to third-country students and academics as defined in Article 2 of this Decision.
Justification
Ensures funding from DCI or the Cotonou Agreement is not used to benefit EU nationals, thereby respecting the development objectives of these instruments.
Amendment  107 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 2 - paragraph 6
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
6. In assigning the scholarships under this action, the Commission shall support socio-economic disadvantaged groups and populations in vulnerable situations.	6. In assigning the scholarships under this action, the Commission shall support socio-economic disadvantaged groups and populations in vulnerable situations without compromising the transparency conditions set out in point 2f). In the case of measures funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006 or the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, priority shall be given to such groups and populations.
Justification
The Commission has agreed to prioritise disadvantaged and vulnerable groups, but there has been no indication of the means by which this shall be carried out. This amendment gives legislative force to the requirement to implement such prioritisation and combines it with the requirement to select students on merit.
Amendment  108 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 3 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Activities can take various forms (conferences, seminars, workshops, studies, analyses, pilot projects, prizes, international networks, production of material for publication, development of ICT tools, etc.) and may take place anywhere in the world.	3. Activities can take various forms (conferences, seminars, workshops, studies, analyses, pilot projects, prizes, international networks, production of material for publication, development of ICT tools, etc.) and may take place anywhere in the world. The Commission shall ensure the widest possible dissemination of information on activities and developments in the Erasmus Mundus programme, mainly through the Erasmus Mundus information portal which should be made more visible and more accessible. The Commission shall keep its delegations in the third countries concerned regularly informed of all useful public information on the Erasmus Mundus programme.
Justification
After Internet sites and the international relations offices at universities, it is to the European Commission's delegations in third countries that students turn with their requests for information. These delegations should therefore be fully involved in any measures that may be taken to make the process and personal life easier for students taking part in a mobility scheme.
Amendment  109 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4a. The integrated public information policy carried out by the competent national authorities in cooperation with the participating higher education institutions shall be aimed at providing reliable and complete information and to clarify the necessary procedures, while the main priority should be given to the under-represented regions.
Amendment  110 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 3 – paragraph 6
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The Community shall support an alumni association of all students (third-country and Europeans) graduating from Erasmus Mundus masters programmes and Erasmus Mundus doctoral programmes.	Deleted
Justification
This is deleted, having been incorporated into Article 6.
Amendment  111 Proposal for a decision Annex – Selection procedures – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
a) proposals under action 1 will be selected by the Commission assisted by a selection board presided over by a person whom it elects, composed of personalities of high standing from the academic world who are representative of the diversity of higher education in the European Union. The selection board shall ensure that Erasmus Mundus masters programmes and doctoral programmes correspond to the highest academic quality. The Commission shall organise a European-level assessment of all eligible proposals by independent academic experts prior to submitting the proposals to the selection board. Each Erasmus Mundus masters programme and doctoral programme will be allocated a specific number of scholarships which will be paid to the selected individuals by the body managing the masters programmes and doctoral programmes. The selection of master students, doctoral candidates and academics will be carried out by the institutions participating in the Erasmus Mundus masters programmes and doctoral programmes following consultation with the Commission;	a) proposals under action 1 will be selected by the Commission assisted by a selection board presided over by a person whom it elects, composed of personalities of high standing from the academic world who are representative of the diversity of higher education in the European Union. The selection board shall ensure that Erasmus Mundus masters programmes and doctoral programmes correspond to the highest academic quality and a balanced geographical representation. The selection board shall also ensure that the tuition fees proposed do not exceed certain thresholds based on the average of the tuition fees applied across the Member States. The Commission shall organise a European-level assessment of all eligible proposals by independent academic experts prior to submitting the proposals to the selection board. Each Erasmus Mundus masters programme and doctoral programme will be allocated a specific number of scholarships which will be paid to the selected individuals by the body managing the masters programmes and doctoral programmes. The selection of master students, doctoral candidates and academics will be carried out by the institutions participating in the Erasmus Mundus masters programmes and doctoral programmes on the basis of academic excellence following consultation with the Commission. Action 1 is intended mainly for students from third countries;
Amendment  112 Proposal for a decision Annex – Selection procedures – point b – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Without prejudice to the provisions of the rules and decisions referred to in the first subparagraph, the Commission shall also ensure that Erasmus Mundus partnership proposals meet the highest academic quality standards and the criterion of balanced geographical representation. Students and academics are selected by establishments taking part in the partnership on the basis of academic excellence criteria, following consultation with the Commission. Action 2 is intended mainly for students from third countries. However, in the interests of mutual enrichment, mobility should also take a smaller proportion of European nationals to third countries.

• [1]  OJ C 139, 14.6.2006, p. 1. Agreement last amended by Decision 2008/371/EC ofthe European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 128, 16.5.2008, p. 8).

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

The proposal for the Erasmus Mundus 2009 - 2013 programme is dealt with under the codecision procedure. It is the subject of increased cooperation with the AFET and DEVE committees with regard to the external development and cooperation instruments in Action 2.

The development of the Erasmus Mundus programme

The current Erasmus Mundus programme is a co-operation and mobility programme in the field of higher education intended to promote the European Union as a centre of excellence in learning around the world.

The objective of excellence that lay behind the first programme should be pursued further. The new programme will also seek to promote intercultural understanding through cooperation with third countries, and boost their development in the field of higher education.

The mid-term review of the current programme testifies to its success with students from third countries and European students. Between 2004 and 2008, 4 424 scholarships were granted to students from third countries and 323 universities (265 in Europe) took part.

The new Erasmus Mundus programme should therefore be tailored to this rising demand for mobility without sacrificing quality.

The new programme will be based on three actions:

Action 1 deals with joint masters and doctoral programmes, and scholarships. It aims to promote the excellence of European higher education in the world. The joint programmes are set up by a consortium of universities from at least three European countries and may involve higher education institutions from different third countries.

Action 2 allows partnerships with third-country higher education institutions and includes scholarships. The aim of this external cooperation action is to develop human resources and the international cooperation capacity of higher education institutions in third countries, in line with EU external policy.

These partnerships involve a minimum of five higher education institutions from a minimum of three different European countries and a number of institutions in third countries.

Action 3 covers specific communication and information measures. This action seeks to enhance the visibility of European higher education on the international stage.

The budget for the programme

The budget is split into two separate parts: one budget for Actions 1 and 3 and a separate budget for Action 2.

The budget for Action 1 (joint masters and doctorates) is therefore € 450 million (as compared with a budget of € 230 million for the current programme) and € 16.5 million for Action 3 (information measures). This budget is managed by the Education and Culture DG.

The budget for Action 2 (Erasmus Mundus partnerships), on the other hand, is only an estimate. This estimated budget of € 460 million will be divided, indicatively, between various external policy and development instruments and will be managed by the RELEX and AIDCO DGs.

The new features of this programme are:

· Under Action 1: Erasmus Mundus masters and doctorates

- The award of scholarships to European students moving to study in Europe and in third countries;

Up to now, scholarships for European students were only possible if they moved to third countries only for a maximum of three months and only if these third countries were partners under the masters programme.

- The establishment of joint "Erasmus Mundus" doctorates.

· Under Action 2: 'Erasmus Mundus partnership'

This type of partnership is in fact the transposition of experience acquired by the Commission since 2005 outside the Erasmus Mundus programme.

Through the comitology procedure, external cooperation ‘windows’ have been set up in order to allow a higher number of third-country students to come to Europe without having to follow a masters course. Under this framework, 1640 additional scholarships were granted between 2005 and 2008, thanks to funding from financial instruments other than the Erasmus Mundus budget.

Points of particular note for the rapporteur:

1. The 'indicative' budget for Action 2 'Erasmus Mundus partnership'

The budget for Action 2 is financed by external cooperation instruments and divided up as follows:

-          2 development policy instruments:

-          European Development Fund (10th EDF): € 30 million,

-                    Financing instrument for development cooperation (DCI): € 240 million;

-          and 3 external policy instruments:

-            European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI): € 140 million,

-            Financing instrument for cooperation with industrialised and other high-income countries (ICI): € 20 million,

-             Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA): € 30 million.

Each year, the European Commission establishes the amount to be spent on exchanges in higher education with each third country. It therefore unfortunately seems impossible to determine in advance amounts which will vary from year to year depending on the priorities set by these countries.

The rapporteur regrets that a report containing precise information on the sums allocated to these exchanges will only be available a posteriori.

2. Geographical distribution and gender equality not properly respected

The geographical distribution of the partnerships is decided on solely by DGs RELEX and AIDCO, which could lead once again, for example, to over-representation of Asian students to the detriment of students from Mediterranean or ACP countries, as is the case in the current programme.

It would also be desirable to avoid certain countries being under-represented in Erasmus Mundus consortia, as is currently the case for Greece, Austria, Slovakia, the western Balkans or the new Member States in general.

Indicatively, 273 Erasmus Mundus scholarships have been granted for 2007-2008, along with scholarships granted under ‘external cooperation windows’, i.e. 63 scholarships for the Balkans, 37 for China and 403 for India.

DG RELEX and AIDCO’s choice of countries to participate in partnerships is therefore crucial in ensuring a balanced representation of students according to their geographical origin.

Equally, the principle of gender equality must be effectively respected. For example, out of the 403 students from India having received a scholarship for 2007-2008, only 103 were women.

The rapporteur's suggestions for the programme as a whole:

1.      The granting of visas for beneficiaries of the programme moving around a number of Member States could be made easier if they are informed of their destination university at least 6 months priori to departure; Similarly, the Member States could look into the possibility of introducing a specific visa as part of this programme.

2.      Learning at least two foreign languages should be emphasised; the diversity of European languages is value added to the course.

3.     Access to the programme will be on the basis of academic excellence criteria, and should also be open to people with disabilities and persons with learning difficulties, and comply with the principles of gender equality and a balanced geographical breakdown.

4.      Nationals from the Balkans and the acceding countries should be encouraged to take part in this programme, and universities in these countries encouraged to join consortia, in order to lend a European dimension to their education which would be useful for their future integration into the EU.

5.      Tuition fees, where these exist, should be common to all universities in the consortium or partnership, and be identical for all students (from third countries or Europe).

6.      The value of the scholarships should take account of the level of tuition fees, estimated expenditure for the studies and costs relating to the student's stay in the destination country.

7.      Public-private partnerships should be set up, notably to allow for greater investment in research.

8.      Information on the programme should reach an optimum number of universities in Europe and throughout the world. This is why such information needs to be available in as many languages as possible. The European Commission's delegations in third countries should also be able to handle the widespread local dissemination of useful information and help influence the student's choice (as to the level of tuition fees, the value of scholarships, possible obligation to return home, etc.).

The rapporteur's specific suggestions for Action 2:

1.        Details should be given on funds from the field of external policy that may be used to finance scholarships for European students, and they should be clearly labelled as such.

2.        Attracting students from third countries to the EU should remain the primary objective of the partnerships. European students moving to third countries is still necessary for promoting intercultural dialogue, but this should be on a lesser scale.

3.        Important information should be contained in the Decision establishing the programme (and not in the invitations to tender) so that all parties, and particularly the students, know of it. One such piece of information is the obligation for students to return to their country of origin, as this programme should on no account allow a brain drain from third countries.

Whilst this programme is open to more students and academics from third countries, through partnerships, care should therefore be taken to retain the objectives of excellence in the persons selected and the quality of the welcome.

CONCLUSION

For this programme to be a success, it is necessary to pursue the objectives of excellence in the education offered and the quality of the welcome.

In order to create poles of excellence attracting a greater number of top quality students and academics, this programme needs clear and transparent conditions on participation.

Finally, to ensure that this programme can foster better intercultural understanding, it will need to reach out in a balanced manner to all parts of the world.

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS (5.6.2008)

for the Committee on Culture and Education

on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an action programme for the enhancement of quality in higher education and the promotion of intercultural understanding through co-operation with third countries (Erasmus Mundus) (2009-2013)
(COM(2007)0395 – C6‑0228/2007 – 2007/0145(COD))

Draftsman (*): Samuli Pohjamo

(*) Procedure with associated committees – Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

The second phase of the Erasmus Mundus programme (2009-2013) will continue the activities of the first Erasmus Mundus programme (2004-2008), with the exception that the new programme incorporates its External Cooperation Window, extends its scope to all levels of higher education, and improves funding opportunities for European students, as well as offers enhanced possibilities for cooperation with Higher Education Institutions (HEIs).

Whereas the main objective of the Erasmus Mundus programme continues to be the promotion of "excellence", its second phase adds through the incorporation of the External Cooperation Window a foreign policy dimension to the programme. The funds for the this part of the programme will be drawn from external assistance instruments, including the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) and Pre-Accession Instrument (IPA), which support the European Neighbourhood Policy and Accession Process, respectively.

The Committee on Foreign Affairs is the lead committee for the democratic scrutiny of the ENPI and IPA, meaning in practice that it receives all relevant strategy papers at the same time as they are transmitted to the Member States. The Parliament and the Commission then engage in a dialogue on the strategy papers the Parliament wishes to discuss.

Promotion of people-to-people contacts, research, and educational and youth exchanges lies at the core of the ENP and the EU's enlargement strategy and the amendments seek to ensure that the objectives of the relevant actions of the programme reflect the priorities of the above-mentioned policies.

However, he believes that the cumbersome visa policies that the Erasmus Mundus students have to face are major obstacles towards making full use of the opportunities of the programme. Since the visa policy is a Member State competence, your draftsperson calls on the Member States to take all possible steps to simplify the obtaining and renewing of visas.

Finally, your draftsperson believes there is a clear need for better coordination of information on the programme in third countries, for example via the delegations of the Commission and the Embassies of the Member States.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Foreign Affairs calls on the Committee on Culture and Education, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following amendments in its report:

Amendment  1 Proposal for a decision Recital 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(2a) In the course of negotiating the external assistance instruments and the Interinstitutional Agreement on budgetary discipline and sound financial management, the European Parliament and the Commission reached a number of understandings on democratic scrutiny and the coherence of external action, set out in the declarations annexed to the Interinstitutional Agreement. The consultation process and dialogue with the European Parliament will operate in parallel with the latter's rights under Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission1, and in particular Article 8 thereof.
	___________________________________ 1 OJ L 184, 17.7.1999, p. 23. Decision as amended by Decision 2006/512/EC (OJ L 200, 22.7.2006, p. 11).
Justification
The agreement on the new external assistance instruments (the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument - ENPI, the Instrument for Stability - IfS, and the Pre-Accession Instrument - IPA) grants the European Parliament increased scrutiny over the implementation of Community assistance.
Amendment  2 Proposal for a decision Recital 10 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(10a) The promotion of European common values and people-to-people contacts in the context of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), in particular through educational and youth exchanges, must lie at the core of the Erasmus Mundus programme, supported by a policy dialogue aimed at reinforcing modernisation and reform efforts by the partner countries in the area of education, and must contribute to an improvement in knowledge of foreign languages and cultures and to the fostering of intercultural dialogue, as well as to convergence with EU policies, including the Bologna and Copenhagen processes. Mobility of teaching staff and researchers is an essential part of increasing research cooperation between the EU and the ENP countries and improving excellence, but it is also important to take measures to prevent a brain drain in this field.
Justification
This year is the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue, and the European Union should also make use of the Erasmus Mundus programme to promote the learning of foreign languages and familiarisation with foreign cultures and to foster intercultural dialogue. At the same time, the importance should be stressed of moving ahead with the Bologna and Copenhagen processes and encouraging mobility and exchanges among the teaching profession to help improve the quality of education. Finally, emphasis should be placed on the need to avoid brain drain.
Amendment  3 Proposal for a decision Article 3 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The programme’s overall aim is to enhance the quality of European higher education and to promote dialogue and understanding between peoples and cultures through cooperation with third countries as well as to promote EU external policy objectives and the sustainable development of third countries in the field of higher education.	1. The programme’s overall aim is to enhance the quality of European higher education and to promote dialogue, common European values and understanding between peoples and cultures through cooperation with third countries as well as to promote EU external policy objectives, including the fostering and consolidation of democracy and the rule of law, and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, including equality between men and women, and to assist the sustainable development of third countries in the field of higher education.
Justification
It is important to incorporate the gender aspect across all policies.
Amendment  4 Proposal for a decision Article 3 - paragraph 2 - point d a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	da) to achieve a regional balance in the support provided for partnerships with third countries, as set out in the Annex.
Justification
The programme should seek to achieve a regional balance and support educational exchange with regions with less "excellent" HEIs and offer special support for these regions.
Amendment  5 Proposal for a decision Article 6 - paragraph 2 - point b a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ba) in particular, take steps to simplify the obtaining and renewal of visas for Erasmus Mundus students;
Amendment  6 Proposal for a decision Article 6 - paragraph 3 - point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) appropriate information, publicity and follow-up with regard to actions supported by the programme;	(a) appropriate information, publicity and follow-up with regard to actions supported by the programme, and in particular the visibility of the programme in the third countries concerned;
Justification
More focus should be put on the visibility of the programme in the third countries and availability of information on it.
Amendment  7 Proposal for a decision Article 7 - paragraph 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3a. The Commission shall consult the European Parliament in line with the Interinstitutional Agreement on budgetary discipline and sound financial management and Council Decision 1999/468/EC, in particular Article 8 thereof.
Justification
The agreement on the new external assistance instruments (ENPI, the Instrument for Stability - IfS, and IPA) grants the European Parliament increased scrutiny over the implementation of Community assistance. The consultation process and dialogue with Parliament will operate in parallel with Parliament's rights under Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 and in particular of Article 8 thereof, which provides that the Parliament may pass a resolution to the effect that the Commission has exceeded the implementation powers conferred on it.
Amendment  8 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 1 – Section A – paragraph 2 – point j
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
j) shall establish a joint tuition fee regardless of the actual place of study of the students within the masters programme;	j) shall establish a joint tuition fee regardless of the actual place of study of the students within the masters programme. The Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency will deduct the consortia fees from the student scholarships and remit them to the coordinating institution, which will pass them on to the member universities in accordance with the consortia agreement;
Justification
If the consortia fees are collected by the Agency by deducting them from the student scholarships, the consortia could then divide the fees among the participating universities in accordance with the consortia-agreement. As Finnish and other Scandinavian universities, which are prohibited by law from taking fees for study programmes, are not claiming fees under the agreement, they would not take part in the division of consortia fees. This would also benefit other universities.
Amendment  9 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 1 – Section B – paragraph 2 – point j
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
j) shall establish a joint tuition fee regardless of the actual place of study and research of the doctoral candidates within the doctoral programme;	j) shall establish a joint tuition fee regardless of the actual place of study and research of the doctoral candidates within the doctoral programme. The Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency will deduct the consortia fees from the student scholarships and remit them to the coordinating institution, which will pass them on to the member universities in accordance with the consortia agreement;
Justification
If the consortia fees are collected by the Agency by deducting them from the student scholarships, the consortia could then divide the fees among the participating universities in accordance with the consortia-agreement. As Finnish and other Scandinavian universities, which are prohibited by law from taking fees for study programmes, are not claiming fees under the agreement, they would not take part in the division of consortia fees. This would also benefit other universities.

PROCEDURE

Title	Erasmus Mundus programme (2009-2013)
References	COM(2007)0395 – C6-0228/2007 – 2007/0145(COD)
Committee responsible	CULT
Opinion by        Date announced in plenary	AFET 3.9.2007
Associated committee(s) - date announced in plenary	13.3.2008
Drafts(wo)man        Date appointed	Samuli Pohjamo 12.9.2007
Discussed in committee	1.4.2008		3.6.2008
Date adopted	3.6.2008
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	45 0 2
Members present for the final vote	Monika Beňová, André Brie, Colm Burke, Philip Claeys, Véronique De Keyser, Hanna Foltyn-Kubicka, Bronisław Geremek, Maciej Marian Giertych, Ana Maria Gomes, Alfred Gomolka, Anna Ibrisagic, Ioannis Kasoulides, Maria Eleni Koppa, Helmut Kuhne, Willy Meyer Pleite, Francisco José Millán Mon, Philippe Morillon, Annemie Neyts-Uyttebroeck, Baroness Nicholson of Winterbourne, Alojz Peterle, Tobias Pflüger, João de Deus Pinheiro, Samuli Pohjamo, Raül Romeva i Rueda, Libor Rouček, Christian Rovsing, Katrin Saks, José Ignacio Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra, Jacek Saryusz-Wolski, György Schöpflin, István Szent-Iványi, Inese Vaidere, Ari Vatanen, Jan Marinus Wiersma, Luis Yañez-Barnuevo García, Zbigniew Zaleski, Josef Zieleniec
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Maria Badia i Cutchet, Alexandra Dobolyi, Árpád Duka-Zólyomi, James Elles, Martí Grau i Segú, Jaromír Kohlíček, Doris Pack, Rihards Pīks, Jean Spautz, Karl von Wogau

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON DEVELOPMENT (13.6.2008)

for the Committee on Culture and Education

on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an action programme for the enhancement of quality in higher education and the promotion of intercultural understanding through co-operation with third countries (Erasmus Mundus) (2009-2013)
(COM(2007)0395 – C6-0228/2007– 2007/0145(COD))

Draftsman(*): Alessandro Battilocchio

(*) Procedure with associated committees - Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

Overlapping legislation

For the period 2004-2008, the External Cooperation Window of the Erasmus Mundus programme was outside the Erasmus Mundus Decision, and brought under regulations for EC external actions. For the next programming period, covering 2009-2013, the Commission proposes to include the External Cooperation Window within the new Erasmus Mundus Decision. However, funding will still be taken from the external financing instruments - specifically those applying to particular geographic areas[1]. The result is that the funds for the external aspects of Erasmus Mundus will be subject to two pieces of legislation - the external financing instrument covering the country concerned, and also the Erasmus Mundus Decision itself.

It is unusual, but not unprecedented, for Community law to overlap in this way. In this instance, there is an advantage for the European Parliament: under the external instruments, detailed programming is done by comitology with limited parliamentary involvement, but the Erasmus Mundus Decision will allow Parliament to participate to a greater extent in detailed policymaking under codecision. However, great care must be taken to make sure the overlapping laws do not contradict each other, since this would cause legal confusion. This is a particular concern in relation to the Erasmus Mundus proposal and existing development legislation.

In the area of development, funding for the Erasmus Mundus programme is drawn from two sources:

· The European Development Fund (EDF), for ACP countries. Although this is outside the Community budget, and its legal base, the Cotonou Agreement, is outside Community law, it is implemented by means of a Council Regulation within Community law[2].

· The Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI) for non-ACP developing countries

Programming is underway for both DCI and EDF, but is more advanced for DCI which has been implemented since the beginning of 2007. For EDF, implementation was intended to begin at the start of 2008 but has been delayed due to problems with ratifying the revised Cotonou Agreement.

Consistency with development legislation

From a development perspective, it is important to ensure that funds used for the Erasmus Mundus programme still further the objective of poverty reduction in developing countries. For DCI funding, this is also legally obligatory: Erasmus Mundus funds are drawn from DCI geographic programmes, which are subject to the requirement that 100% of measures financed must meet the criteria for classification as Official Development Assistance (ODA) as defined by the OECD/DAC[3]. Your draftsman proposes amendments to ensure the Erasmus Mundus Decision remains compatible with this provision of DCI.

Scholarships are included within the definition of ODA[4], but are subject to the general requirement that all ODA-eligible funds must be administered with the main objective of "the promotion of the economic development and welfare of developing countries"[5]. In practical terms, this can be furthered by the inclusion of requirements that scholarships be provided for courses relevant to development and that the student be encouraged to return to his country of origin to use his new knowledge and skills for the benefit of that country's development. Your draftsman proposes amendments to include these requirements for Erasmus Mundus students financed from development instruments.

Other amendments aim to ensure compatibility between the objectives of the development legislation and those parts of the Erasmus Mundus programme using development funding.

Financial aspects and programming under DCI and the 10th EDF

No figures are given in the Erasmus Mundus legislative proposal for the sums to be drawn from the external financing instruments for the Erasmus Mundus programme. Indicative figures, set out in the explanatory statement, suggest that EUR 240 million is to be used from DCI and EUR 30 million is to be used from the 10th EDF. These figures cover the period 2009-2013.

Under DCI, there appears to be little consistency in the way Erasmus Mundus is included in Strategy Paperts. In some cases, the programme appears to be financed under some Country Strategy Papers - eg: Brazil, Argentina and India. In other cases it is included in Regional Strategy Papers - mentioned by name in the RSP for Latin America, and under the title "Higher Education" in the RSP for Asia. It is not possible to work out from the Strategy Papers the breakdown of DCI Erasmus Mundus funding by country or region.

For the 10th EDF, draft Strategy Papers are not made available to the European Parliament but are provided to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly. At time of writing, not all Country Strategy Papers had been made public. There was no reference was found to the Erasmus Mundus programme in those CSPs that were available. No information could be found about the content of the 10th EDF Regional Strategy Papers.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Development calls on the Committee on Culture and Education, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following amendments in its report:

Amendment  1 Proposal for a decision Article 1 - paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. The development of human resources in specific third countries, and more particularly the action of the programme referred to in Article 4(1)(b), shall be implemented in accordance with Regulations (EC) No 1085/2006, 1638/2006, 1905/2006 and 1934/2006 and Decisions (EC) No 599/2005 and 608/2006.	4. The development of human resources in specific third countries, and more particularly the action of the programme referred to in Article 4(1)(b), shall be implemented in accordance with Regulations (EC) No 1085/2006, 1638/2006, 1905/2006 and 1934/2006, Decisions (EC) No 599/2005 and 608/2006 and the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement. In particular, Article 2(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006 shall be respected.
Justification
Ensures the Erasmus Mundus decision will be fully compatible with the Cotonou Agreement and DCI, particularly the DCI provision requiring 100% of geographical programme funding to meet the OECD/DAC requirements for classification as ODA.
Amendment  2 Proposal for a decision Article 3 – paragraph 2a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. For actions funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006, the objectives shall be limited to those in conformity with that Regulation, particularly Article 2(4) thereof.
Justification
Ensures the continued applicability of the DCI provision requiring 100% of geographical programme funding to meet the OECD/DAC requirements for classification as ODA
Amendment  3 Proposal for a decision Article 4 – paragraph 1a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. For actions funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006, the actions shall be limited to those pursuing the objectives of that Regulation and in conformity with Article 2(4) thereof.
Justification
Ensures DCI funding cannot be used for objectives incompatible with DCI, especially any objectives or actions which do not fulfil the DCI provision requiring 100% of geographical programme funding to meet the OECD/DAC requirements for classification as ODA
Amendment  4 Proposal for a decision Article 4 – paragraph 2 - subparagraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	However, in the case of measures funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006 or the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, actions shall only benefit institutions, academics or other persons from developing countries.
Justification
Prevents development funding under DCI or the EDF being used to benefit EU nationals. Such a use would not fall within the OECD/DAC definition of ODA.
Amendment  5 Proposal for a decision Article 6 – paragraph 1 - point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) ensure the effective and efficient implementation of the Community actions provided for by the programme in conformity with the Annex and, as regards the action of the programme referred to in Article 4(1)(b), with the legal instruments mentioned in Article 1(4);	(a) ensure the effective and efficient implementation of the Community actions provided for by the programme in conformity with the Annex and, as regards the action of the programme referred to in Article 4(1)(b), with the legal instruments mentioned in Article 1(4), in particular their objectives and principles;
Justification
Ensures development funding is used to further development objectives, and in the case of DCI draws attention to the DCI provision requiring 100% of geographical programme funding to meet the OECD/DAC requirements for classification as ODA
Amendment  6 Proposal for a decision Article 7 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. All measures necessary for the implementation of the action referred to in Article 4(1)(b) are not governed by this Decision and are following the procedures of the legal instruments referred to in Article 1(4).	1. All measures necessary for the implementation of the action referred to in Article 4(1)(b) shall not be governed by this Decision and shall follow the procedures of the legal instruments referred to in Article 1(4).
Justification
Inserts language stressing the obligatory nature of following the procedures in the external financing instruments.
Amendment  7 Proposal for a decision Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. In the case of measures funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006, the objectives of Article 2 of that Regulation shall be upheld, particularly paragraph 4 thereof.
Justification
Ensures DCI funding is used in conformity with the DCI provision requiring 100% of geographical programme funding to meet the OECD/DAC requirements for classification as ODA
Amendment  8 Proposal for a decision Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3a. The Commission shall inform the European Parliament and the Committee referred to in Article 8 on a regular basis of the measures taken.
Justification
Ensures appropriate feedback is provided from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Erasmus Mundus management committee
Amendment  9 Proposal for a decision Article 10 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	In the case of measures funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006, subparagraph (a) of this Article shall not apply and implementation shall be carried out with regard to the development policy of the Community and particularly to the objective of eradicating poverty in partner countries and regions.
Justification
Ensures DCI funding is used for development purposes and rules out the possibility of using it for purposes benefiting the EU but outside the realm of development policy.
Amendment  10 Proposal for a decision Article 11 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The Commission shall, in cooperation with the Member States, ensure overall consistency and complementarity with other relevant Community policies, instruments and actions, in particular with the Lifelong Learning Programme, the Seventh Framework Programme for Research, with external cooperation programmes and with the European Fund for the Integration of third-country nationals.	1. The Commission shall, in cooperation with the Member States, ensure overall consistency and complementarity with other relevant Community policies, instruments and actions, in particular with the Lifelong Learning Programme, the Seventh Framework Programme for Research, with development policy and external cooperation programmes and with the European Fund for the Integration of third-country nationals.
Justification
Ensures consistency with development policy (as required by Art 178 of the EC Treaty).
Amendment  11 Proposal for a decision Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. For actions funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006, evaluation shall include follow-up with the nationals of developing countries following expiry of their periods of study or research in the EU and shall assess their subsequent contribution to the economic or social development of their country of origin.
Justification
To assess how far Erasmus Mundus scholarships contribute to the development objectives of the financing instrument DCI, it will be necessary for follow-up to be carried out with former students.
Amendment  12 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 2 - paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The Community will select partnerships of high academic quality which, for the purposes of the programme, will be called ‘Erasmus Mundus partnerships’. They pursue and are in line with the objectives of article 3.	The Community will select partnerships of high academic quality which, for the purposes of the programme, will be called ‘Erasmus Mundus partnerships’. They pursue and are in line with the objectives of article 3, in so far as these are in conformity with the legal base from which the funding is derived.
Justification
Ensures respect for the provisions of DCI and the Cotonou Agreement in the selection of partnerships.
Amendment  13 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 2 - paragraph 2 - introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
For the purpose of the programme, Erasmus Mundus partnerships shall:	For the purpose of the programme, and in conformity with the legal base from which the funding is derived, Erasmus Mundus partnerships shall:
Justification
Ensures there are no contradictions between the Erasmus Mundus Decision and other legislation governing use of the same funds.
Amendment  14 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 2 - paragraph 2 - point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
c) exchange students at all levels of higher education (from bachelor to post-doctoral), academics and higher education staff for mobility periods of variable length, including the possibility of placement periods. Mobility must take European nationals to third countries and third-country nationals to European countries. The scheme will also allow the hosting of third-country nationals who are not linked to the third-country institutions involved in the partnerships, as well as include specific provisions for vulnerable groups, as appropriate to the political and socio-economic context of the respective region/country;	c) exchange students at all levels of higher education (from bachelor to post-doctoral), academics and higher education staff for mobility periods of variable length, including the possibility of placement periods. Except in the case of measures funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006 or the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, mobility may take European nationals to third countries. Mobility shall take third-country nationals to European countries. The scheme will also allow the hosting of third-country nationals who are not linked to the third-country institutions involved in the partnerships, as well as include specific provisions for vulnerable groups, as appropriate to the political and socio-economic context of the respective region/country;
Justification
Ensures funding from DCI and the Cotonou Agreement may only be used to provide scholarships for nationals of developing countries to study at EU universities, rather than for the benefit of EU nationals.
Amendment   15 Proposal for a decision Annex − Action 2 − paragraph 2 − point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
d) have built-in mechanisms for the recognition of periods of study and research undertaken in partner institutions based on, or compatible with, the European credit transfer and accumulation system;	d) have built-in mechanisms for the mutual recognition of periods of study and research undertaken in partner institutions based on, or compatible with, the European credit transfer and accumulation system as well as equivalent systems in third countries;
Amendment  16 Proposal for a decision Annex − Action 2 − paragraph 2 − point f
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
f) establish transparent conditions for the award of mobility grants which pay due regard, inter alia, to gender issues and equity issues;	f) establish transparent conditions for the award of mobility grants based on merit which pay due regard, inter alia, to gender issues, equity issues and linguistic abilities;
Justification
Ensuring candidates have a minimum level of proficiency in the language of instruction is vital to maintaining high academic standards.
Amendment  17 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 2 - paragraph 2 - point h
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
h) put in place appropriate arrangements to facilitate access for, and hosting of, European and third-country students, academics and higher education staff (information facilities, accommodation, assistance with visas, etc.);	h) put in place appropriate arrangements to facilitate access for, and hosting of, European and third-country students, academics and higher education staff (information facilities, accommodation, assistance with visas, including payment of visa fees, etc.);
Justification
Students should not be disadvantaged by differing visa requirements between Member States, and particularly the differing charges applied to visas. Provision is therefore made for the visa fees to be covered by the scholarship funding.
Amendment  18 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 2 - paragraph 2 - point j a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	ja) in the case of measures funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006 or the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, ensure that nationals of developing countries study or carry out research in areas that are relevant to the economic development of their countries of origin;
Justification
Ensures the development objectives of DCI and the Cotonou Agreement are respected by ensuring students benefiting from funding under these instruments undertake study in areas relevant to the development of their countries of origin
Amendment  19 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 2 - paragraph 2 - point j b(new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	jb) in the case of measures funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006 or the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, put in place mechanisms to ensure that nationals of developing countries return to their countries of origin on the expiry of their periods of study or research to allow them to contribute to the economic development and welfare of the developing countries concerned.
Justification
To comply with the objectives of development instruments, incentives must be provided for recipients of scholarships financed from these instruments to return to their countries of origin and contribute to the development of the countries concerned.
Amendment  20 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 2 - paragraph 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3a. In the case of partnerships including developing countries, priority shall be given to partnerships involving publicly funded higher education institutions in the developing countries.
Justification
To avoid concentration on the elites in third country societies and increase the possibility of Erasmus Mundus opportunities being opened to less wealthy and more disadvantaged groups, priority must be accorded to partnerships involving publicly-funded education institutions rather than just private universities.
Amendment  21 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 2 - paragraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. Scholarships will be open to European and third-country students and academics as defined in Article 2.	5. Scholarships will be open to European and third-country students and academics as defined in Article 2. In the case of measures funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006 or the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, scholarships will only be open to third-country students and academics as defined in Article 2 of this Decision.
Justification
Ensures funding from DCI or the Cotonou Agreement is not used to benefit EU nationals, thereby respecting the development objectives of these instruments.
Amendment  22 Proposal for a decision Annex – Action 2 - paragraph 6
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
6. In assigning the scholarships under this action, the Commission shall support socio-economic disadvantaged groups and populations in vulnerable situations.	6. In assigning the scholarships under this action, the Commission shall support socio-economic disadvantaged groups and populations in vulnerable situations without compromising the transparency conditions set out in point 2(f. In the case of measures funded under Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006 or the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, priority shall be given to such groups and populations.
Justification
The Commission has agreed to prioritise disadvantaged and vulnerable groups, but there has been no indication of the means by which this shall be carried out. This amendment gives legislative force to the requirement to implement such prioritisationand combines it with the requirement to select students on merit.

PROCEDURE

Title	Erasmus Mundus programme (2009-2013)
References	COM(2007)0395 – C6-0228/2007 – 2007/0145(COD)
Committee responsible	CULT
Opinion by        Date announced in plenary	DEVE 3.9.2007
Associated committee(s) - date announced in plenary	13.3.2008
Drafts(wo)man        Date appointed	Alessandro Battilocchio 5.11.2007
Discussed in committee	1.4.2008
Date adopted	28.5.2008
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	27 0 0
Members present for the final vote	Margrete Auken, Alessandro Battilocchio, Thijs Berman, Danutė Budreikaitė, Marie-Arlette Carlotti, Beniamino Donnici, Fernando Fernández Martín, Juan Fraile Cantón, Alain Hutchinson, Filip Kaczmarek, Glenys Kinnock, Maria Martens, Gay Mitchell, Luisa Morgantini, Horst Posdorf, José Ribeiro e Castro, Frithjof Schmidt, Jürgen Schröder, Feleknas Uca, Jan Zahradil
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	John Bowis, Ana Maria Gomes, Miguel Angel Martínez Martínez, Manolis Mavrommatis, Mihaela Popa, Renate Weber, Gabriele Zimmer

• [1]  Instrument for Pre-Accession (IPA), European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI), Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI) European Development Fund (EDF), Industrialised Countries Instrument (ICI)
• [2]  Council Regulation (EC) No 617/2007 of 14 May 2007
• [3]  DCI Article 2(4), 1st para
• [4]  Mentioned in OECD/DAC Creditor Reporting System Purpose Codes 11420 and 43081
• [5]  OECD/DAC Factsheet "Is it ODA?", October 2006

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON BUDGETS (30.5.2008)

for the Committee on Culture and Education

on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an action programme for the enhancement of quality in higher education and the promotion of intercultural understanding through co-operation with third countries (Erasmus Mundus) (2009-2013)
(COM(2007)0395 – C6‑0228/2007 – 2007/0145(COD))

Draftswoman: Helga Trüpel

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

1. Current Erasmus Mundus programme

The current Erasmus Mundus programme covers the 2004-2008 period. Its overall aim is to enhance the quality of European higher education by fostering cooperation with third countries. The particular objectives include: promoting a quality offer in higher education, attracting quality graduates and scholars, fostering cooperation with third countries´ educational institutions, improving accessibility and visibility of higher education in the EU.[1]

The financial framework of the programme for the years 2004-2008 has been set for EUR 230 million, financed under Heading 1a of the Financial Framework.

The so called "External Cooperation Windows" of the programme are based on several Council regulations concerning various external policy instruments; accordingly, they are financed separately, under the financial envelopes of these instruments.

2. Commission's proposal for the extension of the programme

The aim of the proposal is to extend the programme for a further five years (2009-2013), in a modified form. One of the major modifications to the programme, apart from the inclusion of doctoral studies, is the proposal to incorporate its External Cooperation Windows more directly.

The programme has, so far, been implemented by the Education and Culture Executive Agency (EAC EA), and according to the proposal it would still be the case in the coming years. One should note, however, that the mandate of the Agency still needs to be extended for that purpose (see amendment 2).

From a budgetary point of view, a major modification is the integration of the activities currently covered by the "External Cooperation Windows" into the Erasmus Mundus programme itself as Action 2 (Erasmus Mundus Partnerships with Third-Countries Higher Education Institutions including Scholarships). The financial provisions are very much different from those applying to Action 1 (Erasmus Mundus Joint Programmes including Scholarships) and Action 3 (Enhancing the Attractiveness of European Higher Education).

Financing of Action 1 and 3

The overall reference amount for the five years of the duration of the programme is EUR 493,69 million, to be financed under Heading 1a of the Financial Framework. This represents a serious increase compared to the envelope foreseen for the 2004-2008 period, which is to be welcomed, in light of the proposed inclusion of doctoral studies into the programme and the declared ambition to ensure better funding to the successful applicants.

The breakdown of this expenditure is as follows:

EUR million

	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014+	Total
Operational expenditure - CA	90,25	92,52	94,1	95,86	98,54		471,27
Operational expenditure - PA	63,17	91,839	93,63	95,33	97,74	29,56	471,27
Administrative expenditure within ref. amount	4,42	4,46	4,48	4,51	4,56		22,42
Total reference amount - CA	94,67	96,98	98,58	100,37	103,10		493,69
Total reference amount - PA	67,59	96,30	98,10	99,84	102,29	29,56	493,69

The operational expenditure is in line with the Financial Programming as presented by the Commission in January 2008. This is also the case for the overall amount of administrative expenditure of the programme.

The administrative expenditure within reference amount comes to EUR 22,42 million over the five years of the duration of the programme. It represents 4,5% of the reference amount, which seems to be an acceptable ratio. Out of this sum, EUR 17,44 million (78%) will cover the needs of the Executive Agency, which, according to the information from the Commission, will implement some 97-98% of the operational budget.

Financing of Action 2

The current "External Cooperation Windows" were launched in 2005 at the initiative of the Commission's DG AidCo and implemented on the basis of various external policy instruments, such as DCI or ENPI.

However, the proposal for the new Erasmus Mundus regulation does not include concrete and binding provisions on the financing of Action 2; it only refers to the legal bases of the external policy instruments, namely: Instrument for Pre-Accession (Regulation 1085/2006), European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (Regulation 1638/2006), Development Cooperation Instrument (Regulation 1905/2006), Instrument for Cooperation with Industrialised and Other High-Income Countries (ICI, Regulation 1934/2006), and European Development Fund (ACP Partnership Agreement (Decision 2005/599/EC) and the relevant Internal Agreement (Decision 2006/608/EC)). The indicative expenditure on Action 2 of Erasmus Mundus under those instruments - covered by Heading 4 of the Financial Framework - would amount to EUR 460 million, with following indicative breakdown:

- ENPI: EUR 140 million

- DCI: EUR 240 million

- ICI: 20 EUR million

- IPA: EUR 30 million

- 10^th EDF: EUR 30 million

It should be noted, however, that this overall amount and contributions from these instruments are neither definite nor legally binding, as they are not determined in the legislative part of the proposal. Accordingly, your rapporteur proposes amendment 3 to the legislative resolution.

The detailed breakdown of the amounts planned for action 2 under different external instruments provided by the Commission is indicative only; nevertheless, it should be monitored by the responsible parliamentary committees whether this breakdown is followed and what are the extent and reasons behind its modifications, if any.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Budgets calls on the Committee on Culture and Education, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following amendments in its report:

Amendment  1 Draft legislative resolution Paragraph 1 a (new)
Draft legislative resolution	Amendment
	1a. Considers that the financial envelope indicated in the legislative proposal must be compatible with the ceiling of heading 1a of the new multiannual financial framework (MFF) and points out that the annual amount will be decided within the annual budgetary procedure in accordance with the provisions of point 37 of the IIA of 17 May 2006 on budgetary discipline and sound financial management;
Amendment  2 Draft legislative resolution Paragraph 1 b (new)
Draft legislative resolution	Amendment
	1b. Notes that the mandate of the Education and Culture Executive Agency does not cover the proposed extension of the Erasmus Mundus programme; stresses that implementation of the programme by the Executive Agency will only be possible after a duly approved extension of the mandate, in accordance with the legal provisions in force;
Justification
Parliament should insist on the obligation to respect legal provisions regulating the functioning of executive agencies.
Amendment  3 Draft legislative resolution Paragraph 1 c (new)
Draft legislative resolution	Amendment
	1c. Notes that the indicative overall amount of EUR 460 million proposed for the financing of Action 2 of the programme would be covered by the financial envelopes of the respective external policy instruments;
Justification
Amendment clarifies financial characteristics of the expenditure on Action 2.
Amendment  4 Draft legislative resolution Paragraph 1 d (new)
Draft legislative resolution	Amendment
	1d. Stresses that financing of the activities foreseen under Action 2 must not be detrimental to other activities financed under the respective instruments; reiterates its position that new actions should only be financed from the EU budget when additional financial means are provided for them; calls on the Commission to provide the Parliament with an annual report presenting detailed data on the activities under Action 2 and their breakdown by financial instrument and among the regions and countries concerned;
Justification
Amendment aims at ensuring that expenditure on education under different external policy instruments is not made at the expense of other objectives determined in respective legal bases.
Amendment  5 Proposal for a decision Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point (b)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) the annual budget and the breakdown of funds among the different actions of the programme and indicative grant amounts;	(b) the annual allocations and the distribution of funds among the different actions of the programme, including information on their geographical distribution, and indicative grant amounts by actions and countries promoting access on an equal footing;
Justification
This is a clearer formulation, in line with earlier legislation within the policy area.
Amendment  6 Proposal for a decision Article 12 - paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. The annual appropriations shall be authorised by the budgetary authority within the limits of the financial perspective.	3. The annual appropriations shall be authorised in accordance with the annual budgetary procedure by the budgetary authority within the limits of the financial perspective.
Amendment  7 Proposal for a decision Article 13 - paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The Commission shall regularly monitor the programme in cooperation with the Member States. The results of the process of monitoring and evaluation of the programme and of the previous programme shall be utilised when implementing the programme. This monitoring shall include the reports referred to in paragraph 3 and specific activities.	1. The Commission shall regularly monitor the programme in cooperation with the Member States. The results of the process of monitoring and evaluation of the programme and of the previous programme shall be utilised when implementing the programme. This monitoring shall include the reports referred to in paragraph 3 and specific activities. In addition, the Commission shall report to the European Parliament, on the geographical distribution of funding by actions for all participating countries, providing also an assessment of the efficiency of the implementation of actions judged against programme priorities.
Amendment  8 Proposal for a decision Annex - Action 1 - Part A - point 2 - point j
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(j) shall establish a joint tuition fee regardless of the actual place of study of the students within the masters programme;	(j) shall leave Erasmus Mundus Masters consortia free to charge students as they wish according to their national legislation and according to the agreement reached within each consortium;
Justification
Allows for all countries to participate in Erasmus Mundus regardless of the tuition schemes in each individual country.
Amendment  9 Proposal for a decision Annex - Action 1 - Part B - point 2 - point j
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(j) shall establish a joint tuition fee regardless of the actual place of study and research of the doctoral candidates within the doctoral programme;	(j) shall leave Erasmus Mundus Doctoral consortia free to charge doctoral candidates as they wish according to their national legislation and according to the agreement reached within each consortium;
Justification
Allows for all countries to participate in Erasmus Mundus regardless of the tuition schemes in each individual country.

PROCEDURE

Title	Erasmus Mundus programme (2009-2013)
References	COM(2007)0395 – C6-0228/2007 – 2007/0145(COD)
Committee responsible	CULT
Opinion by        Date announced in plenary	BUDG 3.9.2007
Drafts(wo)man        Date appointed	Helga Trüpel 24.10.2007
Discussed in committee	6.5.2008		29.5.2008
Date adopted	29.5.2008
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	28 0 0
Members present for the final vote	Simon Busuttil, Daniel Dăianu, Brigitte Douay, James Elles, Szabolcs Fazakas, Markus Ferber, Vicente Miguel Garcés Ramón, Salvador Garriga Polledo, Ingeborg Gräßle, Louis Grech, Nathalie Griesbeck, Catherine Guy-Quint, Jutta Haug, Ville Itälä, Anne E. Jensen, Silvana Koch-Mehrin, Wiesław Stefan Kuc, Janusz Lewandowski, Vladimír Maňka, Mario Mauro, László Surján, Gary Titley, Helga Trüpel, Kyösti Virrankoski
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Thijs Berman, Marusya Ivanova Lyubcheva, Margarita Starkevičiūtė, Gianluca Susta

• [1]  Decision No 2317/2003/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 5 December 2003 establishing a programme for the enhancement of quality in higher education and the promotion of intercultural understanding through cooperation with third countries (Erasmus Mundus) (2004 to 2008) (OJ L 345, 31.12.2003, p. 1).

OPINION of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (3.4.2008)

for the Committee on Culture and Education

on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an action programme for the enhancement of quality in higher education and the promotion of intercultural understanding through cooperation with third countries (Erasmus Mundus) (2009-2013)
(COM(2007)0395 – C6‑0228/2007 – 2007/0145(COD))

Draftswoman: Jamila Madeira

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

The draftswoman welcomes the Commission proposal to extend the Erasmus Mundus programme until 2013 and, in particular, to widen its scope to encompass new levels of study and fields of activity.

As regards the main new features introduced by the proposal, the programme is to be broadened out the cover the doctoral level; scholarships may be awarded to European students taking part in the programme; European industry and commerce and research centres are to be actively involved in implementing and developing the programme; and the External Cooperation Window is to be incorporated into the programme under Action 2, which extends to every level of study, including bachelor’s degrees, a fact which could enable exchanges with third countries to be translated into reality at the starting level of higher education.

The Americans have a worldwide model with a known history of creaming off foreign brains for US master’s or doctoral-level studies; to counteract this, we need to exploit our excellence and promote what are the EU’s best assets, namely teaching of recognised high quality, the magnet of cultural and linguistic diversity, and grants commensurate with a decent standard of living in Europe.

The EU is at present facing a number of challenges related to population trends and hence the sustainability of the European social model, not least high unemployment rates and, above all, a brain drain away from Europe towards the United States or the emerging economies.

It must endeavour to create the conditions required to keep European brains on Union territory as well as investing in the training of third-country nationals in our higher education institutions and providing them with opportunities to settle in Europe, which can thus become a reference point and a centre of excellence in world terms. The efforts in this area will depend on the involvement of business and on public-private partnerships, the idea being to enable the highly qualified personnel in question to enter the labour market as soon as they have completed their Erasmus Mundus master’s or doctor’s degree courses and to discourage them from joining the brain drain once they have been trained in the EU. Creating more and better jobs is a concern that must remain very much to the fore when the programme is implemented.

There are considerable rough edges to be smoothed in order to make a success of the programme: one example is to be found in the issue of visas to Erasmus Mundus students, who frequently encounter difficulties in obtaining or renewing them and are very often compelled to live in a kind of legal limbo in which they attend master’s courses, but have only tourist visas, which may have expired. One option to consider, therefore, is to introduce an Erasmus Mundus student visa.

As regards the cultural and linguistic diversity of the EU and the partnerships to be promoted outside EU territory, it must always be borne in mind that learning the host country’s language is an invaluable way of enabling programme participants genuinely to engage with local culture.

The draftswoman considers it essential for the programme to spell out a commitment to equal opportunities for men and women and to the provision to be made for people with disabilities, for instance by adjusting scholarship awards according to their special needs.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Employment and Social Affairs calls on the Committee on Culture and Education, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following amendments in its report:

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendments by Parliament
Amendment 1 Recital 5 a (new)
	(5a) The Commission communication entitled ‘Putting knowledge into practice: A broad-based innovation strategy for the EU’1 points to the need for an approach based on innovative regional clusters, since it is very often at regional level that businesses, especially small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), interact with each other and with centres of learning and technology. Proximity is a key factor in the innovation process that enhances the effectiveness of innovation policy.
	1 COM(2006)0502.
Justification
Innovation, the establishment of centres of excellence, and partnerships between universities and the business world should diversify their spheres of activity in order to work to advantage and generate added value in host regions.
Amendment 2 Recital 7
(7) Enhancing the quality of European higher education, promoting understanding between peoples as well as contributing to the sustainable development of third countries in the field of higher education avoiding brain-drain whilst favouring vulnerable groups are the core objectives of a higher education cooperation programme aimed at third countries. The most effective means to achieve these aims in a programme of excellence are highly integrated study programmes at postgraduate level, collaborative partnerships with third countries, scholarships for the most talented students and projects to enhance the worldwide attractiveness of European higher education.	(7) Enhancing the quality of European higher education, promoting understanding between peoples as well as contributing to the sustainable development of third countries in the field of higher education, avoiding brain-drain whilst favouring vulnerable groups, are the core objectives of a higher education cooperation programme aimed at third countries. The most effective means to achieve these aims in a programme of excellence are highly integrated study programmes at all levels of study, collaborative partnerships with third countries, scholarships for the most talented students and projects to enhance the worldwide attractiveness of European higher education.
Amendment 3 Recital 9
(9) Promoting the teaching and learning of languages and linguistic diversity should be a priority of Community action in the field of higher education. The teaching and learning of languages is of special relevance in relation to third countries.	(9) Promoting the teaching and learning of at least two languages and linguistic diversity should be a priority of Community action in the field of higher education. The teaching and learning of languages are of special relevance in relation to third countries and to the European students who go to those countries.
Justification
Language learning is one of the keys to familiarisation with other cultures and should be highlighted in this programme as a way for students to integrate.
Amendment 4 Recital 9 a (new)
	(9a) The objectives of the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue 2008 should also be promoted with regard to higher education, by means of education actions and programmes.
Justification
The objectives of the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue 2008 are fully shared by the European Union and all the programmes implemented by it. With a view to achieving more effective results from this Year, the objectives of multiculturalism should also be adapted in the field of education programmes such as Erasmus Mundus.
Amendment 5 Article 2, point 14
14. “mobility” means moving physically to another country, in order to undertake study, work experience, research, other learning or teaching or research activity or related administrative activity, supported as appropriate by preparation in the host language;	14. “mobility” means moving physically to another country, in order to undertake study, work experience, research, other learning or teaching or research activity or related administrative activity, supported wherever possible by preparation in the host language;
Justification
Language learning is one of the keys to familiarisation with other cultures and should be highlighted in this programme as a way for students to integrate.
Amendment 6 Article 3, paragraph 1
1. The programme's overall aim is to enhance the quality of European higher education and to promote dialogue and understanding between peoples and cultures through cooperation with third countries as well as to promote EU external policy objectives and the sustainable development of third countries in the field of higher education.	1. The programme's overall aim is to enhance the quality of European higher education, to help improve and enhance the career prospects for young people and to promote dialogue and understanding between peoples and cultures through cooperation with third countries as well as to promote EU external policy objectives and the sustainable development of third countries in the field of higher education.
Amendment 7 Article 3, paragraph 2, point (b)
(b) to contribute to the mutual enrichment of societies by developing a pool of well-qualified, open-minded and internationally experienced women/men through promoting mobility for the most talented students and academics from third countries to obtain qualifications and/or experience in the European Union and for the most talented European students and academics towards third countries;	(b) to contribute to the mutual enrichment of societies by developing a pool of well-qualified, open-minded and internationally experienced women/men who are able to satisfy the requirements of the labour market through promoting mobility for the most talented students and academics from third countries to obtain qualifications and/or experience in the European Union and for the most talented European students and academics towards third countries;
Justification
Education programmes can play a particularly important role in the context of efforts to achieve the economic and employment objectives of the Lisbon Strategy. Many Commission and Parliament documents have called for the closest possible correlation between education programmes and the requirements of the labour market.
Amendment 8 Article 3, paragraph 2, point (d)
(d) to improve accessibility and enhance the profile and visibi­lity of European higher education in the world as well as its attractiveness for third-country nationals.	(d) to improve accessibility and enhance the profile and visibi­lity of European higher education in the world as well as its attractiveness for third-country nationals and citizens of Member States.
Justification
As the programme is now open on equal terms to citizens of Member States and third-country nationals, the campaign to promote higher education must be carried on within and outside the Union. Excellence must be promoted globally.
Amendment 9 Article 4, paragraph 1, point (c)
(c) measures enhancing the attractiveness of Europe as an educational destination.	(c) measures enhancing the attractiveness of Europe as an educational destination and a centre of excellence at world level.
Justification
The excellence of European education must be highlighted; Europe’s attractiveness as an educational destination depends on how successfully we promote the potential of our universities.
Amendment 10 Article 4, paragraph 2, point (b)
(b) enhanced support for mobility, between the Community and third countries, of people in the field of higher education;	(b) enhanced support for mobility, between the Community and third countries, of people in the field of higher education, for example under arrangements providing for an effective visa system compatible with the duration of Erasmus Mundus study programmes;
Justification
Visa policy is frequently at odds with the Erasmus Mundus programme, for example because of the waiting time entailed in the issue of a visa or of the fact that a master’s degree course might last two years and a visa is valid for just one year, often resulting in a situation in which students attend the relevant courses in given host countries when they are legally not entitled to be there. It would be more useful to establish an ‘Erasmus Mundus visa’ valid for a period allowing for the duration of study programmes.
Amendment 11 Article 4, paragraph 2, point (d)
(d) support for pilot projects based on partnerships with an external dimension designed to develop innovation and quality in higher education;	(d) support for pilot projects based on partnerships with an external dimension designed to develop innovation and quality in higher education, as well as for public-private partnerships between universities and enterprises, with a view to fostering excellence in research and achieving the innovation objectives;
Justification
Partnerships between universities and private firms should be encouraged and implemented, given that they could help to foster excellence and create opportunities for the intellectually gifted to settle in Europe.
Amendment 12 Article 6, paragraph 1, point (c a) (new)
	(ca) ensure, when setting the individual amount of student grants, that the student’s estimated study and living expenses in the country of destination are taken into account.
Justification
Specific arrangements need to be laid down for calculating the amounts necessary for the duration of university exchanges in line with actual living costs in the state of destination, since living costs differ considerably both within the European Union and elsewhere.
Amendment 13 Article 6, paragraph 2, point (c a) (new)
	(ca) mutually recognise both informal and non-formal qualifications gained within the framework of the Erasmus Mundus programme, as well as formal qualifications, on the basis of the common reference system embodied in the European Qualifications Framework.
Amendment 14 Article 6, paragraph 3, point (b a) (new)
	(ba) that the communication strategy aimed at potentially interested European parties is intensified, and partnerships between universities, the social partners and non-governmental organisations are encouraged, with a view to developing the programme.
Justification
Communication strategy is of paramount importance for the success of the Erasmus Mundus programme. Contact between universities and the social partners and non-governmental organisations plays a central role in this regard.
Amendment 15 Article 10, point (a)
(a) enhancing the knowledge base of European economy and contributing to strengthening the global competitiveness of the European Union.	(a) enhancing the knowledge base of European economy, contributing to creating more jobs in line with the Lisbon Strategy objectives and strengthening the global competitiveness of the European Union.
Amendment 16 Article 10, point (a a) (new)
	(aa) increasing labour mobility in the European Union and attracting students and researchers from third countries who can bring significant added value to the European academic world;
Justification
The strategy for the Erasmus Mundus programme must take into account the integration of participating students in the labour market and the contribution that the programme can make to European mobility, a key factor for economic growth. At the same time, the European university world has much to gain from study periods spent by students from third countries.
Amendment 17 Article 10, point (a b) (new)
	(ab) fostering culture, knowledge and skills for peaceful and sustainable development in a Europe of diversity;
Justification
An integrated approach for the programme entails providing deliberate support for culture, knowledge and skills. This will open up a wider horizon beyond the promotion of employment and the labour market.
Amendment 18 Article 10, point (c)
(c) making provision for students with special needs, and in particular by helping to promote their integration into mainstream higher education;	(c) making provision for students with special needs, and in particular by helping to promote their integration into mainstream higher education, and promoting equal opportunities for all;
Justification
It is necessary to prevent high-flyers being left behind on account of economic difficulties or because they are denied the necessary access to information.
Amendment 19 Annex, Action 1, Part A, point 2 j)
j) shall establish a joint tuition fee regardless of the actual place of study of the students within the masters’ programme.	j) shall establish a joint tuition fee regardless of the actual place of study of the students within the masters’ programme with respect to the right of the national states to decide the model of financing in education;

PROCEDURE

Title	Erasmus Mundus programme (2009-2013)
References	COM(2007)0395 – C6-0228/2007 – 2007/0145(COD)
Committee responsible	CULT
Opinion by        Date announced in plenary	EMPL 3.9.2007
Drafts(wo)man        Date appointed	Jamila Madeira 11.9.2007
Discussed in committee	23.1.2008		26.2.2008
Date adopted	2.4.2008
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	43 1 0
Members present for the final vote	Jan Andersson, Edit Bauer, Iles Braghetto, Philip Bushill-Matthews, Milan Cabrnoch, Alejandro Cercas, Ole Christensen, Derek Roland Clark, Luigi Cocilovo, Proinsias De Rossa, Harlem Désir, Harald Ettl, Richard Falbr, Carlo Fatuzzo, Ilda Figueiredo, Stephen Hughes, Karin Jöns, Ona Juknevičienė, Raymond Langendries, Bernard Lehideux, Elizabeth Lynne, Thomas Mann, Jan Tadeusz Masiel, Jiří Maštálka, Elisabeth Morin, Csaba Őry, Marie Panayotopoulos-Cassiotou, Pier Antonio Panzeri, Jacek Protasiewicz, Bilyana Ilieva Raeva, Elisabeth Schroedter, Kathy Sinnott, Ewa Tomaszewska, Gabriele Zimmer
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Jean Marie Beaupuy, Beniamino Donnici, Donata Gottardi, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch, Magda Kósáné Kovács, Sepp Kusstatscher, Jamila Madeira, Kyriacos Triantaphyllides, Anja Weisgerber, Tatjana Ždanoka

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON WOMEN'S RIGHTS AND GENDER EQUALITY (4.4.2008)

for the Committee on Culture and Education

on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an action programme for the enhancement of quality in higher education and the promotion of intercultural understanding through co-operation with third countries (Erasmus Mundus) (2009-2013)
(COM(2007)0395 – C6‑0228/2007 – 2007/0145(COD))

Draftswoman: Teresa Riera Madurell

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

As the overall results of participation show, the first phase of the Erasmus Mundus Programme has been a great success. However, the picture is less flourishing if one analyses the percentage of women participation. In this light, the aim of the draftsperson has been twofold: to promote the basic right of equality between men and women through education in order to contribute towards more just and democratic societies and to enhance the concrete mechanisms which can help increase the programme's accessibility for women in order to avoid such a waste of talents.

Therefore, proposed amendments refer to the implementation of gender mainstreaming when defining educational programmes, to women's access to and participation in the programme through gender-sensitive selection criteria and procedures, to the gender-balanced representation in the programme's Committee, and to the gathering of gender-based data in the programme's evaluations reports.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality calls on the Committee on Culture and Education, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following amendments in its report:

Amendment  1 Proposal for a decision Recital 7
Text proposed by the Commission[1]	Amendment
(7) Enhancing the quality of European higher education, promoting understanding between peoples as well as contributing to the sustainable development of third countries in the field of higher education avoiding brain-drain whilst favouring vulnerable groups are the core objectives of a higher education cooperation programme aimed at third countries. The most effective means to achieve these aims in a programme of excellence are highly integrated study programmes at postgraduate level, collaborative partnerships with third countries, scholarships for the most talented students and projects to enhance the worldwide attractiveness of European higher education.	(7) Contributing to the personal fulfilment of European students, enhancing the quality of European higher education, promoting understanding between peoples, as well as contributing to the sustainable development of third countries in the field of higher education avoiding brain-drain whilst favouring vulnerable groups contributing to social cohesion, active citizenship and gender equality, through elimination of social gender stereotypes, are the core objectives of a higher education cooperation programme aimed at third countries. The most effective means to achieve these aims in a programme of excellence are highly integrated study programmes, either after the sixth level of the European Qualifications Framework, or after the first cycle of the European Higher Education Area (Bologna), collaborative partnerships with third countries, scholarships for the most talented students and projects to enhance the worldwide attractiveness of European higher education.
Amendment  2 Proposal for a decision Recital 8
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(8) There is a need to step up the fight against exclusion in all its forms, including racism and xenophobia, and to step up Community efforts to promote dialogue and understanding between cultures world-wide, bearing in mind the social dimension of higher education as well as the ideals of democracy and respect for human rights, especially as mobility fosters the exchange with new cultural and social environments and facilitates under­standing thereof, and in so doing to ensure that no group of citizens or of third-country nationals is excluded or disadvantaged as mentioned in Article 21(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.	(8) There is a need to step up the fight against exclusion in all its forms, including racism and xenophobia and discrimination against women, and to step up Community efforts to promote dialogue and understanding between cultures world-wide, bearing in mind the social dimension of higher education as well as the ideals of democracy and respect for human rights, including equality between women and men, especially as mobility fosters the exchange with new cultural and social environments and facilitates under­standing thereof, and in so doing to ensure that no group of citizens or of third-country nationals is excluded or disadvantaged as mentioned in Article 21(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
Amendment  3 Proposal for a decision Recital 12
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(12) In all its activities, the Community must aim to eliminate inequalities, and promote equality, between men and women, as provided for in Article 3(2) of the Treaty.	(12) In all its activities, the Community must aim to eliminate inequalities, and promote equality, between men and women, as provided for in Article 3(2) of the Treaty, giving special consideration to the integration of gender perspective in all types and levels of education and in accordance with the objectives of the roadmap for equality between women and men (2006-2010) (COM(2006)0092).
Amendment  4 Proposal for a decision Recital 13
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(13) There is a need to widen access for those from disadvantaged groups and to address actively the special learning needs of people with disabilities in the implementation of all parts of the programme, including through the use of higher grants to reflect the additional costs of disabled participants.	(13) There is a need to widen access for those from vulnerable groups and to address actively the special learning needs of people with disabilities or learning difficulties in the implementation of all parts of the programme, including through the use of higher grants to reflect the additional costs of participants affected and their families.
Amendment  5 Proposal for a decision Article 3 - paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The programme's overall aim is to enhance the quality of European higher education and to promote dialogue and understanding between peoples and cultures through cooperation with third countries as well as to promote EU external policy objectives and the sustainable development of third countries in the field of higher education.	1. The programme's overall aim is to enhance the quality of European higher education, to promote the gaining of qualifications with a view to the future professional development and mobility of men and women, and to promote dialogue and understanding between peoples and cultures through cooperation with third countries as well as to promote EU external policy objectives and the sustainable development of third countries in the field of higher education.
Amendment  6 Proposal for a decision Article 3 - paragraph 2 - point (b a) (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ba) to contribute to the promotion of equality between women and men by improving women's access to and participation in the programme;
Amendment  7 Proposal for a decision Article 3 - paragraph 2 - point (d)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) to improve accessibility and enhance the profile and visibility of European higher education in the world as well as its attractiveness for third-country nationals.	(d) to improve accessibility and facilitate access for women from third countries, in particular those living in rural areas and economically less-favoured regions, and to enhance the profile and visibility of European higher education in the world as well as its attractiveness for male and female academics and students who are third-country nationals.
Justification
Access to programmes such as this one may sometimes be difficult for women from rural areas, particularly in terms of information on the existence of programmes and the lack of financial resources which may pose an obstacle to their joining these programmes. Moreover, women from rural areas have an additional contribution to make to interculturality.
Amendment  8 Proposal for a decision Article 3 - paragraph 2 - point (d a) (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(da) to help both to ensure that sciences and humanities are promoted equally in order to improve their position on the labour market, and to encourage young people to match their qualifications to their options without being restricted by stereotypes, in particular gender-related stereotypes.
Amendment  9 Proposal for a decision Article 4 - paragraph 2 - point (c a) (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ca) support for capacity building for gender mainstreaming in higher education;
Amendment  10 Proposal for a decision Article 6 - paragraph 2 - point (a)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) take the necessary steps to ensure the efficient running of the programme at Member State level involving all the parties concerned in higher education in accordance with national practice, including endeavours to adopt such measures as may be deemed appropriate to remove legal and administrative barriers;·	(a) take the necessary steps to ensure the efficient running of the programme at Member State level involving all the parties concerned in higher education in accordance with national practice, including endeavours to adopt such measures as may be deemed appropriate to remove legal and administrative barriers and guarantee equal treatment;
Amendment  11 Proposal for a decision Article 7 - paragraph 2 - point (d)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) the selection criteria and procedures, including the composition and the internal rules of procedure of the selection board;	(d) gender-sensitive selection criteria and procedures, including the composition and the internal rules of procedure of the selection board;
Amendment  12 Proposal for a decision Article 8 - paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The Commission shall be assisted by a Committee.	1. The Commission shall be assisted by a Committee. It shall be ensured that there is a balanced representation of women and men in this Committee.
Amendment  13 Proposal for a decision Article 10 - point (a)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) enhancing the knowledge base of European economy and contributing to strengthening the global competitiveness of the European Union;	(a) enhancing the knowledge base of European economy and contributing to creating more jobs in line with the Lisbon Strategy objectives and strengthening the global competitiveness of the European Union;
Amendment  14 Proposal for a decision Article 10 - point (d)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) promoting equality between men and women and contributing to combating all forms of discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation.	(d) promoting equality between men and women and contributing to combating all forms of discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability or learning difficulty (in particular dyslexia, dyspraxia and dyscalculia), age or sexual orientation with a view to bolstering this equality and combating these forms of discrimination in third countries in the long term, so as to boost the active participation of young people and women in social, economic and political life in their countries.
Justification
Not all the Member States regard learning difficulties (in particular dyslexia, dyspraxia and dyscalculia) as a disability. Moreover, the educational arrangements made for students affected by these problems, such as authorisation to use a PC during exams, differ widely from one Member State to another. These students must be given an equal chance. The European Union also has an obligation to share experiences and promote the values of democracy, tolerance and respect for rights in education.
Amendment  15 Proposal for a decision Article 13 - paragraph 3 - point (a)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) an interim evaluation report on the results achieved and on the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the implementation of the programme by 31 March 2012;	(a) an interim evaluation report, that includes gender-disaggregated data, on the results achieved and on the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the implementation of the programme by 31 March 2012;
Amendment  16 Proposal for a decision Annex - Action 1 - A. Erasmus Mundus masters programmes - paragraph 2 - point h)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
h) shall reserve a minimum of places for, and host, European and third-country students who have been granted financial support under the programme;	h) shall fix a percentage of the total number of places for, and host, male and female European and third-country students who have been granted financial support under the programme;
Amendment  17 Proposal for a decision Annex - Action 1 - C. Scholarships - paragraph 1 - point d a) (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	da) The Community will ensure and apply transparent criteria for the award of scholarships which take into account, inter alia, respect for the principle of equal opportunities and non-discrimination;
Amendment  18 Proposal for a decision Annex - Selection procedures - point a)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
a) proposals under action 1 will be selected by the Commission assisted by a selection board presided over by a person whom it elects, composed of personalities of high standing from the academic world who are represen­tative of the diversity of higher education in the European Union. The selection board shall ensure that Erasmus Mundus masters programmes and doctoral programmes correspond to the highest academic quality. The Commission shall organise a European-level assessment of all eligible proposals by independent academic experts prior to submitting the proposals to the selection board. Each Erasmus Mundus masters programme and doctoral programme will be allocated a specific number of scholarships which will be paid to the selected individuals by the body managing the masters programmes and doctoral programmes. The selection of master students, doctoral candidates and academics will be carried out by the institutions participating in the Erasmus Mundus masters programmes and doctoral programmes following consultation with the Commission;	a) proposals under action 1 will be selected by the Commission assisted by a selection board presided over by a person whom it elects, composed of personalities of high standing from the academic world who are represen­tative of the diversity of higher education in the European Union. The selection board shall ensure that Erasmus Mundus masters programmes and doctoral programmes correspond to the highest academic quality. The Commission shall organise a European-level assessment of all eligible proposals by independent academic experts prior to submitting the proposals to the selection board. Each Erasmus Mundus masters programme and doctoral programme will be allocated a specific number of scholarships which will be paid to the selected individuals by the body managing the masters programmes and doctoral programmes. The selection of master students, doctoral candidates and academics will be carried out by the institutions participating in the Erasmus Mundus masters programmes and doctoral programmes following consultation with the Commission. Inclusion of gender equality and equity issues in the programme contents will be considered positively;

PROCEDURE

Title	Erasmus Mundus programme (2009-2013)
References	COM(2007)0395 – C6-0228/2007 – 2007/0145(COD)
Committee responsible	CULT
Opinion by        Date announced in plenary	FEMM 3.9.2007
Drafts(wo)man        Date appointed	Teresa Riera Madurell 1.10.2007
Discussed in committee	28.2.2008		3.4.2008
Date adopted	3.4.2008
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	23 0 0
Members present for the final vote	Edit Bauer, Edite Estrela, Věra Flasarová, Claire Gibault, Zita Gurmai, Lívia Járóka, Piia-Noora Kauppi, Urszula Krupa, Roselyne Lefrançois, Astrid Lulling, Zita Pleštinská, Anni Podimata, Christa Prets, Teresa Riera Madurell, Anne Van Lancker, Anna Záborská
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Gabriela Creţu, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Mary Honeyball, Marusya Ivanova Lyubcheva, Petya Stavreva, Feleknas Uca
Substitute(s) under Rule 178(2) present for the final vote	Manolis Mavrommatis

• [1]  Not yet published in OJ.

PROCEDURE

Title	Erasmus Mundus programme (2009-2013)
References	COM(2007)0395 – C6-0228/2007 – 2007/0145(COD)
Date submitted to Parliament	12.7.2007
Committee responsible        Date announced in plenary	CULT 3.9.2007
Committee(s) asked for opinion(s)        Date announced in plenary	AFET 3.9.2007		DEVE 3.9.2007		BUDG 3.9.2007		EMPL 3.9.2007
	FEMM 3.9.2007
Associated committee(s)        Date announced in plenary	DEVE 13.3.2008		AFET 13.3.2008
Rapporteur(s)        Date appointed	Marielle De Sarnez 27.8.2007
Discussed in committee	31.3.2008		5.5.2008
Date adopted	24.6.2008
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	33 2 1
Members present for the final vote	Maria Badia i Cutchet, Katerina Batzeli, Ivo Belet, Giovanni Berlinguer, Guy Bono, Nicodim Bulzesc, Marielle De Sarnez, Marie-Hélène Descamps, Jolanta Dičkutė, Milan Gaľa, Claire Gibault, Vasco Graça Moura, Christopher Heaton-Harris, Luis Herrero-Tejedor, Ruth Hieronymi, Mikel Irujo Amezaga, Ramona Nicole Mănescu, Manolis Mavrommatis, Ljudmila Novak, Dumitru Oprea, Zdzisław Zbigniew Podkański, Mihaela Popa, Christa Prets, Pál Schmitt, Hannu Takkula, Helga Trüpel, Thomas Wise
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Victor Boştinaru, Mary Honeyball, Elisabeth Morin, Reino Paasilinna, Christel Schaldemose, Ewa Tomaszewska, Cornelis Visser
Substitute(s) under Rule 178(2) present for the final vote	Nathalie Griesbeck, Søren Bo Søndergaard
Date tabled	7.7.2008