REPORT on Council's position on draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2011 - all sections

11.10.2010 - (12699/2010 – C7‑0202/2010 – 2010/2001(BUD))

and Letters of amendment Nos 1/2011 (SEC(2010)1064), 2/2011 (SEC(2010)0000) and 3/2011 (SEC(2010)0000) to the draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2011
Part 1: Motion for a resolution
Committee on Budgets
Rapporteurs: Sidonia Elżbieta Jędrzejewska - (Section III - Commission)
Helga Trüpel - (Other sections)

Amendments

• 001-003 (PDF - 100 KB)
• 001-003 (DOC - 225 KB)
• 004-004 (PDF - 90 KB)
• 004-004 (DOC - 212 KB)
• 005-006 (PDF - 96 KB)
• 005-006 (DOC - 218 KB)
• 007-010 (PDF - 106 KB)
• 007-010 (DOC - 230 KB)
• 011-016 (PDF - 116 KB)
• 011-016 (DOC - 243 KB)
• 017-022 (PDF - 123 KB)
• 017-022 (DOC - 246 KB)
• 023-028 (PDF - 116 KB)
• 023-028 (DOC - 243 KB)

MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

on Council's position on draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2011 - all sections (12699/2010 – C7‑0202/2010 – 2010/2001(BUD)) and Letters of amendment Nos 1/2011 (SEC(2010)1064), 2/2011 (SEC(2010)xxxx) and 3/2010 (SEC(2010)xxxx) to the draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2011

The European Parliament,

–       having regard to Article 314 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and to Article 106a of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community ,

–       having regard to Council Decision 2007/436/EC, Euratom of 7 June 2007 on the system of the European Communities' own resources[1],

–       having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities[2],

–       having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 on budgetary discipline and sound financial management[3],

–       having regard to its resolution of 25 March 2010 on priorities for the 2011 budget - Section III - Commission[4],

–       having regard to its resolution of 15 June 2010 on mandate for the trilogue on the 2011 draft budget[5],

–       having regard to the Draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2011 which the Commission presented on 27 April 2010 (COM(2010)0300),

–       having regard to the Position on the Draft budget of the European Union adopted by the Council on 12 August 2010 (12699/2010 - C7-0202/2010),

–       having regard to Letter of Amendment No 1/2011 to the Draft general Budget of the European Union for the financial year 2011 presented by the Commission on 15 September 2010,

–       having regard to Rule 75b of its Rules of Procedure,

–       having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets and the opinions of the other committees concerned (A7‑0284/2010),

SECTION III

Key issues and priorities for the 2011 budget

1.      Is firmly convinced that the budgetary procedure under the new Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) requires full and high-level political involvement of all institutions concerned; underlines that the conciliation procedure aims at reconciling the views of both branches of the budgetary authority and that the Joint Text on Budget 2011 will still have to be approved by both branches according to their own rules and Article 314(7) of the Treaty;

2.      Considers the written procedure for the adoption of the Council's position to be particularly inappropriate for the budgetary procedure, and questionable in the absence of public and clear political endorsement by the Council at ministerial level of an essential piece of EU legislation;

3.      Is moreover rather concerned about how to assess Council's position on Draft budget (DB) 2011 since the cuts adopted do not correspond to clearly defined objectives and seem, on the contrary, to be distributed randomly and radically throughout the whole budget; considers arbitrary reductions in appropriations not to be in line with sound budgeting;

4.      Considers that the entry into force of the TFEU, which strengthens EU policies and creates new fields of competence - notably Common Foreign and Security Policy, competitiveness and innovation, space, tourism, the fight against climate change, social policy, energy policy, justice and home affairs - implies a "lisbonisation"of the budget and therefore requires both branches of the budgetary authority to be coherent and consistent as regards increased financial capacities;

5.      Recalls that, despite consecutive Treaty changes and increased responsibilities transferred at Union level, the EU budget amounts to a modest 1% of GNI; opposes consequently the severe cuts adopted by the Council;

6.      Understands the concern expressed by some delegations in the Council that the pressures on Member States' budgets are particularly heavy for the financial year 2011 and that savings are all the more necessary, but nevertheless considers arbitrary reductions in payments appropriations not to be in line with sound budgeting, considers moreover that arbitrary reductions in commitments appropriations jeopardize the implementation of Union policies and programmes already agreed;

7.      Recalls, once more, that the EU budget should in no way be perceived and evaluated as a simple financial item added as a burden to national budgets but, on the contrary, is to be understood as an opportunity to gear up those initiatives and investments that are of interest and of added value to the EU as a whole, most of them co-decided by Parliament and the Council and thus legitimised also at national level; calls on the EU institutions to define a proper mechanism to evaluate and assess the "cost of non Europe" which would highlight the savings in national budgets generated by the pooling of resources;

8.      Reiterates that the complementary nature of the EU budget to national budgets and the impetus it creates should not be checked and curbed by arbitrary reductions that represent an infinitesimal share (less than 0,02%) compared to cumulated budgets of the 27 Member States;

9.      Recalls that youth-, education- and mobility-related policies have been identified by Parliament as one of its most important priorities, among others as mentioned in Parliament's resolution for the mandate of the trilogue, adopted in June 2010, for the 2011 budget since they are essential and necessary parts of the EU strategy for the economic recovery and the Europe 2020 strategy; emphasises that the proposed increase in appropriations for a selected number of budget items serves both short- and long-term strategies for the future of the EU;

10.    Reiterates its firm conviction that, in a context of scarce funds and global economic slowdown, the financing of EU policies should be closely monitored in order to avoid any expenditure which is not driven by a clear and identifiable objective, bearing in mind the European added value of the EU budget, since it is an expression of solidarity and efficiency by pooling together financial resources otherwise dispersed at national, regional and local level; emphasises as well that an overwhelming part of EU budget expenditures supports long-term investments necessary to stimulate EU economic growth;

11.    Points out that the margins stemming from the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) do not allow real room for manoeuvre, especially in subheadings 1a and 3b and heading 4, and reduce the capacity of the EU to react to policy changes and unforeseen needs while maintaining its priorities; points out that the scope of the challenges the EU faces, would require means well beyond the current ceilings of the multiannual financial framework; recalls, in that respect, that a substantial budget review is absolutely needed and that an immediate revision of the ceilings of the current MFF as well as some provisions of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 on budgetary discipline and sound financial management has been rendered unavoidable by the various challenges and new priorities that have arisen;

12.    Urges the Council to take full account of the clear conditions set out in its resolution of 22 September 2010 on the proposal for a Council regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2007-2013 ((COM(2010)0072 - 2010/0048(APP))[6] on the basis of which Parliament will give its consent to the new MFF regulation, as provided for by the TFEU;

13.    Recalls that the financing of its priorities and of the new policies stemming from the entry into force of the Treaty could not have been rendered possible by the ceilings of the MFF; stresses that, in order to ease the negotiation within the Conciliation Committee, it has, at the price of severe compromises, proposed the financing of these policies within the ceilings; points out, nevertheless, that this can only be managed through the decrease of appropriations on other, specific and carefully chosen, budget lines;

14.    As regards payment appropriations, refuses to consider an overall figure of the Council's position as a final target arrived at by decreasing or increasing expenditure on different lines without in-depth assessments of the real needs;

15.    Recalls that this practice of the Council may impact on the execution rate for commitments for the same year, by slowing down the rate of signing new contracts, especially in the final quarter, therefore disturbing multiannual life cycles of the EU programmes;

16.    Takes the general position that administrative expenditure supporting EU programmes should not be cut, as a matter of guaranteeing the swift implementation of the latter as well as its quality and adequate monitoring; therefore restores all of the Council's cuts in respect of the administrative management lines of those programmes;

On sub-heading 1a

17.    Recalls that, as EP horizontal priorities for the 2011 budget, youth, education and mobility require, under the various policies, cross-sectoral targeted investment as a means to foster EU growth and development; states, therefore, its will to increase appropriations for all Programmes related to those priorities, namely Lifelong Learning, People and Erasmus Mundus;

18.    Considers, in particular, that youth employment mobility is a key instrument to ensure the development of a competitive and dynamic job market in Europe and, as such, needs to be boosted; is therefore in favour of increasing appropriations for the European Employment Service and strongly supports to this end the launch of the Preparatory action "Your first EURES Job", which aims to help young people enter the job market or access specialised jobs in another Member State, as a first step towards a specific non-academic youth mobility programme;

19.    Acknowledges the added value represented by EU-financed research which creates a momentum among separate national efforts and investments in the field of research, and especially research related to energy, including the field of renewable energy, and the central role played by SMEs in European growth and employment rate; reiterates accordingly its support to the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework programme and especially the Entrepreneurship & Innovation and Intelligent Energy programmes, by increasing commitment and payment appropriations on a selected number of lines; notes that the smooth implementation of the R&D programmes should be guaranteed in order to avoid the transfer of the appropriations at the end of the budgetary period away from their intended use;

20.    Is extremely concerned by the insufficiency of resources available for the financing of policies at the core of competitiveness for growth and employment and by the worsening of this situation due to the upcoming financing of the Europe 2020 strategy; recalls that investment in policies such as education, research, innovation, transport (in particular TEN-Ts) and tourism has a crucial role to play in driving forward growth and employment;

21.    Believes it to be of utmost importance that the newly founded European Financial Authorities be funded from the beginning in a proper and sufficient way which allows them to contribute to the stability of the European and international financial system;

22.    Is convinced that the financing of the Euratom-Joint Undertaking for ITER should be reconsidered in the light of the Commission proposal on the financing of ITER for the years 2012 and 2013; is not ready to accept redeployment within the existing 7th framework programme for research to finance increasing financial needs that are no longer in line with the original proposal; considers therefore that, in the light of the implementation delays, and in order to launch negotiations with the Council on the future financing of ITER, a reduction by 47 million in commitment and payment appropriations on line 08 20 02 is the most suitable budgetary option;

23.    Supports the Commission's proposal to introduce payment appropriations under the heading on the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, in order to simplify the financial procedures relating to applications approved by the two arms of the budgetary authority; consequently restores the default value, noting that it can be insufficient for the needs of 2011;

24     Is convinced that a strategic perspective on the European energy situation is needed; notes that the Commission has established a Strategic Energy Technology (SET) Plan which is still in unclear finance conditions; has therefore created p.m. lines for several fields of the SET-plan which should become active soon;

On sub-heading 1b

25.    Notes that Council's position does not modify Commission's proposal in respect of commitments, and stresses that this position on commitment appropriations is well in line with the allocations set out in the MFF, taking into account the technical adjustment to the financial framework for 2011, as provided for in Point 17 of the Interinstitutional Agreement (IIA) of 17 June 2006;

26.    Deplores Council's restrictive approach on payments, which were cut by EUR 1 075 million (half of which for the completion of the 2006-2010 programming period) as compared to Commission's forecasts of payment needs for 2011; stresses that the latter were already assessed by the European Parliament as possibly having been underestimated and that Council's approach may put at risk the necessary catching up of programme implementation after its slow start at the beginning of the 2007-2013 period, as well as the recent legislative modifications agreed between Parliament and the Council in the frame of the European Economic Recovery Plan;

27.    Therefore restores Council's cuts in payment appropriations to the level of DB, while sticking to its initial position that Commission and Council should present and adopt swiftly an amending budget in case payment appropriations happen not to be sufficient to cover the needs; welcomes Council's declaration in this respect;

28.    Recalls that the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region Action Plan states that the proposed actions should, as far as possible, be funded from existing sources, including Structural and Cohesion funds; points out that the Council conclusions on the EUSBSR state that the Strategy relies on more efficient use of existing EU instruments and funds, as well as other existing resources and financial instruments; underlines that this Strategy must be given appropriate recognition and funding;

On heading 2

29.    Points out that the CAP's primary goal should be to provide market stability, food security, fair prices revenues for farmers, including protection of the environment and landscapes, and therefore calls on the Commission to provide in the 2011 budget a financial buffer for the means necessary to make access to funding uncomplicated, should the market experience volatility in 2011;

30.    Recognises the benefit of the EUR 300 million in exceptional funding for the dairy sector that was provided for in Budget 2010; supports the creation of a new budget line to act as a dairy fund to provide support for modernisation, diversification and restructuring and to improve marketing; points out that the Commission has already approved dairy fund;

31.    Considers that the national support programme for the wine sector should be maintained, albeit at a reduced level; points out that, at the time of the reform of the wine market regime, the Commission explicitly stated that this reform should be budget neutral;

32.    Highlights that Parliament has explicitly disagreed with the use of appropriations for live animals which are to be used in lethal bullfighting and points out that it expects the Commission to make sure that this restriction is put in place;

33.    Recognises that the School Fruit Scheme and the School Milk Scheme are important programmes in terms of encouraging healthy diet amongst children; welcomes the Commission's proposed increase in funding for theses two schemes and decides to increase further their appropriations; stresses the importance of the programme for deprived persons, and decides to increase its appropriations, but recalls that it must be implemented in the light of proceedings before the General Court;

34.    Supports, in line with its priorities, the creation of a pilot project aiming at promoting the exchange of best practices between young farmers, in particular in relation to the challenges facing the European agricultural sector;

35.    Is convinced that LIFE+ (Financial instrument for the environment 2007-2013) should be strengthened further in order to comply with the additional measures; emphasises that environmental concerns are a priority in environmental and agricultural policy and that an increase in funding is pivotal in preserving nature and biodiversity; considers that in addition to LIFE+, sustainable development criteria should be mainstreamed across all relevant EU instruments;

On sub-heading 3a

36.    Considers several programmes, such as the Prevention, preparedness and consequence management of terrorism to be essential for the implementation of the Stockholm programme, and reiterates its support for the Daphne programme - Fight against violence, under which programmes worthy of financing cannot be funded due to the shortage of appropriations, and Drugs prevention and information; in this context, places particular emphasis on the fight against violence perpetrated against women, including through coercive abortion, female genital mutilation, forced sterilisation or any other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment;

37.    Due to the poor level of information on the next steps of the SIS II project presented to Parliament, considers a reserve for appropriations to be the most appropriate means of obtaining the requested information on necessary improvements;

38.    Considers the planning set out in the Commission staff working document of 21 September 2010 insufficient to satisfy Parliament's requests for information on necessary improvements and a full overview of the SIS II budgeting;

On sub-heading 3b

39.    Recalls that heading 3b includes policies which have a direct impact on the daily lives of European citizens and is totally convinced that the actual potential of this heading cannot be fully released with the limited margin fixed by the current MFF; highlights that the proposed financing of these instruments by the Council does not match the core priorities covered by this heading, and underlines in particular that the extremely high implementation rates of youth-related programmes so far prove that they deserve a much stronger investment;

40.    Reiterates its intention to increase appropriations for the Youth in Action Programme, the World Special Olympic Summer Games, the Information outlets and the ongoing Preparatory Action in the field of sport; takes note of the initiative of the Council to present a new Preparatory action on commemorative sites in Europe and is of the opinion that this preparatory action could promote EU citizenship by preserving and facilitating access to historical sites of shared European memory;

On heading 4

41.    Is absolutely convinced that the role of the EU as a global player cannot be properly financed within the margins provided for by the MFF, and that this shortage of means should not be addressed by the two branches of the budgetary authority through last-minute compromises without proper reflection on medium-term needs; recalls that a review of the MFF and the revision of the ceiling of heading 4 to take into account the needs that have arisen and which could not have been foreseen in 2006 is a condition sine qua non for the manageability and sustainability of this heading;

42.    Is of the opinion that, in the context of extremely narrow room for manoeuvre within this heading and in the struggle to make savings initiated by the Council, the financing of priorities can only be guaranteed through selected decreases of appropriations on a limited number of budget lines; considers the appropriations envisaged for assistance to rehabilitation of Afghanistan and for Macro Financial Assistance could be partially reduced without substantially adversely affecting operations; in the same spirit, decides to restore appropriations for the Common and Foreign Security Policy at the level of Budget 2010, as allowed by point 42 of the IIA;

43.    Reiterates its commitment not to reduce arbitrarily appropriations for assistance to Palestine, the peace process and UNRWA; reiterates nevertheless its firm conviction that the discrepancy between its global financial assistance - the EU as a whole being the first donor - and its limited influence on the Peace process is neither justified nor comprehensible and needs to be addressed thoroughly, especially in the context of the newly created European External Action Service;

44.    Reiterates its opposition to the proposed redeployment of appropriations from several instruments and programmes to Bananas Accompanying Measures and to the Instrument for Cooperation with Industrialised Countries (ICI+), the financing of which was not foreseen at the time of the adoption of the current MFF, but reiterates nevertheless its support for these instruments; stresses that the Development Cooperation Instrument cannot be considered as a fund that could be appealed to for the financing of any new need arising in the field of heading 4, but that is has been settled and funded for a specific list of objectives that the EU has, on numerous occasions, committed itself to achieve; calls therefore on the Council to agree on a multiannual financing of these measures through all means provided for in the IIA;

45.    Decides to put part of the appropriations for environment and sustainable management of natural resources, including energy, in reserve, pending a presentation by the Commission of a politically binding document demonstrating that the "fast start" climate finance package is truly additional, that it allocates EU resources to partner regions in a geographically balanced way and that it does not come at the expense of existing development cooperation programmes, as well as clear information on criteria for selection of the beneficiaries and details of agreements with the developing countries;

46.    Initiates a mainstreamed approach on EU support to Fair Trade across budgetary titles;

47.    Considers that, in line with the quadripartite negotiations on the setting up of the European External Action Service, an enhanced identification of CFSP and CDSP missions should be sought, in the interests of improved transparency and the facilitation of budgetary overview; decides, consequently, to split lines 19 03 01, 19 03 03 and 19 03 07 in order to create separate budget lines for EUMM Georgia, EULEX Kosovo and EUPOL Afghanistan, which are the major missions conducted under CFSP/CDSP for the year 2011;

48.    Considers, in line with its resolutions on transatlantic relations, that the EU-US strategic partnership must be clearly identified via the creation of a specific budget line on "Cooperation with the United States";

49.    Is convinced that a further increase of the financial envelope to support the Turkish Cypriot community is necessary in order to ensure adequate financing of the  work of the Committee on Missing Persons in Cyprus as well as the restoration projects of the Technical Committee on Cultural Heritage; considers the work of these committees to be of paramount importance for both communities in Cyprus;

On heading 5

50.    Rejects Council's general position on heading 5 expenditure, which consists in an overall reduction of more than EUR 115 million, resulting from the non-budgeting of the 1,85% salary and pension adjustment, a global cut to European Schools' budget lines, which goes against Parliament's priorities on Youth-Education-Mobility;

51.    Stresses that such a restrictive approach, while resulting in short-term savings for the EU budget and the Member States, endangers the implementation of EU policies and programmes; further stresses that institutions should be provided with adequate resources to carry out their tasks, especially after the entry into force of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

52.    Therefore restores generally the cuts made by the Council, while putting in reserve the amounts corresponding to the 1,85% salary adjustment pending the judgement of the Court of Justice; considers that the budgeting of such expenditure is sound and prudent budgetary management;

53.    Restores Commission's Draft budget for all other abovementioned cuts except the one in respect of conferences, meetings and committees; considers the cuts made to the budget of the European Schools to be unacceptable; wonders in addition how Council is able to estimate the possible staffing levels in the services of the Commission with more accuracy than the Commission itself;

54.    Requests the Council to adopt quickly Amending Letter No 1/2011, so that the European External Action Service can start functioning with adequate resources at the very beginning of 2011, but decides to put appropriations in reserve pending further consultation of Parliament's relevant bodies by the Vice-President of the Commission and High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy on the priorities to be realised by the resources freed by the merging of current Commission and Council structures;

55.    Sets reserves on certain administrative lines, pending specific actions, follow-up or proposals by the Commission or with a view to obtaining additional information from it; requests particularly a revision of the Code of Conduct for Commissioners and the strict application of it concerning the modalities of allocation for the pensions of former members in order to release certain of these reserves;

On agencies

56.    Endorses, as a general rule, Commission's estimates of agencies' budgetary needs and rejects the principles on which Council's position on the budgets of EU decentralised agencies as compared to 2010 was based, i.e.:

- the limitation of the increase to 1,5% for 'cruising speed' agencies,

- the limitation of the increase to 3% for agencies entrusted with new tasks, with only

- half of the posts requested,

- no modifications made to Commission's proposal for new agencies;

57.    Considers, however, that the EU subsidy to fee-collecting agencies should not be reduced by the amount of assigned revenue so as to give them the adequate budgetary flexibility in view of the volatility of collected fees;

58.    Further decides to increase the 2011 budget allocation to the three new financial supervision agencies in line with available estimates of the budgetary impact of the outcome of the negotiations with the Council, to set a reserve for the European Police College, pending the outcome of 2008 discharge procedure to increase EU funding to the European Training Foundation, in line with Parliament's priorities, as well as to increase the budget allocation to the Fisheries Control Agency so that it is in a position to discharge its control obligations in international waters;

On pilot projects and preparatory actions

59.    Stresses that pilot projects and preparatory actions, adopted in a limited number, have been thoroughly considered and evaluated, also in the light of the useful and constructive first assessment by the Commission in July 2010, in order to avoid duplication of actions already covered by existing EU programmes; recalls that pilot projects and preparatory actions aim at formulating political priorities and at introducing new initiatives that might turn into future EU activities and programmes;

***

SECTIONS I, II, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX

General Framework

60.    Recalls that the institutions should draw up their budgets on the basis of sound and efficient management and, taking into account the effects of the current economic crisis, make the necessary efforts to use resources effectively, enabling them to pursue their obligations under the Lisbon Treaty while, at the same time, looking for savings where possible;

61.    Draws attention to the ongoing case brought by the Commission before the Court of Justice concerning salary adjustments and has decided to enter appropriations in reserve, on the principle of budgetary prudence, that would cover the effects for 2011, should the Court rule in favour of the Commission on the 1,85% salary adjustment in question;

62.    Notes that the Council has cut appropriations in relation to Croatia, using a different working hypothesis on the date of accession of Croatia than the Commission; decides, in the absence of new elements that warrant a modification at this point in time, to follow the Commission's approach;

63.    Has decided, following an assessment of the requests of each institution, to restore a part of the reductions made by Council to the budget of the institutions in those cases where the specific requests of each institution are considered to be fully justified;

64.    Stresses that the Council's failure until now to reach a position on Amending Budget 2/2010 for the Committee of the Regions and the Economic and Social Committee, leaves no other option than to make the contents of that Amending Budget part of the discussion for the budget for 2011;

Section 1 - European Parliament

General framework

65.    Stresses that negotiations took place during two pre-conciliation meetings in March and April 2010 and that, on a large number of issues, clear results were achieved at the stage of establishing the estimates; welcomes the good will and constructive nature of these meetings; welcomes the fact that the Amending Letter adopted by the Bureau in September 2010 does not imply major changes to the estimates;

66.    Is aware that a difficult but satisfactory balance has to be struck between the needs to implement fully the tasks of the Parliament as laid down by the Lisbon Treaty, which do necessitate increasing resources, and the application of sound budgetary principles and restraint in a time of financial crisis; has therefore screened the different budget lines in detail and made some adaptations to the appropriation entered in the estimates;

67.    Points out that the overall level of its budget amounts to EUR 1 700 349 283 a 20,21% share of expenditure under heading 5 (administrative appropriations) of the multi-annual financial framework, i.e. in line with its previous resolutions to the effect that expenditure should be situated around the 20% mark;

68.    Stresses, in this respect that considerable increases of competences under the Lisbon Treaty with the resulting needs for personnel and other resources, have been absorbed into this amount;

69.    Notes that the final amount decided by the budgetary authority represents a net reduction of EUR 6 198 071 compared to the Draft budget and EUR 25 029 014 to the initial budget proposals before conciliation with the Bureau;

70.    Maintains its position that, in any event, a policy of identifying savings wherever possible and the continued pursuit of reorganisation and redeployment of existing resources are crucial elements of its budgetary policy, especially in this time of economic crisis;

Human resources

71.    Notes the strong emphasis on indirect assistance to members' proposed by its Bureau and approved by its Committee on Budgets, through clearly strengthening areas such as the Parliament's research and policy analysis capacity, library services, policy departments and related areas; recalls that this is the corresponding complement, following the new and stronger role of the Parliament, to the direct assistance measures already boosted in the 2010 budget and Amending Budget 1/2010;

72.    Recalls its resolution on the estimates for 2011 and the accompanying establishment plan of 18 May 2010; now decides to make some adjustments as described in the following paragraphs;

73.    Recalls its decision to boost the capacity of the library services, confirming 15 new posts for 2011 and transforming the 13 contractual agents into permanent posts as part of this process; decides to reduce the appropriations relating to 8 of these posts with a view to phasing in recruitments over a two-year period;

74.    Has decided to maintain in reserve the appropriations linked to the 30 posts (6 AD5 and 24 AST1) for 'other sectors' pending further information requested;

75.    Decides to approve the internalisation of the accreditation service, as suggested in the Amending Letter, and, in consequence, to create 16 new posts under the establishment plan (1 AD5 and 15 AST1) and make available the corresponding appropriations;

76.    Approves, following the Amending Letter, the following budgetary-neutral measures:

- conversion of 5 existing temporary posts into permanent ones (1 AD9T to 1 AD5P, 1 AD8T to 1 AD5P, 1 AD5T to 1 AD5P and 2 AST3T to 2 AST1P),

- upgrading two temporary AD11 posts to AD12 posts,

- conversion of 15 AST posts ( 5 AST10, 5 AST6 and 5 AST5) into 15 AD5 posts;

77.    Has released EUR 3 million of appropriations in the reserve relating to Croatia, in line with its previous decision on transfer C1/2010; and has transferred these funds toward the budget item for hiring contract agents;

Direct Assistance to members

78.    Subsequent to its previous in-depth debate on the assistants allowance in connection with Amending Budget 1/2010, and the Bureau proposals for 2011 for a second tranche of reinforcement, decides to maintain these appropriations in reserve; notes the replies received by the administration but finds them inconclusive for justifying a further increase at this stage; recalls its request for information as voted in its resolution of 25 March 2010 on the guidelines for the 2011 budgetary procedure;

79.    Rejects the request from its Bureau to up-grade the Questors' assistants from AST 4 to AST 8;

Buildings policy

80.    Has modified the heading of budget item 2 0 0 8 in order to provide increased transparency on different building projects;

81.    Requests to be kept informed on a regular basis on new developments for building projects with a significant impact on the budget, such as e. g the KAD building and awaits the replies as regards the financial impact of possible parallel building projects in Brussels on the budget;

Communication and information policy

82.    Takes note of the reply given on the state of play as regards a Knowledge Management System, which however at this stage of the project cannot yet be evaluated as to whether it will meet the expectations raised; highlights the need for a timetable regarding the implementation of this system; recalls its request in the resolution on the Guidelines that such a system be made easily accessible for European citizens via the internet; requests information regarding how savings can be made following the implementation of the Knowledge Management System;

83.    Notes that a significant number of members have raised questions concerning the content and state of play as regards the IT mobility project, which may warrant a more profound analysis and discussion; has decided to enter appropriations relating to this project in reserve for the time being to allow for such discussion and analysis;

84.    Requests to be kept informed on developments as regards Parliament's WEB TV and decides to enter EUR 1 million in reserve;

Environment-related matters

85.    Reiterates its support for effectively putting into place concrete incentives and measures to make more and better use of less polluting means of transport than airplanes and cars, such as public transport and bicycles, which may also help to identify possible future savings on budget items such as "vehicles";

86.    In the same spirit, underlines the need to develop further measures to improve resource efficiency both in budgetary and environmental terms;

87.    Is satisfied that some further saving can be made on the budget item for Members' travel costs and the item for energy consumption by a total of EUR 4 million;

Multi-annual projects and other items of expenditure

88.    Concerning the House of European History, decides to enter the requested EUR 2,5 million for further studies in the reserve; notes that, pending the evaluation of the architects proposals, there is still no overview of the global cost of the project available; refers also to the other requests made in different resolutions of the Parliament to which no reply has yet been received, such as possible cooperation with other institutions and possible interested partners;

89.    Decides to adjust appropriations for a further number of budget items and to create some reserves on budget items where the exact need for appropriations is difficult to forecast and possible additional needs or, on the contrary, savings may arise in the course of the year;

90.    Recalls that, during the estimates stage and the conciliation procedure between its Committee on Budgets and the Bureau , the initial amount of EUR 1,2 million contempleted to finance the latter's decision to introduce an office holder allowance, was brought down to EUR 400 000; recalls furthermore that expenditure relating to this office holder allowance can be reimbursed only upon presentation of supporting documents fully justifying such costs; points out that other increases compared to the financial year 2010 are mainly for the renewal of the stock of repesentation articles for the protocol services; considers that if such stock is renewed this year, expenditure for this item can likely be reduced in coming years; stresses the need for budgetary prudence concerning mission requests, between Parliament's places of work and other missions, as well as utmost self-restraint as regards representation expenses in these times of economic crisis; would therefore warmly welcome the reduction of such expenses  in the course of the year compared to the forecast initial needs;

Section IV - Court of Justice

91.    Decides to create 29 new posts out of the 39 requested, mainly as a result of a high increase in the number of cases and resulting workload leading to an additional demand for lawyer linguists and translation (24 of the posts related to this) and a limited number of other justified increases;

92.    Notes that during its reading, the Council has cut the appropriations included in this item in a manner that does not properly reflect the high rate of occupancy of posts achieved by the Court of Justice in 2009 and during the first half of 2010; has decided therefore that the 3 % cut imposed by the Council (and equivalent to raising the standard abatement rate from 2,5% to 5,5%) needs to be reduced to 1% in order to meet the necessary needs of the establishment plan and allow the Court of Justice to correctly carry out its functions;

93.    Takes a compromise position on various lines of support expenditure, granting more than the Council but less than the draft budget; makes an exception for some IT-related expenditure where, following external audit recommendations, the full amount is provided on two lines;

Section V - Court of Auditors

94.    Notes that the Court's draft budget was only marginally amended by the Council and that, overall, the resulting levels could be accepted; notes that, following an increase of 32 auditor posts in the past two years, no additional staff, although initially planned, were requested in an exercise of self restraint;

95.    Welcomes the Court's systematic commitment to reducing its administrative support costs and holding internal budget audits; wishes to further explore to what extent other Institutions can make use of the Court's expertise in this field;

Section VI - European Economic and Social Committee

96.    Decides to introduce a compromise solution concerning new posts requested as a consequence of the Lisbon Treaty, along the lines already proposed by the Spanish Presidency in the summer, consisting of the creation of 11 new posts in order to deal with increased competencies and workload as follows: 6 AD5, 3 temporary AD9 and 2 AST3;

97.    Notes that these posts are intended, inter alia, to boost the Committee's capacity in the areas of consultative work, programming and relations with civil society and that they strike an acceptable compromise position between the Committee's original requests and the Council's draft budget;

98.    Having taken note of current vacancy rates and heard the Committee on this issue, decides to apply an abatement rate of 4,5% on salaries, instead of the 5,5% suggested by the Council, in order not to hinder effective recruitment on vacant posts;

99.    Underlines the need to implement without delay the Committee's decision in principle to reimburse its Members' transport tickets on the basis of real costs and to scrap the flat-rate system currently possible; welcomes this decision in principle, has made available the appropriations relating to this change in system and will continue to follow this issue;

100.  Agrees to a limited number of increases compared to the Council's reading, while still representing a saving on the DB, as concerns various support expenditure lines;

Section VII - Committee of the Regions

101.  Decides to introduce a compromise solution concerning new posts requested as a consequence of the Lisbon Treaty, along the lines already proposed by the Spanish Presidency in the summer, consisting of the creation of 18 new posts in order to deal with increased competencies and workload as follows: 2 AD9, 5 AD7, 7 AD5, 2 AST3 and 2 AST1;

102.  Notes that these posts are intended, inter alia, to boost the Committee's capacity in the areas of subsidiarity, territorial cohesion, impact assessments, consultative work and expanded inter-regional activities;

103.  Decides to introduce a general abatement rate of 5 % after hearing the Committee's arguments as regards recruitment levels and vacancy rates;

104.  Takes a compromise position between the Committee's requests and the Council's reductions on various support expenditure lines;

Section VIII - European Ombudsman

105.  Considers that the DB of this Institution as largely satisfactory and also notes that very few changes were introduced by the Council;

106.  Stresses, however, that it takes the opposite view from Council concerning the creation of 1 temporary post, with no budget impact as the same expenditure is currently paid through contracts, and therefore decides to approve it;

Section IX - European Data Protection Supervisor

107.  Taking into account the combined workload of this institution, based on previously existing obligations and on new obligations under the Lisbon Treaty, leading to increasing consultations on legislation with an impact on data protection, has decided to create 2 new posts for 2011 (1AD6 and 1 AD9);

108.  Has taken a restrictive approach on increases asked on other lines and asks the Supervisor to manage those needs internally, within existing budgets;

***

109.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission and to the other institutions and bodies concerned.

• [1]  OJ L 163, 23.6.2007, p. 17.
• [2]  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.
• [3]  OJ C 139, 14.6.2006, p. 1.
• [4]  Texts Adopted, P7_TA(2010)0086.
• [5]  Texts Adopted, P7_TA(2010)0205.
• [6]  Texts Adopted, P7_TA(2010)0328.

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

I.         Introduction

1.        The Treaty of Lisbon (TL) introduces substantial modifications to the financial architecture of the EU. The consequences of these modifications were analysed in the resolution on the financial aspects of the Treaty of Lisbon, adopted by the EP in May 2009 on the basis of the report of Catherine Guy-Quint on behalf of the Committee on Budgets. The present working document builds on that resolution and develops some aspects concerning the consequences of the main changes brought by the TL to the budgetary procedure concerning the organisation of work within Parliament and the development of interinstitutional dialogue, its effects in terms of calendar, etc. Taking always into consideration the political guidelines expressed in the resolution mentioned, the working document integrates the elements agreed on by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission in the Joint Declaration (JD) on transitional measures applicable to the budgetary procedure after the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon and the modifications introduced in the Rules of Procedure of Parliament. The Joint Declaration has a temporary nature. Considering the timing difficulties, this temporary agreement should be changed into a permanent one on the basis of the experience gained during the 2011 Budget procedure.

2.        The changes introduced by the TL to financial matters concern mainly the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) and the annual budgetary procedure.

3.        The MFF becomes a legally binding act which is adopted by the Council, by unanimity, after obtaining the consent of the EP (by a majority of its members).

4.        Concerning the annual budget, the main change is the suppression of the distinction between compulsory expenditure (CE) and non-compulsory expenditure (NCE), which means that the EP and Council become co-responsible for all the expenditure of the EU, on which they jointly decide.

This modification implies significant changes to the annual budgetary procedure, which becomes a special legislative procedure (the budget is adopted via a regulation), that can be considered as a special case of codecision, or, to avoid confusion, a joint decision by the EP and Council.

The TL further simplifies the procedure, in which each institution will have only one reading, after which, if the two branches of the budgetary authority have not reached an agreement, a Conciliation Committee (CC) is convened.

Overall, the institutional balance is maintained and democratic scrutiny of the budget is reinforced, as the EP will codecide the whole budget. Furthermore, while no budget can be adopted against the will of the EP, it is possible (at least in theory) that in a specific case the EP imposes a budget against the will of the Council.

II.       The new annual budgetary procedure

1. Initiative: Commission presents DB instead of PDB

The preliminary draft budget (PDB) no longer exists. Instead, the Commission presents the draft budget (DB), which constitutes the proposal on the basis of which the procedure will run (art. 314(2) TFEU).

The Commission can modify the DB until the convening of the Conciliation Committee (art. 314(2) TFEU). This may cause problems concerning the availability of data on the agricultural year and the presentation of the traditional agriculture amending letter in time before the CC is convened.

Calendar: art. 314(2) TFEU stipulates that the DB shall be presented by 1st September

Pragmatic calendar[1]: Commission will present the DB by end of April/beginning May (week 18 at the latest) in accordance with paragraph 5 of the Joint Declaration. This is practically identical to the practice followed until now.

(Trilogue of March - see page 7 below)

2. Council's reading

Council adopts its position on the DB by 1st October (art 314(3) TFEU)

Pragmatic calendar: Council will present its position by the end of July (week 30 - paragraph 5 JD)

(Trilogue of July - see page 7 below)

3. The EP's reading

The EP has 42 days (after the 1st October) to approve the draft budget as amended by the Council or to adopt amendments to it (art. 314(4) TFEU).

Pragmatic calendar: The EP will deliver its reading in week 42 (mid October); BUDG shall proceed to its vote by the end of week 39 (paragraph 5 JD)

Consequences of the EP's reading (art. 314(4) TFEU):

-       if the EP adopts the DB as amended by Council or takes no action, the budget is deemed adopted (art 314(4), a) and b).

-       if the EP adopts amendments (by an absolute majority of its members) to Council's position, its President must convene without delay the Conciliation Committee, after contacting the President of the Council (art. 314(4) c)).

However, the Conciliation Committee will not meet if the Council, within 10 days, informs the EP that it accepts all its amendments (TFEU art. 314(4) c).

In this event, the budget would be deemed adopted as such.

4. Conciliation Committee

The Conciliation Committee has 21 days to agree on a joint text (art. 314(6) TFEU). Its work should be finished by the end of week 45 (para.5).

Composition:

The CC will be composed of an equal number of representatives of Member States and of the EP (27 members from each delegation, in principle).

The members of the EP delegation will be appointed by the political groups, preferably "from amongst the members of the committee responsible for budgetary issues and other committees concerned" (Rule 75d(3)). It shall be chaired by the President of the EP, who can delegate the role to "...a Vice-President having experience in budgetary matters or to the Chair of the committee responsible for budgetary issues".

Organisation and work:

The organisation and working methods of the CC will have to be agreed amongst the institutions, as mentioned in para. 7 Joint Decision. The resolution on the financial aspects of the Treaty of Lisbon mentioned above contains some guidelines concerning the organisation of the work of the CC which constitute the current mandate for EP negotiators. Issues to be dealt include the level of representation of the participants in the CC, the preparation of the meetings at political level, the organisation of the secretariat of the CC, the documents to be prepared for its work, etc.

A clear example of the issues to be resolved, either at internal or interinstitutional level, is the following: the aim of the CC is to agree on a joint text to finalise the budget. From a practical point of view 27-27 members and advisers can not do all this work together. As was the custom until the entering into force of the LT, the decision could be prepared by a smaller team. It seems desirable that in this negotiation from the EP's side, besides the chairman of the Committee on Budgets and the rapporteur of the budget, depending on the subject standing rapporteurs or draftspersons of the specialised committees could also participate. Therefore this part of the negotiating team could be changed according to the subject.

For the time being, the only element agreed between the institutions concerns the engagement that they will "cooperate closely with a view to complete the work of the Conciliation Committee within the 21 days" and that "in order to prepare for an agreement ... the necessary documentation is exchanged between the institutions as soon as possible" (paragraph 5 Joint Declaration). In a further working document, the rapporteurs could present some proposals on these issues, which should in any case be agreed by the EP.

Decision Procedure:

The Conciliation Committee will decide by a qualified majority of the members of the Council delegation and by an absolute majority of the members of the EP delegation (art. 314(5) TFEU)).

The Conciliation Committee works on the basis of the Council and EP positions.

The Commission may no longer formally modify its draft budget once the CC is convened, but will play an important role, in order to facilitate an agreement between the two branches of the budgetary authority.

Conclusion of the work of the CC - no joint text:

Should the CC not reach an agreement on a joint text within the deadline of 21 days, the Commission must present a new DB and the procedure will restart form the beginning (art. 314(8) TFEU).

Conclusion of the work of the CC - joint text agreed:

In the event that the CC agrees on a joint text, this will be submitted to both branches of the budgetary authority, which will have 14 days to adopt it (art. 314(6) TFEU). In para. 5 Joint Declaration the institutions agree that they "will endeavour to approve the outcome of the Conciliation Committee as soon as possible within the framework of Article 314(6) TFEU, in accordance with their respective rules of procedure".

The possible outcomes following agreement of a joint text by the CC can be summarised as follows:

The budget is adopted if:

- EP approves + Council approves

- EP approves + Council does not deliver an opinion

- EP approves + Council rejects (budget adopted in accordance with EP amendments or

joint text)

- EP does not deliver an opinion + Council approves

- EP does not deliver an opinion + Council does not deliver an opinion

The budget is rejected if:

- EP does not deliver an opinion + Council rejects

- EP rejects + Council approves

- EP rejects + Council does not deliver an opinion

- EP rejects + Council rejects

It should be noted that the rejection of the joint text by the EP requires a majority of its members (art. 314(7) TFEU and Rule 75d(6)), while a simple majority will be sufficient for its approval (bearing always in mind that in the absence of a decision the joint text is deemed adopted).

According to Rule 75d(6) the joint text will be submitted to a single vote. The joint text is deemed adopted if it is not rejected by a majority of the members of the EP (Rule 75d(6)).

Rejection of the joint text:

If the joint text is rejected, it is up to the Commission to present a new DB and the procedure will start again form the beginning.

If necessary, provisional twelfths will apply (art. 315 TFEU).

Confirmation vote:

In the event that the EP approves the joint text and the Council rejects it, the EP will have 14 days (after the rejection by the Council) to confirm the amendments it had adopted during its reading (majority of its component members and three fifths of the votes cast required). Although this is a rather theoretical possibility, it means that when deciding on its annual calendar, the EP should take into consideration the need to have a plenary session within the period of 14 days of the possible negative decision of the Council (it would be also advisable that the EP and Council agree on common guidelines on how to proceed to avoid problems concerning this tight timetable[2]).

The budget will then be deemed adopted as amended by the EP. Concerning those lines for which the EP could not confirm its amendments by the required majority the joint text will be deemed adopted (art. 314(7)d) TFEU).

According to the Rules of Procedure, it is up to the Committee on Budgets to submit to the plenary the amendments for which it considers that a confirmation vote should take place ( Rule 75d(7)). Further reflection will be needed on how BUDG should proceed in this context (a resolution indicating which amendments should be submitted to the vote in plenary?).

Although the time schedule is very tight, it would be politically advisable to organize an informal procedure of consultation between the general rapporteur and the rapporteurs of the specialised committees in order that BUDG can receive the input of these committees before deciding on which amendments to propose to the plenary confirmation vote.

III.      Preparatory work and informal interinstitutional dialogue

The modifications in the budgetary annual procedure call for enhanced internal preparation and a reinforced interinstitutional dialogue as a means of ensuring a successful conclusion to the procedure.

At internal level, the Committee on Budgets' practice of organising meetings with the budgetary rapporteurs of specialised committees starting from the beginning of the budgetary year was acknowledged by the Conference of Presidents. It called for the creation of a Conference of rapporteurs for budgetary and legislative planning[3], in order to improve the preparation of the debates on the APS and on the budgetary guidelines, as well as to follow up and prepare the debate on the annual legislative program, etc., as components of a renewed legislative and budgetary programming for which the TL paves the way.

In 2010, due to the exceptional situation caused by the nomination of the Commission there will be no APS debate. However, BUDG coordinators supported the intention of the general rapporteur of having a debate on budgetary guidelines and a vote on a resolution prepared by BUDG.

This strengthens the need for starting the work with the rapporteurs of specialised committees. A first preparatory meeting could be convened already during the February I Plenary session in Strasbourg.

The debate on budgetary guidelines could possibly take place during one of the plenary sessions in March (see the calendar in annex 1).

Concerning interinstitutional dialogue, as mentioned in the Guy-Quint report, it will be crucial to strengthen it and also to bring it forward, in order to influence the preparation of the DB by the Commission and to allow the reading of the DB in both branches of the budgetary authority to take place in optimal conditions.

In this context, the traditional Spring trialogue could become an important moment in which Parliament and the Council discuss their respective budgetary priorities. For that purpose, it would be important that the EP adopts its report on budgetary priorities before the trialogue, even in a special situation like this year, in which the Commission will not present its APS.

The traditional July trialogue should also be brought forward slightly in order to allow for a discussion between the two branches of the budgetary authority on their respective prioirites on the basis of the Commission's draft budget. This trialogue could also allow the main points of disagreement for later discussions to be identified and take stock of the areas in which an agreement between the institutions seems within reach.

The calendar in annex 1 proposes a first draft of the main "key-dates" of this interinstitutional dialogue.

2011 Budgetary Procedure - Provisional Calendar

(Updated: 03 Feb. 2010)

Week	Event
Week 6 (10 February)	1st meeting with specialised Committees budgetary Rapporteurs
Week 8 (23 February)	Presentation of Draft Report on Budgetary Priorities for 2011
Week 9 (4 March)	Adoption by BUDG of Report on Budgetary Priorities for 2011
Week 11 (16 March)	Budgetary orientations (Council ECFIN)
Week 12 (24 - 25 March)	Adoption by Plenary of Report on Budgetary Priorities for 2011
Week 11 (17 March) or Week 12 (23 March)	Trilogue (tbc)
Week 17 (28 April)	Draft Budget adopted by Commission and presentation to COBU on 28 April
Week 20 (17-20 May)	2nd meeting with specialised Committees budgetary Rapporteurs (tbc)
Week 25 (22 June) or Week 26 (30 June)	Trilogue (tbc)
Week 27 (5-8 July)	Council's Reading. Adoption of Council's position on Draft Budget
Week 36 (6 -9 September)	Deadline for Committees and individual Members to table budgetary amendments
Week 37 (13-17 September)	Deadline for Political groups to table budgetary amendments.
Week 38 (20-24 September)	3rd meeting with specialised Committees budgetary Rapporteurs (tbc)
Week 39 (28-30 September)	BUDG Committee: consideration of and vote on budgetary amendments
Week 40 (4-8 October) or Week 41 (11-15 October)	Adoption by BUDG of draft resolutions (Section III and Other Sections)
Week 42 (18-22 October)	EP's Reading. Adoption of EP's amendments on Council's position. Convening by EP President to the Conciliation Committee.
Week 43 to 45 (25 October - 12 November)	Conciliation Committee establishes a joint text within 21 days (before 12 November) Conciliation Phase / Preparatory Meetings[4]
Week 47 (22-25 November)	Adoption of joint text (Plenary)

1. The annual financial programming

1. The Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 provides, in point 46, for a regular updating of the financial programming: twice a year, as a follow up of the adoption of the budget and together with the PDB. The Commission forwards herewith an overview of the programming, integrating the decision of the two branches of the budgetary authority in December, and incorporating the proposals for priorities defined by the Commission. This financial programming is therefore a "static" photography regularly adjusted.

2. As pointed out in the Working Document on the Mid-term review of the MFF (Rapporteur Reimer Böge), the programming remains indicative since appropriations are set by the budgetary authority in the frame of the annual procedure.

3. Furthermore, it has to be recalled that a certain margin of manoeuvre does exist:

- although the overall envelope of a programme adopted under codecision constitutes the prime reference (Point 37 of the IIA), the budgetary authority has the possibility to frontload and backload appropriations over the years

- the overall envelope of a programme adopted by the Council only is a "financial reference amount" (and not a financial envelope), and leaves margin for flexibility and adaptation (Point 38 of the IIA)

- the actions financed under the prerogatives of the Commission, as defined by Point 49(6) of the IIA, could also be taken into consideration in a situation of restrained financial capacities. The list of budget lines for the financing of actions carried out by the Commission by virtue of tasks resulting from its institutional prerogatives is annexed.

4. These various potential means for increased flexibility could be completed by the provision of Point 37 of IIA which stipulates that a 5% variation is allowed from the amount of the financial envelope of programmes adopted under codecision (under certain circumstances). Your rapporteur underlines that, Budget 2011 being the fourth of seven under the current MFF, this flexibility now makes full sense and should clearly be taken into consideration in the course of the annual budgetary procedure.

2. Inclusion of Pilot projects and preparatory actions in the budget

5. Art. 49(6) of the Financial Regulation stipulates that pilot projects and preparatory actions (PP/PA) can derogate from the principle under which appropriations can only be entered in the EU Budget if a legal act has been adopted previously.

6. As regards their ceilings, the IIA sets a total amount of appropriations to 140 million in any budget year: 40 million for PP, and 100 million for PA (of which 50 million for new PA).

7. The Commission does not include programmed appropriations for PP/PA when it updates its financial programming for the year N+1. This implies that the ceilings foreseen in the IIA for PP/PA are subordinated to the ceilings of the MFF : without an at-least equivalent margin in headings, the budgetary authority would not be able to use the PP/PA ceilings of the IIA. By analogy, appropriations for PP/PA reduce the margins available accordingly.

3. Situation across headings of the MFF

Heading 1a

8. It has to be recalled that under Budget 2010, an extremely limited margin of 147.000 EUR has been left. The financing of Sub heading 1a has been agreed upon with difficulties since the priorities and then the need to finance the recovery plan were conflicting with the restrained financial capacities.

9. As regards the decommissioning of the Kozloduy nuclear plant, no provision had been included in the MFF 2007-2013, although the issue was already well-identified. In the course of the budgetary procedure 2010, a temporary fix was agreed upon through the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument (75 million) in order to respect the political commitment made to Bulgaria. Nevertheless, 225 million extra will still have to be found over the years 2011-2013, with an annual envelope of 75 million.

10. The financing of GMES is another outstanding commitment to be fulfilled. Commitments are set at 10 million for year 2011.

11.The appropriations for the newly adopted Microfinance Facility, 25 million in 2011, are compensated within H1a by an equivalent redeployment from Progress, as agreed upon in conciliation.

12. Finally, the three new decentralised agencies in the field of financial services, reporting and auditing will be allocated a global budget of 15 million.

13. The Commission proposes the financing of these needs by

- redeploying, amongst others, appropriations from Competitiveness and Innovation Programme (CIP): this programme is reduced by 6.5 million in 2011 (19 million over the period 2011-2013), although this was one of the very few priorities that the Parliament managed to secure and promote in 2nd reading.

- reducing the margin: in May 2009, the margin foreseen for Budget 2011 amounted to 127 million. In January 2010, this programmed margin has shrunk to 37 million.

14. You rapporteur is fully aware that such a small margin does not leave any margin of manoeuvre for the October Reading. She wishes to recall that in PDB 2010, the margin was 119 million, an amount already estimated as much too low by the Parliament to allow for the financing of its priorities.

15. As mentioned above, PP/PA are not included in the financial programming. PP/PA in heading 1a amounted to 28.1 million in Budget 2010: if the Parliament wishes only to restore the same level of appropriations for PP/PA (and introduce new PP/PA for the amount as the completed ones), the margin would fall to below 9 million, which represents 0.07% of the ceiling for H1a.

16. This situation reveals that the financing of priorities for Budget 2011, as defined in the EP resolution to be adopted in March 2010, will be mathematically impossible without either redeployment from certain programmes and instruments (possibly on the basis of dissatisfactory implementation rates), or, for another time in the period 2007-2013, use of one of the means provided by the IIA.

	Budget	Fin.Prog.
	2010	2011
HEADING 1A - COMPETITIVENESS FOR GROWTH AND EMPLOYMENT
Codecision programmes	12.969,288	11.600,469
Research Framework (CE)	6.932,938	7.959,302
Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme	525,708	557,860
PROGRESS	109,570	88,631
Anti-pollution measures	20,500	23,000
Marco Polo II	63,940	66,000
Galileo	894,400	195,942
TEN Transport	1.062,440	1.242,000
TEN Energy	21,460	22,100
Safer Internet Plus
Safer Internet Plus (continuation)	11,070	11,000
European digital content for global networks (eContent Plus)
Customs 2008-2013	51,450	55,900
Computerisation of the excise system (EMCS)
Fiscalis 2003-2007
Fiscalis 2008-2013	24,000	27,800
Erasmus Mundus
Erasmus Mundus 2	97,988	98,838
European Institute for Technology	30,200	62,800
Lifelong Learning	1.009,301	1.037,000
Hercule II	14,100	14,200
IDAbc
Interoperability Solutions for European Public Administrtions (ISA)	23,800	26,000
Production of Statistical Information
Community Statistical Programme 2008-2012	54,519	58,546
MEETS	10,655	11,200
Support to financial services and auditing	6,000	7,350
European Energy Programme for Recovery	1.980,000
European Microfinance Facility	25,250	25,000
European Earth observation programme (GMES)		10,000
Council's decisions	885,887	896,865
Research Framework (EURATOM)	609,487	631,365
Research Framework (EURATOM) Supplementary High-flux reactor
Nuclear decommissioning: Bohunice	60,000	62,000
Nuclear decommissioning: Ignalina	120,000	121,000
Nuclear decommissioning: Kozloduy	75,000	75,000
European Year of Equal Opportunities for All (2007) — towards a just society
Pericles	0,900	1,000
Anti-Fraud Information System	5,500	6,500
International Fund for Ireland	15,000
Total programmes Heading 1A (without EGF)	13.855,176	12.497,334
Other expenditure	506,678	452,625
TOTAL HEADING 1A (Without EGF)	14.361,853	12.949,959
Financial framework ceiling	14.167,000	12.987,000
Margin	0,147	37,041
FLEX	195,000
Reserve for the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund	500,000

All tables in EUR million, source : European Commission

Headings 1b, 2 and 3a

17. Reflection on the margin in sub heading 1b is irrelevant since the financial programming is adapted to the needs identified by the Member States.

As regards heading 2, the margin remains unchanged although a shift of 53 million is programmed from Market expenditure and direct aids to Rural development, as foreseen in the Commission Decision.

The margin in Sub-Heading 3a remains unchanged at 19.7 million for 2011, but it is unclear at this stage from the Commission whether the Stockholm programme is included in this programming.

	Budget	Fin.Prog.
	2010	2011
HEADING 1B - COHESION FOR GROWTH AND EMPLOYMENT
Total Structural Funds	39.191,847	39.688,663
Total Cohesion Funds	10.190,245	10.961,150
Total programmes Heading 1B	49.382,092	50.649,813
Other expenditure	5,500
TOTAL HEADING 1B	49.387,592	50.649,813
Financial framework ceiling	49.388,000	50.651,000
Margin	0,408	1,187
HEADING 2 - PRESERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Codecision programmes	306,855	326,057
Market expenditure and direct aids (after transfer to Rural Development) including the following co-decided programme : Surveys on the structure of agricultural holdings	306,855	326,057
Surveys on the structure of agricultural holdings (included in 'Market expenditure and direct aids)	15,100	0,550
Council's decisions	59.104,925	59.865,062
Market expenditure and direct aids (after transfer to Rural Development)	43.819,802	44.437,590
Rural Development	14.363,565	14.465,117
Common Fisheries Policy and Law of the Sea	277,530	304,070
European Fisheries Fund	644,029	658,285
Total programmes Heading 2	59.411,780	60.191,119
Other expenditure	87,053	44,807
Climate change actions	15,000
TOTAL HEADING 2	59.498,833	60.235,926
Financial framework ceiling	59.955,000	60.338,000
Margin	456,167	102,074
HEADING 3A - FREEDOM, SECURITY AND JUSTICE
Codecision programmes	403,850	507,080
European Refugee Fund	102,650	104,030
External Borders Fund	208,000	254,000
Daphne	18,350	18,000
Civil justice	15,800	16,000
Drugs prevention & information	3,050	3,050
Schentgen Information System (SIS II)	35,000	(1)
Visa information system (VIS)	21,000	112,000
Council's decisions	348,200	419,950
Integration Third-countries	111,000	132,000
Fundamental rights	14,000	14,100
Criminal justice	26,300	26,850
Terrorism	20,520	23,400
Crime	86,380	109,600
European Refugee Fund
European Return Fund	88,000	114,000
Eurodac	2,000
Total programmes Heading 3A	752,050	927,030
Other expenditure	254,437	259,310
TOTAL HEADING 3A	1.006,487	1.186,340
Financial framework ceiling	1.025,000	1.206,000
Margin	18,513	19,660

Heading 3b

18. Heading 3b is, together with heading 1a, a fundamental element for the financing of EP priorities in Budget 2011 and more generally for the shaping of a "Europe for citizens".

19. Due to a frontloading in 2009 of appropriations for the EU response to the pandemic swine flu, a slight increase is programmed in 2011, for a margin of 9.4 million. In PDB 2010, the margin was twice as big, at 18.7 million. In December 2009, the budgetary authority voted a budget with zero margin in H3b.

20. The programmed margin will certainly not allow the financing of new priorities in favour of Youth and related actions, since, for example, PP//PA amounted already to 9 million in Budget 2010 for heading 3b. A potential remaining margin of EUR 400.000 (calculated from a potential prolongation of all PP/PA deducted from the margin) is not acceptable as a starting point, and the same solutions should be reflected upon as regards H1a.

	Budget	Fin.Prog.
	2010	2011
HEADING 3B - CITIZENSHIP
Codecision programmes	406,134	415,614
Public health	51,370	52,700
Consumer Protection	21,920	22,800
Culture 2007	58,164	61,514
Youth	127,800	127,700
Media 2007	111,005	114,000
Citizen	35,875	31,900
Media Mundus		5,000
Council's decisions	18,000	19,150
Civil Protection Financial Instrument	18,000	19,150
Total programmes Heading 3B	424,134	434,764
Other expenditure	243,866	238,900
TOTAL HEADING 3B	668,000	673,664
Financial framework ceiling	668,000	683,000
Margin		9,336

Heading 4

21. The margin left in Budget 2010 was only 900.000, due to the competing traditional priorities the EP supports and the unpredictable needs in third countries that arose in the course of the budgetary procedure.

22. A margin of 128 million is programmed under H4 for 2011, which represents only 1.5% of the ceiling. The financing of Bananas accompanying measures, at 25 million, has reduced the programmed margin accordingly, despite Parliament's strong reluctance to use the margin for the financing of measures which were not foreseen in the MFF. As repeatedly recalled, "new measures require new funds".

23. Furthermore, it has to be recalled that the EP has always expressed its strong opposition to the recurring method used by the Commission to underestimate in its proposal the appropriations required for Palestine, claiming that the real needs cannot be assessed at this period of the year.

24. Heading 4 margin must be put in perspective with the fact that PP//PA in heading 4 received 26 million in Budget 2010, and with the absence of any programming in 2011 for either the EU Baltic Sea Strategy or Information and communication programmes for non-members countries (respectively 20 and 10 million in Budget 2010). It would be interesting, at this preliminary stage of the drafting of Commission's Draft Budget, to know the reasoning behind this absence of programming for EU Baltic Sea Strategy that has always been clearly identified as an EP priority.

	Budget	Fin.Prog.
	2010	2011
HEADING 4 - EUROPEAN UNION AS A GLOBAL PLAYER
Codecision programmes	5.329,491	5.514,847
European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI)	1.675,359	1.704,675
Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI)	2.469,857	2.532,166
European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR)	164,198	163,112
Instrument for Stability (IFS)	219,559	290,200
Humanitarian Aid	800,518	824,693
Council's decisions	2.226,637	2.622,229
Instrument for Pre-Accession	1.587,100	1.796,793
Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation	70,453	75,813
Macro Financial Assistance	98,985	114,869
Common Foreign and Security Policy	281,541	327,374
Loan Guarantee Reserve	93,810	200,000
Financing Instrument for cooperation with industrialised and other high income countries and territories	24,094	24,663
Financing Instrument for cooperation with industrialised and other high income countries and territories ICI +	34,500	45,000
Civil Protection Financial Instrument	8,000	9,000
Cooperation with Greenland	28,154	28,717
Total programmes Heading 4	7.556,128	8.137,076
Other expenditure	165,996	164,832
TOTAL HEADING 4 (without EAR)	7.892,124	8.301,908
Financial framework ceiling	7.893,000	8.430,000
Margin	0,876	128,092
Emergency Aid Reserve	248,882	253,860

Heading 5

25. The situation of the margin in this heading for 2011 relies partially on the outcome of the Rule of the Court of Justice following the challenge lodged by the Commission and the European Parliament as regards the pay increase for 2009. Since the Court has recently refused to treat the case through an accelerated procedure, it is likely that any complementary payments (in case of such a decision) will have to be budgeted in 2011.

26. As a reminder, the difference to be paid, with retroactive effect, could amount to 135 million across all institutions, to be compared to the programmed margin of 109 million in 2011.

27. Finally, your rapporteur wants to recall that the Parliament has always expressed its wish to see all administrative expenditures fall under heading 5 and its disapproval as regards the spreading of some administrative expenditures in other headings.

	Budget	Fin.Prog.
	2010	2011
HEADING 5 - ADMINISTRATION
Commission's expenditure, excluding pensions and European Schools	3.604,622	3.749,042
Pensions (all institutions)	1.192,789	1.302,764
European Schools	154,212	162,861
Other institutions' expenditure, excluding pensions	2.937,432	3.091,950
TOTAL HEADING 5	7.889,055	8.306,617
Financial framework ceiling	7.962,000	8.416,000
Margin	72,945	109,383

ANNEX:

I.  Legal framework for Pilot projects and Preparatory actions

1.        Pilot projects (PP) and Preparatory Actions (PA) have been firstly introduced by the European parliament in 1975, and have evolved, throughout various inter institutional negotiations, into important tools for the formulation of political priorities and the introduction of new initiatives that might turn into EU activities and programmes.

2.        Article 49 (6) of the Financial Regulation provides for their legal basis, namely by mentioning the derogations to the principle under which appropriations can only be entered in the EU budget if a legal act has been adopted previously; in the case of PP/PA, a budgetary decision is therefore taken prior any legislative decision.

3.        Financial Regulation defines explicitly the nature and the purpose of these two instruments:

PP are defined as schemes of an experimental nature designed to test the feasibility of an action and its usefulness. The relevant commitment appropriations may be entered in the budget for not more than two successive financial years;

PA are defined as actions in the fields of application of the EC Treaty and the Euratom Treaty and of Title VI of the TEU, designed to prepare proposals with a view to the adoption of future actions. The preparatory actions are to follow a coherent approach and may take various forms. The relevant commitment appropriations may be entered in the budget for not more than three successive financial years. The legislative procedure must be concluded before the end of the third financial year.

4.        The Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 defines further the framework and the rules for implementation of PP and PA. Point D of Annex II of the IIA provides that in order for the Commission to be able to assess in due time the implementability of amendments envisaged by the budgetary authority which create new preparatory actions/pilot projects or prolong existing ones, both arms of the budgetary authority will inform the Commission by mid-June of their intentions in this regards, so that a first discussion may already take place at the conciliation meeting of the Council's first reading.

5.        As regards the ceilings, the IIA stipulates that the institutions agree to limit the total amount of appropriations for pilot schemes to 40 million in any budget year. They also agree to limit to 50 million the total amount of appropriations for new preparatory actions in any budgetary year, and to 100 million the total amount of appropriations actually committed for preparatory actions.

II.       Changes following the Lisbon Treaty

6.        The Lisbon Treaty does not introduce any provisions that have a direct effect on PP & PA; nevertheless, new rules for the Financial regulation stemming from the entry into force of the Lisbon treaty and for a new IIA have to be introduced.

7.        In its recently proposed "package" on the amending of the IIA and the Financial regulation, the Commission modifies the frame for PP & PA:

           -          Annex D of the IIA does not make any more reference on the ceilings for PP & PA

-          the two branches of the budgetary authority commit themselves to inform the Commission, by mid-June, on their intentions as regards PP & PA so that a first discussion could already take place at the June trilogue;

-          Art 32 of the Implementing Rules of the Financial Regulation provides for the ceilings, which are unchanged.

Your rapporteurs stress that these elements do not prejudge the outcome of the interinstitutional negotiations on the amended IIA and Financial regulation.

8.        Beside these rather technical changes proposed, it has to be clearly reminded that the changes introduced by the Lisbon Treaty could have clear implications on the adoption of PP & PA: up to budget procedure 2010, PP & PA were classified as "non compulsory expenditure" and were therefore in the remit of the EP who had the last word on these expenditures. The abrogation of categories of expenditure implies that the Council is now in a position to put forward proposals for PP & PA and to request to include the traditional "compromise package" on PP & PA in the overall negotiation on Budget 2011 during conciliation.

III.      Pilot projects and preparatory actions in Budget 2010: facts and figures

9.        In Budget 2010, 56 PP and 47 PA have been adopted. PP have been allocated an amount of commitment appropriations contained between 2.5 million (PP on enhanced health care for victims of sexual violence in Democratic republic of Congo) and 1 million (18 PP are concerned; the others just have a p.m.).

10.       As regards PA, the financial envelope varies from 7.5 million (PA on EU rapid response capability) to 0.5 million (PA on Erasmus for journalists).

11.       The total amount adopted for PP in 2010 is 40 million in commitment appropriations (maximum foreseen in the IIA) and 61.9 million in payment appropriations (no limitation foreseen by the IIA); PA have been financed up to 63.25 million (under the ceiling of 100 million), split between new PA (13.75 million, under a ceiling of 50 million) and ongoing ones (49.5 million, under a ceiling of 50 million).

IV.      Pilot projects and preparatory actions in Budget 2010: implementation

12.       On 03 March, the Commission forwarded its First Interim Report on the implementation of PP & PA 2010, pointing out the way it intends to implement them (this document is attached). A more detailed an extensive report will be transmitted together with the Draft Budget for 2011, to be presented on 28 April. Your rapporteurs expect that this next report will clearly highlight the feasibility of implementation and the best delivery mechanism.

V. Conclusions for the preparation of EP first reading

13.       As regards the timetable for the adoption of PP & PA, the rapporteurs would like to propose the following tentative one:

- week 6 (10 February):             First meeting of specialised committees Budget rapporteurs

- week 9 (3 March):                   First interim report by COM on implementation of PP/PAs in Budget

- week 11 (16-17 March):                      Presentation of a Working Document on PP/PA in COBU

- week 17 (28 April):                  Adoption of a Draft Budget by COM

- week 20 (19 May):                  Second meeting of specialised committees Budget rapporteurs

- week 22 (31 May - 4 June):      Transmission by specialised committees Budget rapporteurs of proposals for PP/PA to COBU and preparation of a consolidated document

- week 23 (7-11 June):               Transmission of proposals for PP/PA to COM

- week 25 (21-25 June):             Trilogue

- week 27 (5-8 July) :                 Assessment report by COM on proposals for PP/PA

- week 36 (6-10 September):       Deadline for budgetary amendments from committees

- week 38 (20-24 September):     Third meeting of specialised committees Budget rapporteurs

- week 39 (27-30 September):     Vote on budgetary amendments in COBU

- week 42 (18-22 October):         EP first reading on Budget 2011

First Commission interim report on the implementation of Pilot Projects and Preparatory Actions 2010

IMPLEMENTATION OF PILOT PROJECTS

MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

Implementation of Pilot Projects

Heading 1a

Working and Living Conditions of Posted Workers (04 03 09)

Measures for employment maintenance (04 03 10)

Enhancing mobility and integration of workers within the EU (04 03 11)

All-inclusive cooperation between public authorities, commercial firms and not-for- profit enterprises on integrating people into society and employment (04 03 12)

Encourage conversion of precarious work into work with rights (04 04 08)

Preventing elder abuse (04 04 11)

Employment of people on the autistic spectrum (04 04 13)

Portplus – Sustainable energy plan for ports (06 04 08)

Waste recovery and waste recycling for clean energy (06 04 15)

Cost of studies for students coming from ENP countries and for related academic activities (15 02 31)

European neighbourhood policy – Enhancing education through scholarships and exchanges (15 02 32)

Transparency and stability in the financial markets (17 02 04)

Heading 1b

Enhancing regional and local cooperation through the promotion of EU regional policy at a global scale (13 03 23)

Actions in connection with the textile and footwear sector (13 03 25)

Heading 2

Support for farmers' cooperatives (05 02 17 01)

European farm prices and margins observatory (05 02 17 02)

Support for farmers' and consumers' initiatives for low carbon emission, low energy consumption and locally marketed food production (05 02 17 03)

Development of prevention activities to halt desertification in Europe ('07 03 16)

Recovery of obsolete vessels not used in the fishing trade (07 03 18)

Economic loss due to high non-revenue-water amounts in cities (07 03 19)

Certification of low-carbon farming practices (07 03 21)

Complex research on methods of controlling the spread of ragweed and pollen allergies (07 03 22)

To promote the replacement of vessels in the European commercial fleet with low environmental impact vessels (11 09 03)

A European refund system for aluminium beverage cans (17 03 18)

Heading 3a

Impact assessment of legislative measures in contract law (18 06 09)

Heading 3b

Cultural heritage alert networks (15 04 46)

Heading 4

Support for surveillance and protection measures for Community vessels sailing through areas where piracy is a threat (19 06 07)

Programme for NGO-led peace building activities (19 06 09)

Finance for agricultural production (21 02 04)

Enhanced health care for victims of sexual violence in the Democratic Republic of Congo (21 05 01 08)

Heading 5

European research grants for cross-border investigative journalism (16 02 05)

Inter-institutional system identifying long-term trends facing the EU (25 01 09)

Implementation of Preparatory Actions

Heading 1a

Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs (02 02 03 05)

European Destinations of Excellence (02 02 08 01)

Sustainable tourism (02 02 08 02)

Social tourism in Europe (02 02 08 03)

Heading 1b

Promoting a more favourable environment for micro-credit in Europe (13 03 24)

Heading 2

Climate of the Carpathian Basin (07 03 17)

EU Rapid Response Capability (07 04 05)

Control posts (resting posts) in relation to the transport of animals (17 04 03 03)

Heading 3b

Erasmus for Journalists (09 06 05)

Preparatory Action in the Field of Sport (15 05 11)

European Year of Volunteering 2011 (15 06 11)

Monitoring Measures in the Field of Consumer Policy (17 02 03)

Heading 4

Environmental monitoring of the Black Sea Basin and a common European framework programme for development of the Black sea region (07 02 04)

Implementation of the MEDIA 2007 programmes in third countries (09 06 01 02)

Emergency response to the financial and economic crisis in developing countries (19 06 08)

Minorities in Russia – Developing culture, media and civil society (19 08 01 05)

EU-Asia – Integration of policy and practice (19 10 01 06)

Water management in developing countries (21 04 06)

Pharmaceutical-related transfer of technology in favour of developing countries (21 05 01 06)

Research and development on poverty-related, tropical and neglected diseases (21 05 01 07)

Preserving and restoring cultural heritage in conflict areas (22 02 09)

Heading 5

Erasmus public administration programme (26 03 03)

OPINION of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

OPINION of the Committee on Development

OPINION of the Committee on International Trade

OPINION of the Committee on Budgetary Control

OPINION of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs

OPINION of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs

OPINION of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety

OPINION of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection

OPINION of the Committee on Transport and Tourism

OPINION of the Committee on Regional Development

OPINION of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development

OPINION of the Committee on Fisheries

OPINION of the Committee on Culture and Education

OPINION of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

OPINION of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs

OPINION of the Committee on Petitions

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

This is the first Commission interim report on the implementation of pilot projects and preparatory actions in 2010.

It covers the projects/actions adopted by the Budgetary Authority for the Budget 2010, focusing on the new 32 projects/22 actions, and existing projects/actions for which additional commitment appropriations were approved. It identifies the authorising officers responsible for the implementation of these actions and outlines the plans for implementation. A second report will be transmitted with the Draft Budget (DB) 2011, as required by Article 49, point 6a and b of the revised Financial Regulation. This will be more detailed, and will also provide information on pilot projects and preparatory actions which are in the completion stage, i.e. for which there are no new commitments in 2010, but which still have payment appropriation.

Implementation of Pilot Projects

Heading 1a

Working and Living Conditions of Posted Workers (04 03 09)

1. Objective

Building on last year' actions, the overall objective is to obtain better data on how posting of workers takes place in practice.

2. Implementation

The objective is pursued through 3 separate actions:

1. The provision of grants for initiatives which help exploring the real working and living conditions of posted workers and how the Member States, social partners and labour inspectorates work in practice. The specific objectives of this measure are:

- to promote the exchange of relevant information, establish best practices and publish an overview of the state of play in the Member States and

- to examine any questions and difficulties which might arise in practical application of the posting of workers legislation, as well as in its enforcement in practice.

2. A study on the legal aspects of the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services in the European Union, which will examine any difficulties which might arise in practical application of the posting of workers legislation, as well as in its enforcement in practice.

3. A study on the economic and social impact of the posting of workers in the European Union, which will aim to assessing the economic and social effects associated with the phenomenon of posting of workers in the context of cross-border service provision focussing on those sectors where the use of posting of workers is most widespread and on those member States with a relatively larger presence of posted workers either as receiving or sending countries.

Calls were made in the course of 2009 for all 3 actions and the contracts were signed by the end of 2009.

3. Forecast for 2010

First results of these actions are expected in the 3^rd trimester of 2010. A second Call for Proposals for initiatives to explore the real working and living conditions of posted workers and how the situation is handled in practice is planned for the 2^nd trimester of 2010. A second study on the legal aspects of the posting of workers covering those Member States that could not be included in the first study will be launched in 2010.

Measures for employment maintenance (04 03 10)

1. Objective

According to the budgetary remark included in the 2010 Budget, in order to help alleviate the employment and social consequences of the current crisis, a Pilot Project should be launched to test further ways of strengthening the collective efforts to mitigate the negative impact of the crisis at the European level. Through the Pilot Project, it should be analysed to what extent jobs that at risk due to the financial and economic crisis can be effectively maintained by introducing measures such as short-time working arrangements and training. Best practices should be established and the exchange of relevant information promoted.

2. Implementation

In order to meet such objectives, three calls for tender will be published during the first quarter 2010 regarding the following issues.

Study on "short-time working arrangement during the crisis, and lessons to learn"

In many Member States labour markets have in the first instance reacted on the crisis by adjusting production and aggregate working time to counter the slump in demand rather than reducing employment levels. Short-time compensation programmes whereby employers can apply for temporary state assistance to top up the wages of workers working reduced hours, have protected European jobs from the initial impact of the recession. The study should analyse in how far these schemes have indeed affected the relative resilience of the European Union (EU) labour market to date owing to these internal adjustment measures (e.g. short-time working schemes and shorter working hours, temporary closures etc.) and how this compares to earlier experiences with similar measures in earlier crisis situations. The study should also assess measures taken by governments to ensure that these arrangements have been most effective for example by analysing provisions with regard to eligibility criteria. The study should also analyse the effectiveness of measures that couple short term work arrangement with work-related training in terms of the impact thereof on the employability of workers concerned (e.g. if this facilitates possible transition to new jobs). The study should also analyse how and if the risks of deadweight losses connected to these measures has been limited. Furthermore the study should analyse the role of different stakeholders in this context including national authorities, public employment services, social partners, municipalities and other labour market stakeholders.

Study on "the apprenticeship supply in Member States"

The objective of the study is to make an assessment of the impact of the crisis on the situation of (young) people now finishing their education and what the subsequent risk is that they are facing in terms of unemployment and inactivity spells and if this risks to have further consequences in terms of their employability even after recovery. The study should make recommendations as how to best support young people now seeking to enter the labour market for example in the form of job placements, practical job-linked training, or access to further studies to gain the key competences needed for future labour market success. The study should also assess current practices of apprenticeships in companies and the public sector and assess the potential of setting national targets and more opportunities for learning mobility, including for apprentices and for vocational education and training and graduate trainees. The study should also indentify the EU role in dissemination of best practices and mutual learning projects as well as in increasing the quality of apprenticeships as well as provide recommendations on potential measures that should be envisaged to incite companies to offer more traineeship places and to invest themselves in increasing the employability of new staff including apprentices.

Study on "a comprehensive overview on traineeships arrangements in Member States"

Over the last years, two main structural weaknesses in the labour market integration of young people have persisted: high levels of youth unemployment in many Member States and low quality and insecurity of many jobs occupied by young people. Weaknesses in linking education and employment at an early stage and the persistently high number of young people with too low levels of skills and competences (particularly the ‘early school leavers’) impede a successful and smooth transition from education to employment. In many countries problems are more concentrated among specific groups of young people, migrants and some ethnic minorities. This is particularly worrying since these young people form an increasing proportion of the youth population especially in urban areas. At the same time, the demand for highly skilled workers is increasingly difficult to match, as the provision of high quality and attractive vocational education and training is insufficient in many Member States. The study should look at how traineeships arrangements in Member States deal with these problems. To do so the study will present an overview per Member State of the availability of in-company and public traineeship places for young people and the conditions in which these traineeships take place. The study will identify eventual changes in this context over the last 5 years and in particular address the consequences of the crisis. The study will assess the potential of traineeship programmes in terms of providing security for young people and the relationship between these programmes and individual choices of education and training pathways. The study will also look into options to including school-based vocational education and temporary work arrangements in providing stepping stones for young labour market entrants. The study will also analyse the effectiveness of traineeship programmes in terms of providing employment opportunities for the young and avoiding longer spells of unemployment among young people.

On another hand, in order to promote the exchange of relevant information and establish and publicise best practises following the results of the studies that will be launched, dissemination events will be organised.

The Commission will publish three calls for tenders which contains the above mentioned action. The Commission will use the allocated EUR 1.000.000 for this action.

3. Forecast for 2010

The calls for tenders will be published during the first quarter 2010. This action will be implemented starting on the 3rd Quarter 2010 and end during 2011.

Enhancing mobility and integration of workers within the EU (04 03 11)

1. Objective

Whereas free movement of workers in the European Union (EU) is largely positive, there are potentially negative side effects, in particular for vulnerable workers. The aim of this pilot project is thus to help overcoming some of the difficulties, including various social difficulties, faced by the vulnerable workers in the host country. The project recognizes that the gaps in the support to vulnerable workers are often filled by the civil society. Its role should therefore be supported so that networks and partnerships could be created, and that advice services could be linked together into advice structures.

2. Implementation

In December 2009 the Commission has put forward the Guidelines for the operations of EURES in the years 2010-2013. While discussing these guidelines, the Commission took into account the opinion of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs on "The European Job Mobility Action Plan (2007-2010) which invites, inter alia, the Commission to facilitate the mobility of vulnerable groups of the population and help remove the obstacles they encounter by creating more quality jobs, combating discrimination, tackling new forms of social exclusion, supporting gender equality, supporting the family and effectively ensuring access to the workplace, accommodation services and transport.

The Commission, in its proposal for the EURES guidelines has put forward an action which calls on EURES members to: "Establish cooperation mechanisms with organizations active in the provision of information and assistance for the integration of workers and their families, in particular vulnerable groups. Host countries should carry out this action."

The Commission proposes to allocate EUR 1.000.000 for this action, to be implemented through the annual grants for EURES starting in June 2010. As a first step, a select group of countries will be asked to implements these activities.

The Commission published a call for proposals (VP/2009/008) in December 2009 which contains the above mentioned action. The Commission has allocated EUR 1.000.000 for this action, to be implemented through the annual grants for EURES.

3. Forecast for 2010

This action will start in June 2010 and end in May 2011. As a first step, it can be expected that the hosting countries will implements these activities.

All-inclusive cooperation between public authorities, commercial firms and not-for- profit enterprises on integrating people into society and employment (04 03 12)

1. Objective

The development of social economy enterprises increases stable and quality employment, and not only in services related to social assistance policies. In line with the European Parliament Resolution on the social economy, the Lisbon strategy and the social agenda, it is important to promote the development of companies in this sector through collaborative projects between governments and businesses, be it profit oriented or not, promoting transferable models and practices, especially in times of crisis, when the number of people at risk of marginalization increases.

Therefore the project should increase the awareness of the business community in its social responsibility, through support to companies concerned with integration to labour; and thus expand the areas of labour for social inclusion and employment of disadvantaged groups (agriculture, industry, trade etc.).

2. Implementation

The projects will be implemented through grants following a call for proposals to be organised in 2010.

Applications should propose effective and efficient solutions to socio-economic issues specific to the territory of reference populations; essentially through collaboration between administrations, for-profit and social enterprises. Therefore the projects should foresee the creation of networks among public institutions and businesses that are capable to innovate in governance or to formulate indicators of social well-being, with quantitative impact on the reference populations. The budget available for 2010 amounts to EUR 1.500.000. The rate of the Community contribution should not exceed 80% of total eligible costs.

3. Forecast for 2010

Indicative timetable:

Publication of the call for proposals        May/June 2010

Deadline for submissions                      September 2010

Award decision                                  December 2010

Implementation of the project(s)            during 2011

Encourage conversion of precarious work into work with rights (04 04 08)

1. Objective

The overall objective of the Pilot Project is to gain a better understanding of the phenomenon of "precarious work" in its widest sense across the European Union (EU) and to promote the conversion of precarious employment relationships into work contracts carrying more social rights, notably through an in-depth examination of concrete steps taken at Member State level to encourage such a transformation.

2. Implementation

The objective is pursued through 2 separate actions:

The provision of grants for transnational projects in the field of conversion of precarious work into work associated with rights. The specific objectives of this measure are:

- to promote the analysis and/or monitoring of concrete measures taken to improve the rights of precarious workers;

- to exchange and disseminate relevant information on national practices or cooperation initiatives designed to address the issue of converting precarious work into work with rights;

- to analyse the role of precarious work in the general framework of social, economic and demographic developments, with a focus on social exclusion and in-work poverty, as well as its specific impact on working and living conditions of young workers, women and migrants;

- to analyse the economic significance, causes and effects of precarious work against the background of today's working patterns, and to what extent it contributes to the flexibility of the labour market.

A study which will describe and analyse policy measures and good practices recently implemented in Member States with a view to encourage the transformation of precarious employment relationships into contracts carrying more social rights. The study should help to develop a clear concept of precariousness in employment relationships and an identification of what could constitute basic social rights.

3. Forecast for 2010

The call for proposals and the call for tender are planned for the second quarter of 2010.

Preventing elder abuse (04 04 11)

1. Objective

In line with the budgetary remarks, the pilot project is intended to fund initiatives which help uncover the extent of abuse of older people in the European Union. In particular, the pilot project will focus on:

· assessing the scale of elder abuse according to the World Health Organisation (WHO) definition (physical, psychological and financial abuse),

· gaining a better understanding of the causes of elder abuse,

· identifying existing policy approaches and good practice in the Member States for preventing elder abuse and making recommendations on how to improve quality in elder care. As far as this point is concerned, it should be noted that it will be tried, as far as possible, to respond to what has been requested in the budgetary comments.

It should be noted that the last point is less ambitious than what has been requested in the budgetary comments ("measuring of the effectiveness of policy responses in the Member States").

2. Implementation

The Commission will implement this pilot project through a call for proposal, a conference organised under the Belgium Presidency and a cooperation with the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The aim of this call for proposals is to support an initiative that should examine how best to prevent elder abuse by ensuring high quality and dignity in long-term care services. The purpose of the grant will be to organise in various Member States a reflection exercise, bringing together representatives of public authorities responsible for the supervision of long-term care services, of providers, of carers and of users of long-term care services. Based on existing recommendations and charters at national and European level, the project should examine how these standards can be put into practice. The conference to be organised by the Belgian Presidency (2nd semester 2010) will examine how to ensure the dignity of frail older persons and take stock of finished or on-going research projects on elder abuse which have been funded by the European Union.

The Commission has the intention to pursue with the OECD a policy-oriented project for examining available initiatives and offering recommendations to develop policies on quality and user satisfaction in long-term care systems in the European Union, thus promoting reforms that will reduce the risks of elder abuse.The project will focus upon three main elements: i) Quality monitoring and control systems; ii) Regulation of quality in long-term care (LTC) systems; iii) Policies to address quality shortcomings, including training of carers and LTC workers.

3. Forecast for 2010

1. Call for proposal:

May 2010:                   publication of the call for proposal

August 2010:               deadline for submitting proposals

October 2010:             award decision of the evaluation committee

November 2010:           signature of contract (24 month)

November 2012:           presentation and dissemination of final results

2. Belgium Presidency Conference

The conference should take place in the second half of 2010. Following a number of contacts with the Belgium government the Commission is still awaiting the final confirmation from the Belgium side on this initiative. If the planned conference were not be organised under the Belgium Presidency, it could be organised by the Commission at the beginning of 2011.

3. Cooperation with OECD

The project should build upon an ongoing project by the OECD which reviews long-term care coverage and workforce policies and their impact on informal carers’ welfare, access and sustainable LTC financing.

November 2010:           signature of contract

November 2012:           presentation and dissemination of final results

Employment of people on the autistic spectrum (04 04 13)

1. Objective

Objective is to fund projects which help develop policies for employment and social integration of people with autism. It should support innovative and integrated projects, addressing multiple disadvantages faced by people on the autistic spectrum, while taking account of the strengths they offer. The projects should help to identify effective policy responses and to establish and promote an exchange of good practices.

2. Implementation

The pilot projects will be implemented through a call for proposals. Proposed projects shall develop or test approaches to improve access to and retention in employment for persons on the autistic spectrum in a practical manner including all relevant stakeholders. The projects should be constructed around real cases that will allow a sufficient number of persons with autism to perform paid work in inclusive settings. The proposed projects must include a detailed evaluation which can be used for dissemination of the project results. Projects' have to be designed in a way to achieve a sufficient sustainability after EC funding has ended.

3. Forecast for 2010

Indicative timetable:                  Call for proposals to be published during the 2^nd quarter 2010

                                               Signature of grant agreements 4^th quarter 2010 (between 3 and 6 projects)

Indicative amount:                    EUR 1 000 000

Maximum co financing rate:      80 % of the total eligible costs of the action. Co-financing of the Commission for each financed project shall be between EUR 150.000,- and 400.000,-. Projects shall have a runtime up to 24 months.

Portplus – Sustainable energy plan for ports (06 04 08)

1. Objective

The objective as set out by the European Parliament would be to promote the use of renewable energy sources, to increase the energy efficiency with actions directed to port structures and installations and to provide private operators with an investment tool in technologies allowing energy savings. This proposal is interesting, in that it integrates industrial economic activities and energy measures.

2. Implementation

As known, a large share of the Research Framework programme (FP7) is dedicated to energy efficiency. Therefore, the proposed action fit well in the FP7 framework. The Commission will propose the inclusion of this project in its next Work Programme which will be published in July 2010. The proposed project once included in the Work Programme will follow the usual steps of the FP7 project cycle and will be subject to the applicable comitology rules.

3. Forecast for 2010

No expenditure is foreseen as financing would come from FP7.

Waste recovery and waste recycling for clean energy (06 04 15)

1. Objective

The objective as set out by the European Parliament would involve recycling household waste dumped/stored on waste sites.

2. Implementation

After considerations, it appears that excavating landfilled Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) from old landfill sites is an unproven technology with minimal chances for successful commercialisation and deployment. The landfilled MSW is partially (or heavily) decomposed and has already lost significant quantities of its energy density by either aerobic and/or anaerobic processes. The moisture content is also relative high and thus in addition to the costs of excavation, significant costs (both in terms of economy as well as energy consumption) related to size homogenisation and drying will have to be supported. Given the fact that the MSW has remained over long periods landfilled it implies that all components will be contaminated by various pollutants.

Excavating old landfill sites can result in serious environmental and health hazards. During the excavation process significant quantities of methane, which is 24 times more potent Green House Gas than carbon dioxide, will also be released making the final Green House Gas benefit from such a process negative or minimal at best.

With regards to this Pilot Project, the Commission believes that it is much more effective to avoid landfilling all together by enabling policies based on the Framework Waste Directive. In cases where landfilling is still practised, one should apply extensive landfill gas collection and utilisation for energy purposes. The Commission considers that this Pilot Project as proposed will not offer an effective contribution to clean and cheap energy management, therefore suggests not to implement it.

3. Forecast for 2010

No expenditure is foreseen.

Cost of studies for students coming from ENP countries and for related academic activities (15 02 31)

1. Objective

The purpose of this pilot project is to allow students from European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) countries to acquaint themselves with European Union (EU) policies and institutions by attending specialised courses offered through a scheme of scholarships, in line with the new Enhanced European Neighbourhood policy.

2. Implementation

The European Parliament has designated the College of Europe (the two campuses of Bruges and Natolin/Warsow) as the academic institution where participants will follow tailor-made programmes for the purposes of this pilot project, taking into account the specific characteristics and high degree of specialisation of the College. Therefore the College of Europe is de facto in a monopoly position to carry out the tasks of this pilot project, as provided for in Article 168.1(c) of the Implementing rules to the Financial Regulation.

The European Commission is expected to adopt an annual work programme on this project by March 2010. The work programme will define: the type of training programmes (courses; duration etc. etc.); the indicative number of participant/selected students from ENP countries; the evaluation (selection and award) criteria; the conditions and timing for the application forms of students; and the amount and coverage of the scholarship (flat-rates).

3. Forecast for 2010

The selection of students will take place between April / June 2010. The Community's financial support will be awarded through a grant agreement.

European neighbourhood policy – Enhancing education through scholarships and exchanges (15 02 32)

1. Objective

This pilot project will cover scholarships for students from European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) countries[5] who are studying for a Master’s degree in European Studies in 2010-11. The aim will be to expand the students’ professional capabilities and enable them to deal with Community policies. The initiative could encourage the emergence in the European Neighbourhood Policy countries of a new generation of pro-European civil servants.

2. Implementation

The project will be implemented through an open call for proposals addressed to the EU higher education institutions offering a Master's degree in European Studies. The institutions will be asked to submit their application and pre-select graduate students who are national and resident in an ENP country (3 ranked candidates maximum plus 2 for the reserve list).

The European Commission will be responsible for the award of scholarships to the selected graduate candidates proposed by the participating institutions, to follow a Master's Degree in European Studies.

3. Forecast for 2010

Grants will be covered by a contract with each institution of which ENP students have been awarded a scholarship. It will be expected to grant 30 to 40 full scholarships (depending on the duration of the Master's Degree). The scholarships will cover the tuition fees, the subsistence costs (flat rates per country), and the travel and location costs.

The timetable and the indicative amount of the call(s) for proposals are as follows:

- March 2010: Publication of the call for proposals;

- 30 April 2010: Application deadline;

- May – June 2010: Award procedure and award decision;

- 30 June 2010: Higher education institutions are informed by the European Commission.

The indicative amounts will be: for grants EUR 960.000; and for procurement (experts to assess the application forms received following the call for proposals) EUR 40.000.

Transparency and stability in the financial markets (17 02 04)

1. Objective

With regard to the budgetary remark adopted in the 2010 Budget, the Commission has carefully assessed the justification and the context description of this pilot project.

Indeed, more stable and transparent financial markets are a key objective of the action of EU institutions and of the EU national governments. In its recent Communication "Ensuring efficient, safe and sound derivatives markets" (COM (2009) 332), the Commission has already announced future policy actions to increase the transparency of the derivatives markets.

As part of its response to the financial crisis, the European Commission's Communication "Driving European recovery" (COM (2009)114) proposed to further promote financial education throughout the EU, strengthen the voice of European investors and provide direct funding to facilitate the capacity-building of investor stakeholders to represent their interests in financial services policies at EU level, through training, research and information. Bearing in mind such an objective, contacts with the European Parliament were established by the Commission services to exchange ideas on the best approach to implement this pilot project and a course of action was agreed upon, focused on training and information provision in specific areas of financial services.

It is a matter of fact that more complex financial products, which were originally intended for professional operators, are no longer limited to professional use by financial institutions. Before the emerging of the financial crisis, such products have been largely distributed to consumers who were induced to purchase them without sufficient awareness of their risks and consequences.

The lack of transparency of such financial products is due to their technical complexity, preventing consumers from obtaining sufficient information on the underlying risks. In addition, there is often a lack of suitable advice tailored to the personal profiles of consumers and other end users, which makes the latter purchase financial products which are not suitable to their needs.

In the field of consumer protection, training and information actions addressed to organisations and entities active in the field of awareness raising and advice can be an effective way of improving the quality of financial decision-making as well as the advice provided to consumers. Where organisations provide advice to consumers, this kind of financial education develops consumer capacity and empowers consumers to make informed choices, equipping them with the necessary information to purchase products suitable to their needs, avoiding unnecessary risks.

2. Implementation

The Commission will run a course aimed at training advisers to consumers on various financial services issues. The aim of the course would be to train advisers on a wide variety of financial issues, such as money management and family budget advice, credit products and investment activities, including risk assessment.

The target population would include voluntary government-funded or independent non-government organisations, community entities, consumer associations and any other relevant bodies active in advising consumers. When possible and appropriate, the participation to these courses could be extended to associations of local administrations. The contractor engaged by the Commission will be requested to identify the training needs of the relevant organisations in relation to financial issues and conduct tailored training sessions. These activities would be conceived in view of attaining a multiplier effect through the dissemination of knowledge and information to the relevant target audience.

For efficient and effective use of resources, courses cannot be organised in each of the 27 Member States, therefore it is envisaged that courses will be conducted in selected Member States or clusters of Member States.

The Commission will select the provider of the courses through a call for tender.

3. Forecast for 2010

The contract notice will be published in June 2010 and the deadline for submission of offers by potential bidders will be in September 2010. The evaluation procedure will take place in October 2010, and the internal procurement control will take place in November 2010.

Heading 1b

Enhancing regional and local cooperation through the promotion of EU regional policy at a global scale (13 03 23)

1. Objective

The objectives of the Pilot Project would be to:

· contribute more effectively to the strategic partnership between the Commission and third countries in line with the major demands from the latter for more cooperation in this field;

· share the benefit of the EU's long experience in how regional and cohesion policies underpin the process of economic and political integration, while promoting growth, sustainable development, equality of opportunity and co-operation across borders.

· contribute to the promotion of the international image of the Union;

· contribute to improved understanding of European values, basic principles, delivery structures and policies. An important part of the pilot project is to seize opportunities to co-operate with and assist international organisations in building regional partnerships.

As such the objectives, defined by the Commission, for the pilot project are in line with the priorities identified in the budgetary remarks voted by the Parliament, and as confirmed in two meetings that took place in 2009 with Mr van Nistelrooij, MEP, and member of the EP Regional Policy Committee.

The additional resources for 2010 will help to develop the dialogue with third countries which is only at a preliminary phase. These resources will help the Commission to deepen and widen its activities and to bring real help to third countries in their efforts to improve public policy in regional development, and regional and local governance issues.

2. Implementation

In 2010 the pilot project will be implemented, as in 2009, through the use of Framework Contracts or grants. The actions supported will include the organisation of international conferences and other events, information activities, study visits, networking and studies.

For certain studies, use will also be made of calls for tender.

3. Forecast for 2010

Studies (with OECD and others) - indicative budget EUR 700 000

A territorial review in Ukraine is being prepared in joint management with the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). In addition, the development potential of regional innovation systems in China is being explored involving a joint study with the OECD and Chinese National Development and Reform Commission. A number of studies are envisaged on:

· The development potential of regional innovation systems in China (with OECD);

· Territorial Review of Ukraine (with OECD);

· Cross-border cooperation in Africa;

· Follow up regional innovation systems in Latin America;

· Peer review studies in selected Ukrainian regions.

Information seminars (study visits and seminars) - indicative budget EUR 750 000

Seminars are an important means of exchanging information and promoting mutual understanding with third countries. There is an increasing demand from third countries for direct experience of the implementation of EU regional policy on the ground in different contexts. The pilot project makes this possible, by assuming travel and accommodation costs incurred by nominated experts and third country participants.

A number of seminars are envisaged to be held in main partner countries on topics such as: strategic and governance issues, information systems, evaluation, regional innovation systems, cross-border cooperation, etc.

· Brazil: Seminar on EU-Brazil regional policy cooperation;

· Brazil: Workshop on Information, Evaluation, Financial Control and Audit;

· China: High-level seminar on EU-China regional policy cooperation and participation in the World Expo in Shanghai (seminar, stand, networking);

· China: Two training programmes with the Academy of European Law of Trier (through an existing framework contract or call for tenders);

· Argentina: Seminar on regional innovation systems in Latin America (with OECD) and possibly a seminar on cross-border cooperation;

· Ukraine: Series of introductory seminars on European regional policy in selected regions (Odessa, Chernovtsy, Kharkhiv and Donetsk), involving Commission officials and EU regional experts;

· South Africa: Seminar on Regional Policy organised by the government involving EU officials and EU regional experts;

· Australia: first regional policy conference.

A number of programme exchanges are envisaged, namely for Brazilian regional representatives and Chinese national and regional officials. Ukraine, West Africa (Union économique et monétaire Ouest-Africaine (UEMOA), Economic Community Of West African States (ECOWAS)) and South Africa could participate as well in these exchange visits depending on them expressing an interest.

· Brazil: Second programme exchange for 40 regional representatives, visits to European regions and Open Days European week of Cities and Regions;

· Ukraine: Visits by Ukrainian officials to Brussels, European Spatial Planning Observation Network (ESPON), to EU regions and the Open Days European week of Cities and Regions;

· Other possibilities: West and/or South Africa: visits by officials to Brussels, ESPON, EU regions and the Open Days European week of Cities and Regions. Follow-up contacts/visits for Central American countries in the context of the Association Agreement negotiations with the EU.

Support to information and communication tools - indicative budget EUR 50 000

In order to increase the visibility of the activities and priorities of regional policy it is important to prepare, and translate into other languages, information and communications products.

The Commissioner and/or DG REGIO are frequently called upon to make presentations, together with the provision of stands at conferences all over the world. Since it cannot satisfy all these requests it makes sense to prepare readymade material or stands which could be shipped to these destinations. This action will be implemented via a service contract.

Actions in connection with the textile and footwear sector (13 03 25)

1. Objective

In line with the allocated appropriations, adopted in the 2010 budget, this pilot project aims at developing the Community strategy for the textile/clothing and footwear sectors, in particular for the less-favoured regions.

In this context, the appropriations are intended to be used to carry out an in depth assessment of the situation of the textile/clothing and footwear sectors in the European Union including prospects for their future development. The assessment will focus in the areas underlined in the budgetary comment, in particular research and innovation, restructuring, vocational training and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and will have a regional angle. It will highlight the strategic developments required in order to enhance the competitiveness of the EU textile/clothing and footwear sectors.

2. Implementation

The project will be implemented through a call for tender aiming at financing an in-depth assessment of the sectors’ situation and the prospects for their future development.

The call for tender, to be launched in the first semester of 2010, will comprise two lots, the first one focussing on the in-depth assessment of the European Textile and Clothing sector and the second one on the in-depth assessment of the European Footwear sector.

For each lot, the project will be composed of 6 independent reports/assessments as follows:

a.     Survey on the situation of the European textile/clothing and footwear sectors and prospects for future development

b.     Assessment of the way specialised research and innovation centres liaise/transfer technology to textile/clothing and footwear enterprises in different regions of the European Union. Identification of best practices, success factors and difficulties. Identification of potential future developments.

c.     Assessment of main difficulties faced by textile/clothing and footwear SMEs in different regions of the European Union and prospects to overcome these difficulties.

d.     Assessment of past or ongoing restructuring and modernisation processes in textile/clothing and footwear enterprises in different regions of the European Union. Anticipation of future modernisation and restructuring processes.

e.     Identification of the optimal training approaches (best practices) applied to textile/clothing and footwear enterprises in different regions of the European Union. Identification of future training needs.

f.      Assessment of the evolution of Research and Innovation practices in different textile/clothing and footwear regions of the European Union. Future prospects for research and innovation in the sector.

The project will have a particular focus on specific regions of the European Union.

A final synthesis report, drawing on the key findings of the 6 independent assessments, will highlight the way forward for both sectors.

Total budget: EUR 1.000.000 (EUR 630.000 for lot 1 and EUR 370.000 for lot 2).

3. Forecast for 2010

The call for tender with 2 lots will be launched during the first semester of 2010.

Main challenge will be to attract multidisciplinary teams to apply to the call for tender, which have an in-depth knowledge of the textile and/or of the footwear sectors and an in-depth knowledge of the different areas to be tackled.

Heading 2

Support for farmers' cooperatives (05 02 17 01)

The Commission is still reflecting on the feasibility and the most appropriate delivery mechanism.

European farm prices and margins observatory (05 02 17 02)

The Commission is still reflecting on the feasibility and the most appropriate delivery mechanism.

Support for farmers' and consumers' initiatives for low carbon emission, low energy consumption and locally marketed food production (05 02 17 03)

The Commission is still reflecting on the feasibility and the most appropriate delivery mechanism.

Development of prevention activities to halt desertification in Europe ('07 03 16)

1. Objective

As regards the budgetary remark adopted in the 2010 Budget, this project is intended to identify and develop prevention activities to halt desertification in Europe.

Given the extremely wide scope of initiatives to be covered by the budget remark, several meetings with the European Parliament were organised in order to define a possible focus not already covered by other policy areas (i.e. research and agriculture).

Following the discussions with the EP, the pilot project will focus on supporting the development of concrete pilot initiatives in order to contribute to the exchanges of good practice and innovation at the local level on four priority issues (conservation of rainwater and surface water, alternative forms of irrigation, water saving/water efficiency measures and crops consuming less water) for halting the desertification in Europe. In particular, the project will focus on testing specially designed low-cost technologies, techniques or practices addressing water scarcity and drought with the aim to improve human and environmental conditions in different regions (possibly in the identified priority regions) of Europe. The project would cover the identification, financial support, monitoring of implementation and evaluation of 3-5 concrete pilot initiatives.

2. Implementation

The commitment for this project was EUR 1 000 000 already under the 2009 budget.

Additional commitment appropriations of EUR 1 500 000 were allocated under the 2010 budget.

The additional appropriations will be incorporated into the same call for proposals and make possible the implementation of 3-5 pilot projects, more than originally planned.

3. Forecast for 2010

The project is implemented in two phases.

The first phase was the launch of a service contract assisting the Commission in selecting, monitoring and evaluating the pilot projects. The contract was signed in 2009 and is ongoing.

The second phase starts in 2010 and envisages the launch of a call for proposals for an indicative amount of EUR 2.400.000 in the first quarter of the year.

The pilot proposals will be selected and the grant agreements signed in the second half of the year (indicative time is October 2010).

Recovery of obsolete vessels not used in the fishing trade (07 03 18)

1. Objective

The types of ships covered by the pilot project, as defined by the Budget Authority, are vast in scope. It is proposed to focus the scope on ships that are related to Europe only: small ships operating in the European Union (EU), navy vessels and other governmental vessels and large seagoing vessels linked with the EU (calling at EU ports, flying the flag of one EU country or whose beneficial owner is European). Large seagoing vessels operating outside the EU will not be considered.

Moreover taking into account the budget remark and justification it is not clear whether the aim is a desk study or an actual operational project regarding recycling and reuse of materials and proper management of the remaining hazardous wastes.

The proposed approach for 2010 would be to conduct a scoping study establishing an inventory of the number and composition of ships and identifying the recycling processes already in place or under development. The results of this study could eventually lead to a second phase (in 2011) where the analysis could be refined and best practices shared through awareness raising events organised in relevant Member States (stage 2).

The project will consist on the following stages:

Stage 1 (2010): establish an inventory of the ships, of their composition, of their dismantling location and methods (including the impact on the human health and the environment). Identify the best practices.

Stage 2 (2011): organise awareness raising events in Member States provide information about best practices, to foster public debate and identify new solutions and ideas with relevant stakeholders (local authorities, shipowners, ship recycling facilities, NGOs...

The results of these stages could contribute to identify further possible developments, for example in terms of new waste management technologies, to recycle and reuse materials contained in ships such a glass fiber and resins and to better manage hazardous wastes produced by ship recycling. Such developments might be promoted by proposing a specific priority for projects to be funded through a future call for proposal under the Seventh Framework Programme.

2. Implementation

Stage 1:

Relevant information about large commercial seagoing vessels will be brought through negotiated procedure (commercial data base exists).

This information will then be exploited through a study (call for tender).

Stage 2: Awareness raising events will be organised through one or more specific tender(s).

3. Forecast for 2010

The project should be carried out in 2 phases. Only Phase 1 (EUR 300.000) should be financed from the 2010 budget through a procurement procedure. Phase 2 should be decided and developed in detail only after phase 1 has established the basic information. It should also be implemented through a procurement procedure (2011 budget).

A financing decision on Phase 1 will be proposed for adoption by April 2010.

The call for tenders will be launched as soon as possible in the first half of 2010. Due to the procurement procedure the contract cannot be expected to be signed before the second half of 2010.

Potential difficulties might be inherent to dismantling of large seagoing vessels taking place mainly in third countries and access to information about the impacts of the recycling methods.

Economic loss due to high non-revenue-water amounts in cities (07 03 19)

1. Objective

The aim of the project is to assess non-revenue-water and related economic loss in large cities throughout European Union (EU). The proposed goals can be summarised as follows:

1) Evaluation and estimation of non-revenue water in various representative cities.

2) Analysis of the consequences, the related economic loss and environmental impact.

The loss of water resources is important both from a resource and from an economic point of view. The project will therefore aim at establishing the link between water losses and the value of water in the given basins.

2. Implementation

The pilot project will be implemented through an open call for tender.

The contract will aim at establishing a baseline describing water losses in a selection of large cities in the EU.

As indicated in the budgetary remarks, the project should be linked to the EU's commitment against water scarcity and drought, and the selected countries will be those where there are significant problems with water scarcity and/or droughts, where losses are known to be high, and the potential for reduction of the losses thereby high, as well as cities which have minimised water losses, in order to study best practices.

The loss of water resources is important both from a resource and from an economic point of view. The project will therefore aim at establishing the link between water losses and the value of water in the given basins.

3. Forecast for 2010

The Commission will launch an open call for tender in the first part of 2010, to implement the above objectives.

The signature of the contract is intended to take place before the end of the year.

Certification of low-carbon farming practices (07 03 21)

1. Objective

Taking into account the objectives set out in the budget remark, the Commission would approach the implementation of the Pilot project along three main tasks :

- first, to compare existing farm-level carbon calculators and to find the most suitable or a hybrid suitable for testing in the third stage of the project. It is envisaged to go somewhat beyond the description as set out in the budget remark, so as include other environmental impacts of the farming systems and mitigation measures, so that a carbon calculator for climate change did not lead, for example, to damage to biodiversity;

- secondly, to examine what sort of administration would be needed to establish a certification system;

- and thirdly, to test the carbon calculator (from task1) and the practicality administrative proposals (from task 2) at regional level to assess feasibility in the European Union (EU) as a whole.

2. Implementation

As indicated in the Commission letter of November 2009 on the executability of amendments voted in 1st reading of the 2010 budget; the Commission is already conducting studies on the issues covered by the Pilot project. The output of these studies will be available by end 2010, and should be the foundation for the development of the actions under the pilot project.

As regards implementation, it is envisaged that DG ENV will work in association with the JRC for the implementation of the three tasks.

3. Forecast for 2010

A financing decision for the launch of a preliminary study will be proposed for adoption by April 2010.

The contracts and / or administrative arrangements with the JRC for tasks 1 and 2 are expected to be signed in the second half of 2010, with deliverables in 2011 and 2012. As regards task 3, it is yet to be determined whether the task can be financed from 2010 credits.

Complex research on methods of controlling the spread of ragweed and pollen allergies (07 03 22)

1. Objective

As per the budgetary remark adopted in the 2010 Budget, the project is intended:

- to analyse the various types of ragweed control and to define the most effective;

- to develop prevention mechanism for controlling the spread of ragweed.

Invasive alien species, as ragweed is, are considered to be the second greatest threat to biodiversity worldwide. The problem is expected to worsen in the coming century through climate change and through increasing trade and tourism.

This objective encompasses the objectives 1, 2 and 6 as voted by Parliament. It does not include objectives 3, 4 and 5 relating to allergenic effects of ragweed pollen. This was agreed in a meeting between the Commission (DG ENV and DG SANCO) and MEP Áder on 8 December 2009. Studies on allergenic effects and how to treat them were seen as not being suitable for a pilot project.

Taking into account the substantial amount made available by the European Parliament in the budget, the Commission will focus the pilot project on:

- the spread of common ragweed throughout the European Union (EU), by designing and establishing an early warning system to monitor the spread of ragweed. The definition of such a system will be done in close cooperation with other ongoing work (for instance at the European Environment Agency) and within the developing framework of the EU strategy on invasive alien species. The possibility of designing the system so as to expand it to other invasive species will be explored;

- the negative effects of common ragweed on public health, biodiversity and production systems;

- the implementation of a wide range of experiments in order to assess the results of eradication practices and their impact on non-target species and to analyse the agronomical and organisational patterns related to ragweed eradication.

These activities are expected to contribute to the design and implementation of future actions to counter ragweed infestation.

2. Implementation

The project, for which a total amount of EUR 1.500.000 is foreseen in the 2010 budget, will be implemented along the following strands:

– a call for proposals, for an indicative amount of EUR 500.000, to support the implementation of a wide range of experiments necessary to assess the methods of eradication of common ragweed and to produce and disseminate a set of recommendations on the results of the control measures, their agronomical and organisational patterns, their success factors and their impact on non-target species. The call will be published in March/April 2010 (after the adoption of the necessary financing decision) and we expect the projects to start by end 2010, for a duration of maximum 3 years.

– a service contract will be concluded following an open call for tenders, to be published in March 2010, for a maximum amount of EUR 500.000. The contract will provide the analysis of possible options for structuring the early warning system. The signature of the contract and the start of the work are expected in November 2010.

– a service contract will be concluded following an open call for tenders, to be published in March 2010, for a maximum amount of EUR 500.000. The contract will provide an assessment, in monetary terms, of the effects of common ragweed on public health, biodiversity and production systems. It will include both direct and indirect costs.

3. Forecast for 2010

In March 2010 an open call for tenders will be published for a service contract on the design and setting up of an early warning system. Also in March 2010 an open call for tender will be published for a service contract on the effects of common ragweed in the EU.

The work for both contracts is expected to start in November 2010

A call for proposals on experiments to control and eradicate ragweed will be published after the adoption of the financing decision. The closing date will be set to May and the grant agreement is expected to be finalised in the third quarter of 2010.

Potential difficulties, especially relating to the call for tender, result from the fact that an EU strategy on invasive species will be prepared simultaneously, whose provisions should be included when designing and analysing options for an early warning system, but may not be finalised in time to do so. Currently moreover the EU plant health strategy is being revised. Outcomes of this process should also be taken into consideration. Also, difficulties may result from focusing the early warning system on one particular species when at the same time provisions for a more general early warning system for invasive species are being explored.

To promote the replacement of vessels in the European commercial fleet with low environmental impact vessels (11 09 03)

Discussions are still going on within the Commission as to the attribution among the DGs, and the most appropriate delivery mechanism.

A European refund system for aluminium beverage cans (17 03 18)

1. Objective

The objective of the project is to assess the impacts of introducing a pan-European harmonised refund scheme for aluminium cans and – should the impacts prove positive – introduce a pilot phase of such a scheme in a selected group of Member States. To this end, a thorough Impact Assessment should be carried out covering environmental, economic, social and administrative burden-related issues and taking into account the smooth functioning of the internal market, accompanied by a detailed plan outlining the modalities of the pilot project.

In completing the task, the Commission envisages to launch an Impact Assessment study to scope the problem and assess the feasibility of possible solutions (EUR 300 000)

As a first stage, the contractor shall assess the environmental economic, social and administrative burden-related impacts of introducing common rules for the refund of cans. The impacts shall be analysed in qualitative and quantitative terms.

Secondly, the contractor shall identify solutions likely to deliver the most benefits and least cost to society as a whole. The assessment will include a cost benefit analysis of each option. Models should be made forecasting the potential benefits (environmental, economic and social) of such a scheme within a 10 years perspective, and the related costs, for the European Union (EU) society as a whole and for each Member State.

The assessment will also identify the appropriate level of governance where actions should be taken, in line with the Treaty and the protocols on subsidiarity and proportionality.

Should the EU level be indicated as the most appropriate level for action, the assessment should include the necessary legal framework (including draft proposals of appropriate measures) and a precise time table depicting steps and the necessary investments on the EU level and in each Member State.

Should the national and regional levels be the most appropriate levels for action, measures should be proposed to strengthen cooperation between Member States in enhancing compatibility of the deposit schemes for aluminium cans. Such measures could include targeted awareness raising campaigns, multi-stakeholder transnational workshops, harmonisation of national legislations, etc. The costs and benefits of introducing such measures, time tables and steps for each action should be described.

The results of the Impact Assessment could eventually lead to a second phase, which may involve testing in practice the feasibility and added value of the best option(s) indicated by the study.

2. Implementation

The Commission intends to launch an Impact Assessment to be financed from the 2010 budget through a procurement procedure. Indicative budget EUR 300,000, including: identification and assessment of possible options to address the problem, development of scenarios and assessment of their environmental, economic and social impacts.

A financing decision on Phase 1 will be proposed for adoption by April 2010.

The call for tenders will be launched as soon as possible in the first half of 2010. Due to the procurement procedure the contract cannot be expected to be signed before the second half of 2010.

Depending on the outcome of the impact assessment, a second phase involving practical implementation could be envisaged. The necessity and added value of a second phase should be decided only after the Impact Assessment has established the basic information.

3. Forecast for 2010

A financing decision for the launch of a preliminary study will be proposed for adoption by April 2010.

The call for tenders will be launched in the first half of 2010.

The contract is expected to be signed in the second half of 2010.

The results of the impact assessment are to be expected for end 2011.

Heading 3a

Impact assessment of legislative measures in contract law (18 06 09)

1. Objective

The general objectives of the project are:

(a)       to eliminate legal obstacles to the efficient functioning of cross-border transactions between businesses in the Member States;

(b)       to improve the daily life of individuals and businesses by enabling them to assert their rights throughout the European Union.

(c)       to promote the examination and developing of the Common Frame of Reference for European Contract Law and

(d)       to further the discussion about the usefulness of a 28th contractual system.

2. Implementation

The pilot project will encompass the following actions, to be initiated in 2010:

(a) Translation of the Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR) for a European Contract Law and its comments and notes into five important languages as well as a translation of other academic work in the field of European contract law, i. e. German, French, Spanish, Italian and Polish. Given the limited resources it will not be possible to translate the entire DCFR. The envisaged solution is to translate only the sections relating directly or indirectly to contract law. To promote a large discussion it is also necessary to translate other academic works into the above-mentioned languages. In this context the Guiding principles of European Contract Law (in European Contract Law)[6] are also to be translated. This study has been drafted in French and comprises approximately 170 pages. It has already been translated into English but it would be very useful for the discussion to get it translated into German, Italian, Spanish and Polish.

(b) A Study about the attitude of European businesses towards a 28^th contractual system:  This system would be similar to those devised for other areas of the internal market (e.g. the European company, the European economic interest grouping or the Community trade mark) and would encourage the development of intra-Community trade by establishing a single, directly applicable legal framework.

(c) Up to five seminars on specific issues in the area of contract law, for example about the so-called blue button (the idea of the blue button is that parties to electronic cross border transactions can tick a blue button on the screen to accept that a European optional instrument would govern their contract, instead of one of the national regimes).

For these actions the Commission will refer to various existing framework contracts.

3. Forecast for 2010

1^st Quarter: Adoption of the financial decision

2^nd Quarter: Launch of the translation and the study

3^rd and 4^th Quarter: Organisation of the conferences

Heading 3b

Cultural heritage alert networks (15 04 46)

1. Objective

Le commentaire budgétaire tel qu'adopté dans le cadre du Budget 2010 prévoit la création d'un réseau d'échange direct d'informations entre chacun des points de contact officiels mis en place dans les différents États membres pour signaler les cas de vol et de trafic ou d'exportation illicites de biens relevant du patrimoine culturel ou de monuments historiques protégés et fournir toutes les informations en rapport avec ceux-ci, et les infrastructures nécessaires à cette fin.

Le réseau se fonderait notamment sur une base de données dûment documentée répertoriant les articles volés et toutes les informations utiles pour faciliter la recherche et la récupération de ces pièces, parvenir à un accord, entre les points de contact sur un certain nombre de mesures de lutte contre le vol et le trafic illégal de biens relevant du patrimoine culturel et, enfin, fournir ces informations rapidement aux autorités de la police, des ports, des aéroports et des douanes.

2. Implementation

Le projet pilote du Parlement européen se situe dans le contexte des conclusions du Conseil JAI du 27/28 novembre 2008 qui a, entre autres, invité la Commission européenne à dresser et à rapporter, avant le 31 décembre 2010, un état des lieux des instruments législatifs, normatifs et opérationnels dans le domaine des biens culturels volés dans l'Union européenne (UE).

Il a également souligné l'importance d'une coopération étroite entre les services des Etats membres spécialisés dans la lutte contre le trafic des biens culturels, par exemple par la désignation de points de contact dans chacun des Etats membres et a recommandé d'étudier la possibilité de faire circuler de manière plus rapide et plus large les informations portant sur les biens culturels volés, contenus dans les systèmes nationaux existants.

Précisément pour donner suite à cette demande, la Commission a lancé un certain nombre d'activités :

Suite aux conclusions du Conseil JAI du 27/28 novembre 2008, Interpol a été chargé de perfectionner sa base de données ainsi que son système d'alerte. Le groupe de travail mis en place rendra ses recommandations vers la mi-2010; la réalisation de celles-ci pourra être mise en œuvre via le programme "Prévenir et combattre la criminalité", géré par la DG JLS.

Est également en cours une étude sur la prévention du trafic des biens culturels dans l'UE et dont la finalisation est attendue pour la fin 2010-début 2011; les résultats de cette étude devraient permettre d'identifier les besoins et les modalités envisageables de coopération européenne.

-  Un groupe d'experts "mobilité de collections", gérés par la DG EAC travaille actuellement sur l'identification des moyens de renforcement de la prévention et de la lutte contre le trafic des biens culturels dans les Etats Membres. Les conclusions des travaux de ce groupe sont attendues courant 2010.

3. Forecast for 2010

De l'avis de la Commission, il serait préférable d'attendre les conclusions de ces diverses initiatives avant d'envisager la mise en œuvre d'actions plus opérationnelles telles que préconisées par le projet pilote adopté par le Parlement. Il est évident que la Commission tiendra informé le Parlement européen des résultats des activités en cours.

Compte tenu des contraintes du calendrier, il est peu probable que la Commission soit en mesure de lancer le projet pilote avant la fin 2010.

Toutefois, au cas où des résultats probants étaient disponibles dans le courant de l'année, la Commission pourrait évaluer l'opportunité d'utiliser les crédits mis à disposition pour compléter les initiatives en cours.

Heading 4

Support for surveillance and protection measures for Community vessels sailing through areas where piracy is a threat (19 06 07)

1. Objective

The first and main result will be maritime surveillance data of the region off the coast of Somalia delivered routinely to operational users in the field – e.g. to EU NAVFOR depending on the duration of its mandate, and after that to a suitable follow-up entity. To protect the confidentiality of the data, maritime monitoring and surveillance information from European Union (EU) systems must not be shared with entities that have not been mandated to contribute to the protection and safeguarding of Community vessels in the area or with which there is no enforceable agreement on the protection of such information.

A further result will be the increase of maritime situational awareness and derived risk assessment. It is assumed this would lead to better protection of vessels travelling in high-risk areas.

2. Implementation

The proposed implementation method is direct centralised management. The project consists in a service, i.e. the study of the possibilities of providing integrated maritime information including a test phase. Under these conditions the JRC has been charged with execution of the relative tasks.

3. Forecast for 2010

The activities foreseen under this pilot project are as follows:

Complete the inventory of ongoing initiatives and involved actors.

Set up and test maritime surveillance data collection, communications and contacts in selected countries in the Horn of Africa and Gulf of Aden region.

Obtain a persistent stream of maritime surveillance data from a multitude of sources.

Run the most important parts of the system in a testing phase in selected countries in the region off the coast of Somalia[7] to help establish which of various possible methods are in practice feasible and effective.

Establish a cost-benefit analysis of the use of particular surveillance or communication means, in order to base decisions on their continued use in the operational phase.

Programme for NGO-led peace building activities (19 06 09)

1. Objective

The Commission signaled already, through its Executability letter, that there is no need for a specific pilot project to work with civil society in peace-building as it already undertakes substantial work with non-governmental organisations (NGOs) under the Stability Instrument (IfS).

Almost a quarter of all IfS crisis response funds under Article 3 of the IfS Regulation (19.060101), some EUR 60 million, are being implemented by NGOs worldwide, in more than 80 grants awarded since 2007. The most prominent examples include Zimbabwe, Southern Thailand, Colombia, Georgia, Bangladesh, Philippines and Cuba.

Under Article 4.3 of the IfS, funding for NGOs was some EUR 9 million for 2007-2009, and it is estimated that an average of EUR 10 million or more will be devoted for NGOs per year from 2010 to 2013.

See: http://ec.europa.eu/external_relations/grants_contracts/grants/awards/index_en.htm

Furthermore, the Commission has recently adopted a financing decision under Article 3 of the IfS - Third Facility for urgent actions involving Policy Advice, Technical Assistance, Mediation and Reconciliation for the benefit of third countries affected by crisis situations (PAMF 3), and published on its website (http://ec.europa.eu/external_relations/ifs/index_en.htm). This facility will provide more than EUR 3 million earmarked for NGO-led activities in crisis situations in the sectors enumerated in the pilot project.

Against this background, the additional EUR 1 million provided by this pilot project will accordingly be implemented within this existing framework, in line with the budgetary comments voted by Parliament.

2. Implementation

It is foreseen to implement this pilot project under a new financing decision in 2010 for a 4th Facility for urgent actions involving Policy Advice, Technical Assistance, Mediation and Reconciliation for the benefit of third countries affected by crisis situations, in which a specific funding allocation will be foreseen for NGO-led activities.

The decision will authorize expenditure under 19.0601 and 19.0609 (the pilot project). A restricted call for proposals might be considered, especially for activities to take place in stable conditions as opposed to a crisis situation. A specific follow up and reporting will be established for the expenditures, the actions taken and the results obtained for the pilot project.

3. Forecast for 2010

The above mentioned financing decision will be adopted in the 1^st quarter of 2010, and grants for NGO-led activities shall be awarded starting in the 4^th quarter 2010.

Finance for agricultural production (21 02 04)

1. Objective

The present pilot project has the overall objective to facilitate access to small-holder farmers to financial resources which should be used to stimulate agricultural production in developing countries.

At the time being (February 2010), the Commission is planning exploratory missions in Malawi to check the existence and the financial probity of organisations specialised in microfinance, including local banks and associations. The exploratory missions will lead the way to identification of possible micro-credits projects for small-holders farmers most touched by food crisis and who are looking for financial means to increase production and yields. A correct targeting of possible end beneficiaries would then be needed.

2. Implementation

On the basis of the results of the exploratory missions, the Commission will see whether it is possible to grant a direct contract to local microfinance institutions already working in the country and detaining a de facto monopoly situation. This would be the preferred option to choose: targeted project.

As a fallback position, should this option not be implementable, the Commission will consider the option of launching a call for proposal having for target audience specialised microfinance institutions operation.

3. Forecast for 2010

Once the identification mission has been finalised (forecast: March/April 2010), in case of targeted projects, the Commission will launch the procedure for the commitment of funds leading to a Commission Decision (forecast: May 2010) and subsequently signature of contracts (forecast: September 2010).

In case a call for proposal will need to be launched, the expected procedure will be:

- October April 2010: publication of guidelines

- December 2010: submission of concept notes

- January 2011: starting of the evaluation

- Mid-April 2011: submission of full applications

- End May 2011: selection of successful applications

- June 2011: signature of grant contracts

Enhanced health care for victims of sexual violence in the Democratic Republic of Congo (21 05 01 08)

1. Objective

In line with the budgetary remark adopted in the 2010 Budget, this pilot project aims at improving the medical response to victims of sexual violence in Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).

2. Implementation

Given that the project has only recently been agreed, the Commission Delegation in DRC is still in the process of designing the project.

As a first step, the Delegation will contract a short term consultant to explore the options for this project, some of which may be:

o direct support to existing medical facilities in eastern DRC supporting with sexual violence victims

o Explore options to provide medical training and equipment to medical facilities in eastern DRC working with sexual violence victims.

3. Forecast for 2010

o Terms of Reference for identification finalised: end February

o Selection procedure for Consultant (framework contract Lot 8): March

o Study completed: July

o Financing proposal submitted to Brussels: September

Heading 5

European research grants for cross-border investigative journalism (16 02 05)

1. Objective

The budgetary remark adopted in the 2010 Budget refers to a project aiming at developing a serious cross-border journalistic research at the European Union (EU) scale, with competitive calls for proposals to be organised with a view to select common investigation projects gathering journalists from at least two European Member States and with a cross-border or European dimension that is brought through a national, regional or local perspective.

At this stage the Commission has had a preliminary contact with the EP administration. DG COMM intends to make further contacts with the MEPs concerned.

2. Implementation

The Commission is currently exploring the options it has for implementing the pilot project. The project is politically sensitive as it involves granting public money to individual journalists.

3. Forecast for 2010

The implementation phase will be determined after a thorough assessment.

Inter-institutional system identifying long-term trends facing the EU (25 01 09)

Discussions are still going on within the Commission as to the most appropriate delivery mechanism. In parallel, contacts were established by the Commission services with the European Parliament for exchanging ideas on the best approach to implement this pilot project.

Implementation of Preparatory Actions

Heading 1a

Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs (02 02 03 05)

1. Objective

Europe needs more entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship is essential for economic growth and job creation. Many founders of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) lack management experience and key skills. This, coupled with the fact that the vast majority of SMEs operate in only one country, restricts growth.

Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs helps new European Union (EU) entrepreneurs to enrich their experiences, learn and network with experienced entrepreneurs in their entreprises in other EU Member States. The overall objective of the preparatory action is to enhance the entrepreneurship, internationalisation and competitiveness of European SMEs and improve the chances of success of potential start-up entrepreneurs and newly established micro and small enterprises in the EU.

The preparatory action will also give input to the preparation of the legal base for a permanent programme after 2011.

2. Implementation

The preparatory action will be implemented via a call for proposals. The call for proposals will be published around March 2010. It is expected that around 30-35 proposals will be selected.

3. Forecast for 2010

For 2010 goals are:

o Implementation of the 2010 call for proposals.

o Management of the 2009 call grant agreements and mobility exchanges.

o Target: 1200 exchanges until June 2011.

o Evaluation of the pilot project and preparatory action.

o Holding of a stakeholders conference on the future development of the Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs programme.

o Preparation of a legal basis for a permanent programme.

The expected timetable is as follows:

TIME	GOAL	EXPECTED OUTCOME
March 2010	Publication of the call for proposals for the 2nd cycle of the preparatory action.	EU-wide participation of relevant organisations in the call.
12-13 April 2010	Stakeholders' conference (Brussels)	Input for the evaluation of the pilot project and the preparatory action to allow preparation of the legal base.
July 2010	Evaluation of proposals.	Selection of the best proposals (around 25-35), acceptance of evaluation report and signing of award decision.
September 2010	First report on interim evaluation.	Input for the drafting of the legal base.
October-December 2010	Grant agreements preparation and signature.	Maximise the use of the allocated appropriations for signature of grant agreements.
June – December 2010	Drafting of legal base.	Legal base text prepared for circulation and approval.

European Destinations of Excellence (02 02 08 01)

1. Objective

Since the launch of the project, the aim of the initiative has been to draw attention to the value, diversity and shared characteristics of European tourist destinations and to promote both within Europe and in third countries the European destinations where the economic growth objective is pursued in such a way as to ensure the social, cultural and environmental sustainability of tourism. The measure has also been intended to help European citizens to become better acquainted with one another.

Indeed, in 2006, the Budget Authority adopted the pilot project “European Destinations of Excellence" (EDEN) as a mean of initiating a Community action in support of European tourism, with an annual budget of EUR 1 million. In 2007 the pilot project was concluded. The Budget Authority adopted a budget of EUR 2.5 million in 2008 to launch a preparatory action to ensure the follow up of the pilot project. The same budget was adopted in 2009. For the third and last year of the preparatory action the Budget Authority voted for an increased budget of EUR 3 million.

More in particular, the project's aims are to:

· enhance visibility of the emerging European tourist destinations of excellence, especially the lesser known,

· create awareness of Europe’s tourist diversity and quality,

· promote all European countries and regions both within Europe and in the main third country markets,

· help decongestion, combat seasonality, and rebalance the tourist flows towards the non-traditional destinations,

· present awards for sustainable forms of tourism,

· create a platform for the exchange of good practices at European level,

· promote networking between awarded-winning destinations which could persuade other destinations to adopt sustainable tourism development models.

The project also received a concrete support from the European Parliament with the award ceremony of the EDEN photo competition in December 2009 held on its premises.

2. Implementation

In 2009 the Commission:

1. Implemented the EDEN III project (called “Tourism and protected areas") by supporting the Member States by providing grants (of up to 75% of the eligible costs) for the national selection procedures of the destinations of excellence. This selection was carried out at national level in the first semester of 2009 by 22 countries (20 Member states and 2 Candidate countries): Austria - Belgium - Bulgaria - Croatia - Cyprus – Czech Republic- Estonia - France - Greece - Hungary - Ireland - Italy - Latvia - Lithuania – Luxembourg - Malta – Netherlands - Poland - Romania – Slovenia - Spain - Turkey.

The selection of the 22 winners was completed in June 2009. Eligible destinations were those protected areas (i.e. area of land and/or sea/internal waters especially dedicated to the protection and maintenance of biological diversity, and of natural and associated cultural resources, and managed through legal or other effective means) and/or the areas bordering them where an economically viable tourism product has been developed using the protected area as an asset, while respecting its protected environment and at the same time meeting the needs of local residents and visitors.

2. In addition, in order to give more visibility to the preparatory action the Commission implemented the following communication activities:

a. production of the audiovisual material about the awarded destinations and the EDEN Awards ceremony,

b. organisation of the EDEN Awards ceremony and EDEN Exhibition during the European Tourism Forum in Brussels on 7-8 October 2009,

c. production of promotional material (e.g. press pack, brochures, posters, etc),

d. launch of a fan page on Facebook, publication of the EDEN page on Wikipedia, publication of articles in different magazine. Preparation of a special issue of the Parliament Magazine dedicated to the competition,

e. maintenance and updating of a dedicated web portal (www.edenineurope.eu )

f. launch of a photo competition on the theme of sustainable tourism with a final award ceremony hosted in the premises of the European Parliament.

3. to provide support to the destinations for the networking, promotional and marketing activities to enhance sustainability aspects in the management of the European destinations, the Commission:

a. maintained the network of EDEN destinations

b. proposed the signature of the so called Brussels Declaration to the winning destinations of EDEN II editions which therefore joined the network

c. organised two meetings of the network (one in Ireland in February and one in Brussels in October

d. tried to involve the National Tourist Offices in the promotion of the winning destinations.

3. Forecast for 2010

The same objectives and procedure as in the previous years are continued: the foreseen theme, as agreed with the Member States is “tourism and the regeneration of physical sites”.

It is planned to publish a call for proposals for interested Member States, Candidate and European Free Trade Area (EFTA) countries in February. The amount dedicated to the grants for the selection procedure will be the same as in 2009 (EUR 1 million).

Thanks to the increased budget, more resources will be used for the communication campaign with the aim of increasing the visibility of the project in Europe and outside, as well as to improve the functioning of the EDEN network, which should serve as a platform of reference for local authorities which wish to adopt sustainable tourism offers for their growth.

The project EDEN IV will be brought to an end with a final award ceremony in the last trimester of the year at the occasion of a major tourism event to attract as many persons as possible.

To this aim, the cooperation with different stakeholders, in particular the European Travel Commission and dedicated TV channels and magazines, will be strengthened.

The main general goal of the year is to increase awareness of non traditional emerging destinations all over Europe among the general public. More specifically, 25 destinations will be nominated as EDEN destinations for their sustainable offer in the field of aquatic tourism before summer 2010; the selection for the next round of EDEN will be launched before the end of the year; the EDEN network will be enlarged and reinforced under the lead of an expert in marketing and branding of destinations.

Potential difficulties are linked to the general economic crisis. A number of participating authorities is already facing difficulties in managing the project because of cuts of both financial and human resources. There is a concrete possibility that the number of countries participating in the project cannot be increased.

Sustainable tourism (02 02 08 02)

1. Objective

The implementation in 2009 of the preparatory action was done by the use of existing framework contracts and a low value tender (less than EUR 60.000). It focussed on two initiatives for awareness-raising. The first initiative was the production of a short video-clip to be used to promote cycling as a leisure activity, but also as a mode of sustainable tourism transport and to promote existing EuroVelo routes.

The second initiative consisted of the organisation of three regional Workshops in Europe in order to:

- Highlight the increasing importance of cycling tourism and its benefits and regional economic impacts and stress the importance of developing the Iron Curtain Trail as a EuroVelo route, of which the former remote areas will benefit.

- Present European best-practices from existing EuroVelo routes and model implementations of the Iron Curtain Trail.

- Explore the interest of countries and regions alongside the former Iron Curtain in implementing such a cycling trail and the way forward by identifying feasible/concrete initiatives on how the Commission could assist its implementation in the years 2010 and 2011.

- Promote networking of countries and regions alongside the former Iron Curtain towards the establishment of a future trans-national cycling route, the "Iron Curtain Trail".

- Commemorate the common history of countries and people living along the former Iron Curtain while at the same time giving visibility to their European citizenship.

Each of the first two Workshops gathered between 90 and 120 participants from local, regional and national transport and tourism authorities and other interested stakeholders as well as journalists and media representatives, who showed a huge interest in the topic of cycling tourism. MEP Michael Cramer, initiator and promoter of the Iron Curtain Trail Project was invited to the Workshops as a speaker.

2. Implementation

The implementation in 2010 of this preparatory action will be done by means of a call for proposals.

3. Forecast for 2010

The implementation of further awareness raising actions for cycling tourism seems best to be done with a call for proposals targeted towards the following beneficiaries: national and/or regional authorities and other associations in charge of regional development and/or tourism in the Member States

Timetable 2010 (tentatively):

April: launch of a call for proposals for best practices on trans-border sustainable bicycle and train tourism networks

November: publication of results

December: award decision

Expected outcome:

It is expected to award a minimum of 3 to a maximum of 10 trans-border networks (depending on the project scale).

Potential difficulties:

- to find appropriate synergies with similar calls within the operational programmes of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF).

Social tourism in Europe (02 02 08 03)

1. Objective

Implementing this project would be a genuine opportunity to promote partnerships, spurred on by the European Union, between the social partners as well as the public and private sectors. Regional exchange programmes (such as Interreg, co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)) are indeed indicative of the propensity of encouraging regional and cross-border cooperation. Within this context, Calypso is intended as a tool in extending existing regional good practices to other European territories whilst ensuring accessibility, through tourism exchanges, to different target groups in order to encompass additional strata of the European population.

A study has been launched in 2009 (with 2009 credits) which reflects clearly the main Calypso objectives. The study objectives are to:

- catalogue the main (most representative) good practices as a means to encourage tourism activity particularly during the off peak season, thus generating employment opportunities when tourism demand is traditionally low;

- identify the existing measures at European and national level allowing the exchanges of persons from the following target groups: senior citizens, young people, disabled citizens and families facing difficult social circumstances;

- examine the difficulties related to such exchanges whilst proposing the most appropriate solutions;

- propose one or several mechanisms in the tourist low season enabling particular target groups (senior citizens, young people, disabled citizens and families facing difficult social circumstances) to go on holiday in other Member States/Candidate Countries on the basis of themed programmes and accommodation offers coordinated by Member States/Candidate Countries authorities (national, regional or local public authorities), on the basis of initiatives from stakeholders that include municipalities, charitable organisations, parishes, unions, social partners, cooperatives or any not-for-profit association.

2. Implementation

2010 is seeing – amongst other initiatives - the implementation of this study. Reaching the above objectives would contribute to:

- generate economic activity and growth across Europe (by facilitating the development of European tourism programmes for target groups).

- improve tourism seasonality patterns across Europe, particularly through the social policy function of tourism (tourism growth patterns; encouraging economic activity by target groups during the low season as a means to reduce unemployment risks for tourism personnel; mitigating pressures on the physical infrastructure of developed destinations by promoting tourism outside the peak months; assist in the development of small emerging destinations in the context of regional development).

- create more and better jobs in the tourism sector (respect for tourism sustainability challenges[8]; strengthening full-time employment prospects as opposed to seasonal part-time work; improving employment conditions by stressing the importance of a qualitative work environment throughout the entire tourism supply chain).

- increase the European citizenship (providing tangible opportunities to improve mobility, self-fulfilment, socialising and active learning for families, youths and seniors).

3. Forecast for 2010

It is envisaged that the study currently being implemented will indicate appropriate recommendations concerning Calypso`s future directions. With the aim of facilitating exchanges and the development of social tourism at European level, the Commission intends initially issuing a call for proposals across all European countries interested in the preparatory action. The budget will be of circa EUR 800.000.

Apart from the study implementation, other activities envisaged include a communication campaign (utilising an existing Framework Contract) and meetings in different parts of Europe aimed at ensuring additional visibility to the Preparatory Action. The communication campaign will amongst others include the production of a logo, leaflets and lamas, besides the compilation of targeted databases and the strengthening of relations with stakeholders. The meetings, on the other hand, are phased to coincide with the different implementation stages of the study, and will include a concluding conference (organised in collaboration with the Spanish Presidency) in June 2010.

Assisting the Commission in its endeavours is an Expert Group composed of a cross-section of stakeholders (including Commission officials, European tourism representative bodies, Tourism Sustainability Group (TSG) Members, social partners, NGO`s etc.) which is being consulted regularly on the different stages of implementation.

Heading 1b

Promoting a more favourable environment for micro-credit in Europe (13 03 24)

1. Objective

On 13^th November 2007, the European Commission adopted a communication (COM (2007) 708) on a “European initiative for the development of micro-credit in support of growth and employment” ([9]) (the “European Initiative”) whose objective is to promote the development of micro-credit in the European Union. This initiative comprises four different strands:

e.  Improving the legal and institutional environment in the Member States;

f.  Further changing the climate in favour of entrepreneurship;

g.  Promoting the spread of best practices;

h.  Providing additional capital for micro-credit institutions.

The communication of the Commission stresses in particular that adequate technical and financial support is necessary to help micro-finance institutions ("MFIs")/ micro-credit providers release their potential.

The Commission and the European Investment Bank (EIB) launched on 10th and 11th September 2008 respectively a joint initiative JASMINE (Joint Action to Support Micro-finance Institutions in Europe) to support non-bank micro-credit providers with a view to help them to improve the quality of their operations, to expand and to become sustainable.

The pilot phase of this initiative aims at testing the European market’s ability to provide support to micro-credit providers/ MFIs on commercial terms. JASMINE started its development and implementation in the 3rd quarter of 2009. The pilot phase will last 3 years from 2009-2011 and is targeting some 30 non-bank MFIs in the EU.

With respect to the above mentioned pilot phase the Commission and the EIB have agreed the following:

i. that the JASMINE facility will be hosted and managed by the European Investment Fund (EIF);

j. the Commission will finance activities relating to technical assistance to be provided to non-bank micro-credit providers/ MFIs, such as assessments/ratings and training as indicated in proposal 2 of COM(2007) 708 (1st pillar), and

k. the EIB will provide funding to selected MFIs on a commercial basis through the EUR 20 million RCM Micro-credit Pilot Facility (2nd pillar). This latter aims at supporting the development of very small micro-enterprises through microfinance entities that are close to self-sustainability or in general in a development phase aiming at becoming fully bankable. Financial instruments comprise funded and unfunded risk sharing arrangements and equity investments and will be financed alongside with co-financing partners, such as banks or investment funds.

Pursuant to the decision of the European Parliament to launch a preparatory action in view to promote a more favourable environment for micro-credit in Europe, which is compliant with the provisions of the initiative COM(2007) 708 adopted by the Commission on 13th November 2007, "A European initiative for the development of micro-credit in support of growth and development", the Commission and the EIF took the view that the budgetary allocation from the European Parliament can be used to complete the activities foreseen within the JASMINE initiative; thus allowing to provide a wider range of services to the European MFIs, namely:

Additional risk capital and financial support in order to help smaller or less sustainable MFIs than those targeted under the 2nd pillar to reach a meaningful size and financial standing (3rd pillar). The resources available under the Preparatory Action ("EPPA Resources") will be used for that purpose in combination with the RCM Micro-credit Pilot Facility, or with any other new European facility related to microfinance.

These 3 pillars will be accounted as separate blocks of finance and managed accordingly.

2. Scope of the action and objective

The objective of the Action is to implement the Preparatory Action. The aim of the Preparatory Action is to foster the development of micro-credit on a sustainable basis, in particular by providing seed funding for non-bank micro-finance institutions in the EU.

The budget allocated to the Action (EUR 4,000,000) will be used to provide seed funding and other financial support to selected MFIs / non-bank micro-credit providers in the EU. It is intended to help small MFIs/microcredit providers to reach a meaningful size and financial standing.

The Action should improve the development of micro-credit in the EU in co-ordination with the JASMINE facility that was launched and set up by the Commission and the EIB Group in 2008, combing technical assistance (1st pillar) and RCM Micro-credit Pilot Facility (2nd pillar).

As not all MFIs/micro-credit providers will be eligible for financing under the RCM Micro-credit Pilot Facility which states in its guidelines that “the financial objective for the Micro-credit Facility shall be to achieve full cost coverage and to preserve the real value of the relevant investment”, the EPPA Resources will allow financing green field initiatives having a strong legitimacy from a social point of view and help them reach sustainability in the mid to long term. Seed capital is the initial capital used to start a business. The amount of money is usually relatively small because the business is still at a conceptual stage. Such a venture is generally at a pre-revenue stage and seed capital is needed to cover initial operating expenses until a service can start generating revenue, and to attract the attention of private investors.

3. Implementation

The project will be implemented through a grant (EUR 4 million) directly by the Commission to the EIF pursuant to articles 168(d) and 168(f) of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002 of 23 December 2002. The Board of the EIF has approved on 22 December 2009 to top up this amount with additional EUR 250.000. This will allow signing a contribution Agreement with the EIF in the first quarter of 2010

The resources allocated to this preparatory action will be utilised to help up to 5 non-bank micro-credit providers reach sustainability and commercial standing in the medium term. They will start to be disbursed case by case to selected MFIs/micro-credit providers in the course of 2010. Part of the funding will also be allocated to set up co-ordination with JASMINE. The administrative costs linked to the management of the project are estimated to amount to 7% for the whole duration of the project.

The EIF foresees to use the resources primarily in two ways:

A stand alone funding from the resources to provide seed capital for greenfield MFIs/micro-credit providers who can be expected to have an important impact in terms of job creation and financial inclusion but are unable to attract a loan on commercial terms. In this case, the EIF will financially support start-up/growing MFIs/micro-credit providers (i.e. local initiatives in Western European countries) through seed capital funding. The ultimate objective of the resources in a stand alone funding context is to contribute to build and maintain new micro-credit providers.

A combination of seed capital / funding from the EPPA Resources and commercial funding from the RCM Micro-credit Pilot Facility to cover the risk for MFIs/micro-credit providers showing good quality portfolio but in need of capital funding to face a growing demand (i.e. opening of new branches for an existing MFI/micro-credit providers; recruitment; premises extension, etc.); or any other new European facility related to microfinance.

4. Forecast for 2010

The action will start in the first quarter 2010 and it will last until 31 December 2020. The investment period will be up to 4 years, starting from the date of receipt of the funds by EIF.

DG REGIO, DG ENTR and DG EMPL are seeking to co-ordinate their activities with a view to foster greater synergy between existing instruments aimed at micro-enterprises and financial inclusion of potential entrepreneurs, notably JEREMIE and JASMINE, the CIP instrument and the newly announced PROGRESS microfinance facility.

Heading 2

Climate of the Carpathian Basin (07 03 17)

1. Objective

The objective of the preparatory action is to investigate the detailed weather-related and spatial structure of the Carpathians and the Carpathian basin with integrated or at least comparable methods. The basic results will be a contribution to regional climate variability and change studies, and applied climatology.

This is the second year of this pilot project: EUR 2,5 millions were allocated in the 2009 budget and EUR 2 millions have now been included in the 2010 budget.

The project already underway is focused on the collection and elaboration of relevant data in view of getting a real-time monitoring of drought in the Carpathian region and developing an information exchange protocol/platform.

In this second year the Commission does not consider suitable to further invest in the collection and elaboration of data, without having collected and analysed the results of the first year financing.

In 2010, in line with the Commission White Paper on Adapting to Climate Change and taking into account the needs of the Carpathian/South East Europe (SEE) region, the Commission proposes to focus the analysis on the vulnerability of the region to climate change impacts and on suggesting potential adaptation measures. The results of this analysis will be strongly interrelated with the work underway and will also provide a contribution to the European Union (EU) Adaptation Clearinghouse, the web based platform for the exchange of information on climate change impacts, vulnerability and adaptation envisaged by the White Paper on climate change adaptation.

2. Implementation

The Commission would like to conclude one or more contract(s) for an analysis of vulnerability to Climate Change impacts and potential adaptation measures.

3. Forecast for 2010

One or more open calls will be launched in the second semester of 2010, after the adoption the financing decision.

EU Rapid Response Capability (07 04 05)

1. Objective

The preparatory action aims at meeting the challenges facing civil protection as outlined on the European Parliament resolutions on the fight against natural disasters, in Commission's communication on Reinforcing the Union's Disaster Response Capacity and in the European Parliament resolution on forest fires in the summer of 2009. It covers standby teams and equipment covering a wider scope of disasters and reducing the existing gaps in response capacities. It was initially launched under the 2008 budget and renewed in 2009 with the merge of 2008 pilot project on the EU Forest Fire-fighting Tactical reserve into a single preparatory action. This is because the pilot project and the preparatory action in 2008 were covering closely related activities, while the pilot project was restricted to forest fires.

The extension of the preparatory action for 2010 (third and last budgetary year), will make it possible to continue, reinforce and diversify the rapid response capability established in 2008 and 2009 pending a presentation by the Commission and adoption by the legislator of a proposal establishing the rapid response capability on a permanent basis.

The amounts proposed are the same that were allocated to this budgetary line in the 2009 budget.

2. Implementation

The funds will be used through:

1) a call for proposals (grants) aiming at improving the overall capacity of the European Union (EU) to respond immediately to critical needs arising from all types of major disasters inside and outside the EU, and

2) a call for tender (study contract), aiming at assessing various governance models and arrangements for the development of an EU Rapid Response Capability.

3. Forecast for 2010

An ad hoc financing decision is in the process of adoption.

It is planned to launch a call for proposals of an amount of EUR 7 350 000 in February 2010 and have grant agreements signed in April 2010. An Information Day is expected to be organised in February 2010.

It is also planned to launch a tender for a study contract of an amount of EUR 150 000 in February 2010 and have the contract signed in April 2010.

It is expected that grants will be awarded to beneficiaries before the summer. The preparatory action should enable further testing various arrangements for making resources available for the EU civil protection operations.

They might include

- the standby of additional European rapid response capabilities that can be deployed at the request of the Commission/MIC;

- further extension of standby periods and additional deployments of resources made available in the framework of the preparatory action calls of 2008 and 2009;

- a complementary tactical reserve of aerial fire-fighting capacity for assisting Member States or third countries overwhelmed by forest fires.

Control posts (resting posts) in relation to the transport of animals (17 04 03 03)

1. Objective

The increased transport of animals by road over long journeys has raised the need for improved control posts where animals are to rest. In the interest of animal health and welfare, it has been necessary to introduce specific measures to avoid stress to the animals and the spreading of infectious diseases. The objective of the action is to increase the use of control posts and promote high quality control posts.

The 2010 preparatory action is a follow-up of similar preparatory actions voted in 2009 and 2008.

2. Implementation

The project will be implemented through grants to renovate or build high quality control posts and a possible system of certification to improve their use by livestock transporters.

The implementation shall be carried out directly by DG SANCO.

3. Forecast for 2010

A preliminary feasibility study for determining the best criteria for the grants is presently ongoing and results are expected in May 2010 (based on the credits voted in 2009).

A financing decision for the present action is being prepared and will be adopted in the meantime.

A single call for proposals for an amount of EUR 2.000.000 will be published. The action shall be performed within 24 months following the signature of the grant agreement. The call will be launched after the completion of the preliminary feasibility study.

Potential difficulties:

In a previous call carried out in 2008 on the same topic few parties showed their interest in the project. In addition, applicants lacked sufficient co-financing or economical sustainability to be able to ensure a consistent participation in the proposed projects.

The future call will be prepared in a way that it provides a wider publicity and that interested parties are aware of the importance of the economical viability of their projects.

Heading 3b

Erasmus for Journalists (09 06 05)

1. Objective

The budgetary remarks adopted in the 2010 Budget foresee that "ensuring pluralism in Europe is one of the most important goals of EU media policies. An effective way to enhance pluralism is to give journalists access to pluralism. This could be achieved by financing exchange of journalists between different countries and media within the EU. The goal is to enable journalists to gain a broader and more comprehensive understanding of the EU and its different media and culture."

The first year of this preparatory action will deliver the parameters under which the action requested by the European Parliament (MEP Rübig) can be successfully implemented.

2. Implementation

As the first step of the Preparatory Action an exploratory/feasibility study is being commissioned. The exploratory study will test the underlying intervention logic and define implementation rules for a possible “Erasmus for Journalists” programme. The output shall constitute original analysis, rather than being a mere assembly of secondary sources; it shall take the already on-going Erasmus programmes into account in order to learn from their experiences and avoid any duplication and may propose alternative means. The study shall consist of two parts. The first part should deal with the details of elaboration and implementation of a possible programme. The second part of the study should provide underlying information about the current state of journalism and the media sector in the European Union (EU) Member States. This part of the study should contain the building-up of a database and the preparation of analysis for the management of a possible programme by an external entity.

3. Forecast for 2010

Goal: An exploratory/feasibility study will be commissioned. The study has to be completed within 12 months with part 1 available by September 2010.

Timetable:

Time	Main tasks
January 23rd	Tender launched for feasibility study
February-March, 2010	Evaluation of proposals, award and signing of contract of the exploratory study
September 2010	Preliminary report on Part 1 of the study available ,with inputs for the preparation of a pilot project
March 2011	Delivery of part two, containing statistical background for the management of the project.

Expected outcome

An exploratory/feasibility study which provides the necessary information for implementing the Erasmus for Journalists project.

Potential difficulties

No particular difficulties are expected. The elaboration of the requested statistical database on the current situation of journalism and the media sector may raise various questions in relation to part 2 of the work. Regular consultation with the contractor as part of the management of the study will address this issue.

Preparatory Action in the Field of Sport (15 05 11)

1. Objective

According to Article 165 of the TFEU Treaty, "The Union shall contribute to the promotion of sporting issues, while taking into account the specific nature of sport, its structures based on voluntary activity and its social and educational function". The objective of the preparatory action for 2010 is to provide policy support for the identification of future policy actions in the area of sport (studies, surveys, conferences and seminars); and to test the establishment and functioning of suitable networks and good practices.

2. Implementation

A call for proposals will cover support to networks and good practices in three main areas:

· Fight against doping (Indicative number of projects: 5. Indicative amount: EUR 1 million );

· Promoting social inclusion in and through sport (Indicative number of projects: 5. Indicative amount: EUR 1 million );

· Promoting volunteering in sport (Indicative number of projects: 1. Indicative amount: EUR 0,5 million ).

Potential beneficiaries will be public authorities, sporting organisations, educational institutions and civil society bodies.

Informal contacts were taken with the European Parliament on this action. In the January 2010 meeting of the Committee on Culture and Education, the Commission announced that is currently launching a consultation process with sport stakeholders as a basis for future initiatives in this field, and will outline its policy approach to sport in response to Article 165 (2) TFEU Treaty.

3. Forecast for 2010

Procurements: studies, surveys, conferences and seminars will be carried out in order to support the Commission’s structured dialogue with sport stakeholders and to identify future actions in the field of sport on the basis of priorities identified in the 2007 White Paper on Sport.

European Year of Volunteering 2011 (15 06 11)

1. Objective

The purpose of the preparatory actions in 2010 is to lay the groundwork for a successful European Year of Voluntary activities promoting active citizenship in 2011. In line with the comments to budget line 15.06.11, the preparatory actions will focus on the development and launching of the information and communication campaign and the co-ordinated mobilisation of civil society.

A well-targeted and professional information and communication campaign is crucial to the success of the European Year. The campaign will be developed and launched during 2010 in order to ensure a good level of awareness for 2011. A specific contract will be drawn up under the Multiple Framework Contract No EAC/20/2008 with renewed competitive tendering for the provision of integrated communication services. The selected provider will be charged with: the conception, implementation and monitoring of a communication campaign and strategy for the European Year; the development and dissemination of communication tools and promotional material including a European website; and the organisation of awareness-raising events.

Volunteers and the civil society organisations that represent and work with volunteers are key stakeholders of the European Year. A grant will be awarded to a coordination structure bringing together the major stakeholders at European level to mobilise volunteers and promote ownership of the Year amongst civil society.

The Alliance is a unique pan-European grouping of 22 international and European networks of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) bringing together an unparalleled wealth of knowledge and experience. It represents around 1,500 civil society organisations active at national and regional and covers all sectors and types of volunteering as well as all ages of volunteers and therefore is de facto in a monopoly position to carry out the tasks of the civil society co-ordination structure as provided for in Article 168.1(c) of the Implementing Regulation. No other body could rival the wide scope, breadth of geographical coverage and scale of representation of the Alliance. The Alliance secretariat will be invited to present a grant request to specify how they would: plan and carry out activities specifically targeted at volunteers and civil society organisations and aiming to encourage recognition of volunteering, stimulate projects and promote partnership building between civil society, business, research and public authorities, support debate and sharing of experience in order to improve the policy framework of volunteering and create better conditions for voluntary activities in the European Union (EU).

2. Implementation

A work programme has been prepared covering these two actions and is currently in inter-services consultation. The work programme should be adopted around the beginning of March enabling contracts for the communication campaign and civil society co-ordination structure to be signed and work to get underway in end of March/April 2010.

Informal contacts were taken with the European Parliament on this action.

3. Forecast for 2010

A direct award procedure should then be taken on 1^st quarter of 2010.

Monitoring Measures in the Field of Consumer Policy (17 02 03)

1. Objective

The precise type of action and data to be collected is still under examination. The overall objective is to better understand the functioning of the internal market from a consumer and demand-side perspective. This will be pursued through the continuation of existing surveys and studies, by looking into how best to disseminate results and optimise methodologies identified, and the possible financing of further market studies – thus improving the quality of the Consumer Markets Scoreboard.

2. Implementation

Depending on the results of the ongoing discussion calls for tender, grant proposals or a framework contract will be used for implementing the various parts of the action.

3. Forecast for 2010

On the basis of results of the forthcoming third Consumer Markets Scoreboard (March 2010), DG SANCO will identify consumer markets which show the most serious signs of malfunctioning for consumers. One or more of these markets will then be chosen to undergo a more in-depth market study.

In order to make further progress on the European Union (EU) wide introduction of harmonised methodologies for classifying and reporting, there will be an examination into how best to overcome obstacles to do so. Possibilities to better disseminate data collected under the Scoreboard will also be examined.

Heading 4

Environmental monitoring of the Black Sea Basin and a common European framework programme for development of the Black sea region (07 02 04)

1. Objective

This preparatory action aims at promoting measures for regular monitoring of the quality of the marine and coastline environment, and for combating pollution in the Black Sea region.

In particular, its objectives are the following:

- to study pollution of the marine and coastline environment; to study the impact of pollution on biodiversity and on jobs supported by the marine and coastline environment,

- to develop new technologies for environmental protection and emergency pollution clean-up,

- to design and put in place an integrated marine and coastline monitoring system in the region,

- to establish a network of facilities for dynamic remote-sensing monitoring of the «sea-coast-river» system,

- to train people and prepare staff for the actual implementation of monitoring-related activities.

2. Implementation

This preparatory action continues the pilot project "environmental monitoring of the Black Sea Basin" and a Common European framework programme for development of the Black Sea region created in 2008.

Under the 2008 and 2009 budgets, two grants were awarded to the Black Sea Commission, the sole organisation that for its competence and structure might guarantee efficient dialogue on pollution among the riparian countries, for EUR 1 million each:

- The first grant agreement was signed in December 2008 and the action, started in January 2009, lasts 24 months. The project aims at strengthening the institutional cooperation in view of building up the consensus for addressing oil pollution problems and at preparing the implementation of a monitoring and information platform on oil pollution.

- The second grant agreement was signed on December 2009 and the project is expected to be completed by the end of 2011. It focuses the development of the information and monitoring capabilities necessary to enable riparian countries to better address the pollution provoked by oil.

The results of these two projects will be known by the end of 2011. As already expressed in the letter of executability addressed to the Parliament in November 2009, the Commission considers that it is advisable to wait for the results of the abovementioned projects before launching new activities on oil pollution.

Considering the Strategic Action Plan of the Bucharest Convention adopted in 2009 by the Ministerial meeting of the Bucharest Convention, the Black Sea Convention (BSC) current Work Plan, the European Union (EU) priority for the implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, as well as other regional initiatives such as the EU Water initiative and the Task force for the Danube and the Black Sea (DABLAS), further work could be needed in 2010, inter alia in the following areas:

- cooperation between the BSC and the Danube Convention (ICPDR)

- strengthening of cooperation with other European Regional Seas Conventions.

- Support to the EU Water initiative (geographical component covering the Caucasus area).

Such activities will contribute to studying pollution, designing and putting in place an integrated marine and coastline monitoring system and to training staff for the actual implementation of monitoring-related activities, in line with the EP objectives; it is estimated that the necessary budget will not exceed EUR 500.000.

3. Forecast for 2010

The Commission will undertake all necessary efforts, including informal consultations with key stakeholders, for implementing the preparatory action aiming to further promotion of environmental protection in the Black Sea, taking into account the need to build on existing projects and results, to avoid overlaps with ongoing or already planned relevant activities and to consider the absorption capacity of possible implementing organisations in the region.

Implementation of the MEDIA 2007 programmes in third countries (09 06 01 02)

1. Objective

In the context of the increasing importance of the international dimension of audiovisual policy, the objective of the "Preparatory action MEDIA International" is to strengthen commercial and cultural relations between Europe's film industry professionals and their counterpart in third countries. Global co-operation of the audiovisual industry is expected to offer the consumer a larger choice by bringing more culturally diverse products to European and international markets and to create new business opportunities.

2. Implementation

An amount of EUR l million has been voted for the third year of the preparatory action MEDIA International compared to EUR 5 million in 2009. This has to be seen in the wider context of the launching of the MEDIA Mundus Programme from 2011 with an annual budget of EUR 5 million.

As already explained in the Executability letter, due to the budget decrease, the call for proposals 2010, to be launched in February 2010, will include only two action lines in 2010 (compared to five in 2009), i.e. training of professionals and access to markets. The budget will not allow for the continuity of some valuable projects that were selected in the past[10].

3. Forecast for 2010

The call will be published in February. The selection of projects will take place in April/May. It is expected to support some 10 projects, compared to 18 in 2008 and 40 in 2009. Projects could start in the second half of 2010.

While the 2009 call for proposals was open to projects in the fields of initial training, continuous training, promotion, distribution, screening of cinematographic works and for projects to encourage audiences, the 2010 call for proposals will have to concentrate on continuous training and market access.

Emergency response to the financial and economic crisis in developing countries (19 06 08)

1. Objective

The Community budget is not equipped for addressing directly the consequences of the financial and economic crisis in the 50 Development Co-operation Instrument (DCI) countries and cannot be a substitute to international financial institutions (IFIs) macroeconomic and sectoral role and mandate.

It is also important to remind the mobilisation of the EUR 1 billion additional funds for the Food Facility of which a part is allocated to the DCI countries; a sizeable part of that billion has already been committed this year and will continue to be disbursed in the course of the next months.

With a limited amount, the purpose of this preparatory action should be rather, in line with the EP objective, to assess the consequences of the financial and economic crisis in the developing countries.

2. Implementation and Forecast for 2010

The Commission proposes to start the implementation during 2010 by launching a study on the impact of the crisis in the developing countries. It is estimated that an amount of EUR 500.000 would be appropriate to carry out a study.

Minorities in Russia – Developing culture, media and civil society (19 08 01 05)

1. Objective

The overall objective is to continue with the activities planned in the previous phase of the preparatory action (“Ethnic and national minorities in Russia: promoting integrity and intercultural dialogue”, which is expected to start implementation in 2011). The whole preparatory action proposed by the European Parliament “Minorities in Russia: developing languages, culture, media and civil society” is focused on promoting Russia’s ethnic and national minorities and improving the recognition of their integrity as regards languages, culture, education, media and civil society.

2. Implementation

This phase (as the two previous ones) will be implemented through joint management with an international organisation (standard contribution agreement will be used). The international organisation indentified is the Council of Europe.

3. Forecast for 2010

Draft project fiche is planned to be ready by summer 2010; the contract is planned to be signed in course of 2011, when relevant outputs from previous activities are available. As this stage is a continuation of the previous ones, its expected results will be in line with those expected from the stage two.

Given the sensitivity of the issues tackled by action the full endorsement by the Russian authorities is essential.

EU-Asia – Integration of policy and practice (19 10 01 06)

In the budgetary remark adopted in the 2010 Budget, the EP has requested the Commission to have recourse, for its implementation, to a direct award to a specifically mentioned organisation. This is contrary to the Financial Regulation (FR).

The Commission would propose to implement this preparatory action through a Call for proposals or a Call for Tender in accordance with the rules of the FR and is consequently further reflecting on how to shape the implementation.

Water management in developing countries (21 04 06)

1. Objective

The action, introduced in 2007 for pilot projects and extended later as preparatory action, has the purpose of promote integrated water resources management in developing countries with a particular focus on enhancing cooperation at regional and continental level pursuing the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals.

In 2010 special emphasis is given to the adaptation of water management policies and practices to the expected impacts of climate change, in order to minimise the risks of water scarcity and reduce conflicts linked to it.

2. Implementation

The projects funded under this budget line are identified and formulated with the involvement of DG Development, DG RELEX, EuropeAid and the EU Delegations.

The projects funded so far are:

Year	Title	EC contribution in EUR	Implementing partner
2007	Building local capacities for sustainable water and sanitation services in Trans-boundary basins through a participatory approach in Central America (2008–2010)	1.5 million	United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS)
	Promoting Integrated Water Resources Management and Fostering Transboundary Dialogue in Central Asia	1.5 million	United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
2008	Fostering Integrated Resources Management and Intergovernmental Cooperation in the water sector in Africa	1.5 million	Joint Research Center (JRC)
	Supporting the African Union Commission (AUC) towards improved IWRM through intergovernmental cooperation	1.5 million	Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ)
2009	Improving Governance of Water Management at micro-basin level	1 million
	Latin American Network of Knowledge Centres in the Water Sector	2 million

In accordance with the water needs, it was agreed that every two years the actions funded under this budget line would take place in Sub-Saharan Africa. In line with the geographical distribution, the above mentioned objectives and taking in consideration the on-going initiatives in the sector, the options being considered for funding in 2010 are the following:

i) Preparatory actions for the development of trans-boundary water management in Africa, with a specific focus on the impact of climate change on water management, as well as conflict prevention. This work will build on the reinforced cooperation between AU, AMCOW and regional institutions (supported by this budget line in 2008), and on a reinforced donor coordination. Knowledge exchange will build on the work of the research component of the EU Water Initiative, in particular the work of the SPLASH ERANET, and cooperation will be reinforced with relevant organisations and networks such as the Global Water Partnership (supporting AMCOW on transboundary issues), IUCN, and others. The objective is to contribute to the preparation and development of sound transboundary water management programmes which will be able to attract resources for their implementation, including in the framework of the EU-Africa Infrastructure Partnership;

ii) Expansion of the African Network of Centres of Excellence (cf. 2008 programme) into new regions;

Support to the involvement of civil society in transboundary basin management programmes, such as the Nile Basin Discourse, to ensure a development of transboundary basins anchored on participatory approaches and stakeholder involvement.

3. Forecast for 2010

The actions foreseen are currently at different stages of identification. Depending on the results of the identification phase, all or only part of the three actions mentioned above will be finally undertaken.

It is expected that the financing decision on the use of the 2010 appropriations will be taken by the Commission no later than October 2010.

Pharmaceutical-related transfer of technology in favour of developing countries (21 05 01 06)

1. Objective

The objective of this preparatory action is to support the improvement of pharmaceutical research, development, and production capacity in developing countries in order to increase access, especially of poor and least developed countries, to health products of the poverty related, tropical and neglected, as well as non-communicable diseases.

2. Implementation

Under the first year of this preparatory action - 2008 budget - a contribution agreement was signed with the World Health Organisation (WHO) in December 2008 for the implementation of a large consultation of stakeholders. The purpose of the study is to identify the main challenges and obstacles of local pharmaceutical production and related transfer of technology to developing countries and provide recommendations and guidance for further action in this field. The study was launched in January 2009 and will run for 24 months.

Part of the appropriations under the second year of the preparatory action - 2009 budget - was used to extend this study to vaccines and diagnostics through an amendment to the initial Contribution Agreement with WHO (EUR 519 000). Further action will be identified jointly with WHO and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) as the first partial results of the study become available as from March 2010. This second phase (EUR 4 481 000) will lay the groundwork for implementing the recommendations of the study and set the framework for concrete capacity-building measures according to the needs and priorities identified. It is expected to be implemented through a Contribution Agreement with the most appropriate UN agency.

The second phase of this action has been designed in a flexible way, in order to start developing capacity-building plans in the area of human resources and accommodate the first outcomes of the study as they become available. Considering that these activities are already covered by the budget allocated in 2009, support to other areas should build on the recommendations of the study. It would therefore be premature and very difficult to identify additional activities before 2011.

Research and development on poverty-related, tropical and neglected diseases (21 05 01 07)

1. Objective

The objective of the action is to support research and development on poverty-related, tropical and neglected diseases in order to increase access, especially for poor and least-developed countries, to public health intervention, effective health services, medicines and vaccines to combat these diseases.

2. Implementation

In 2008, the first year of this preparatory action, an action was identified and prepared in consultation with the relevant Commission services, notably RTD. A contribution agreement was signed with the World Health Organisation (WHO) in December 2008 for the implementation of a large consultation of stakeholders with the purpose of identifying the most pressing priorities in R&D into poverty-related, tropical and neglected diseases and provide recommendations for further action in this field. The consultation is implemented through the Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR) and is part of a larger programme. The main outcome will be a Global Report on Research on Infectious Diseases of poverty with recommendations on priorities for research.

In 2009, a new Contribution Agreement was signed with WHO/TDR to support the establishment of sustainable regional health product Research and Development (R&D) innovation networks in order to build capacity for product R&D innovation in Africa, Asia and Latin America and to enhance South-South collaboration in this field. This action will support the establishment of the regional network organisation in Africa and the development of strategic business plans for the Asian and Latin American networks.

The identification of new activities in the area of Research and Development should seek guidance from the final recommendations of the ongoing consultation, which will not be available before end 2010. Consultations will be launched with WHO/TDR, in close collaboration with DG RTD, to identify the areas of R&D were joint initiatives would bring added value, in particular in the light of the Global Strategy and Plan of Action on Public Health, Innovation and Intellectual Property. The possibility of further supporting capacity building activities at regional level will also be explored.

3. Forecast for 2010

The identification of further action to be implemented under the 2010 budget will be made in close collaboration with DG RTD and through informal consultations with WHO, taking into account the need to avoid overlapping with the EU Framework Programme on Research and Development and to build on ongoing activities.

March-June 2010: consultation of relevant Commission services and stakeholders for the identification of the action.

July-September 2010: formulation of the action.

October-November 2010: financing decision procedure.

Preserving and restoring cultural heritage in conflict areas (22 02 09)

1. Objective

According to the remark included in the 2010 budget, the appropriation are to be used for supporting preservation and restoration projects for valuable cultural and religious objects (churches, mosques, libraries, museums, monuments, etc.) damaged or destroyed by war or other political conflicts. Appropriations may be used to support public organisations as well as non-governmental organisations (NGOs) conducting projects in this field.

The Commission is ready to implement a preparatory action with this objective in the Western Balkans and Turkey. It has also taken note that, building on the experience of the 2008-2009 pilot projects, it "should … develop this further, including proposing a permanent legal base". As far as the Western Balkans and Turkey are concerned, similar actions in the future can indeed be covered by the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA), so there is no need for a separate legal base.

As regards the use of the allocated funds as well as the opportunity to develop a permanent, specific legal base for cultural heritage in other parts of the world, the Commission needs assessing how this experience might be broadened to the other regions.

2. Implementation

Depending on the assessment ongoing, the funds allocated to budget line 22 02 09 could be used, partially or in their entirety, for the Western Balkans and Turkey. Implementation will be done via a call for proposals open to NGOs.

3. Forecast for 2010

It is intended that contracts will be signed before the end of 2011. The preparation for the launch of the calls for proposals will be done during 2010.

Heading 5

Erasmus public administration programme (26 03 03)

1. Objective

This preparatory action is the continuation of the pilot project with the same name, financed on budget line 26 03 02 during the budget years 2008 and 2009, and jointly implemented by the Commission's DG HR and the European Administrative School (EAS). Satisfaction levels were very high during the four sessions already organised with nearly 98% of participants giving the programme a score of 4 or 5 (out of a scale of 1 to 5) in terms of overall satisfaction. All but two member states have sent participants and many have considerable waiting lists of candidates.

The goal is to foster collaboration between Member State administrations (at national, regional or local level), and the European Union (EU) institutions, by allowing relatively recently appointed national officials dealing with EU questions to get to know the institutions better through a programme of conferences, visits and training sessions.

2. Implementation

Four 2-week sessions of training, visits to and conferences in all the EU institutions in Brussels, Luxembourg and Strasbourg are foreseen in 2010. Until now, a maximum of 60 participants have been admitted, but this might be slightly increased.

Participants will have to satisfy a number of criteria, the most important of which being that they have not worked in their department for more than five years, that they deal with EU issues and that they have never worked in any capacity in any of the EU institutions. These criteria are designed to ensure maximum impact for the preparatory action.

A call for candidates will be launched, as was the case for the pilot project, through the Member States' Permanent Representations. The decision on which candidates to admit in accordance with the Commission's criteria and taking account where possible of Member State preferences, will be made by a selection panel composed of representatives of the Commission services and the EAS.

In proposing this preparatory action, the European Parliament asked the Commission to "explore how those measures [for implementing the Erasmus public administration pilot project] might be taken further. It is proposed that the EAS run four short training programmes per year that will be open to managers working in Member State administrations, building on a successful experimental action it initiated last year. Such a development would be in line with the overall aim of the Erasmus public administration preparatory action by reinforcing links between Member State administrations and the Institutions through mutual learning events and the opportunity for the exchange of experience and good practice, as well as promoting the establishment of useful networks. The EAS will use its internal trainers and existing consultancy contracts to deliver these courses.

3. Forecast for 2010

Given the lead time that was necessary to set up the pilot project, three of the four sessions financed from the 2008 budget took place in 2009 and the 2009 appropriations are being used to finance the four 2010 sessions.

Similarly, the largest part of the 2010 appropriations will be used to finance the two-week visit in 2011, though some will be used in 2010 itself, notably to finance the increased number of participants per session and the programmes for managers referred to under point 2

Therefore no appropriations will be needed in 2011. The Commission and the EAS are actively examining the question of a proposal for a legal base for the future

Annex: DG responsible and contact persons

PILOT PROJECTS

Line number	Heading	DG Resp.	Contact Person
Heading 1a
04 03 09	Pilot project - Working and living conditions of posted workers	EMPL	Tim RENTROP
04 03 10	Pilot project - Measures for employment maintenance	EMPL	Egbert HOLTHUIS
04 03 11	Pilot project - Enhancing mobility and integration of workers within the EU	EMPL	Marco FERRI
04 03 12	Pilot project - All-inclusive cooperation between public authorities, commercial firms and not-for-profit enterprises on integrating people into society and employment	EMPL	Peter SZATMARI
04 04 08	Pilot project - Encourage conversion of precarious work into work with rights	EMPL	Bertrand MULLER SCHLEIDEN
04 04 11	Pilot project - Preventing elder abuse	EMPL	Sven MATSKE
04 04 13	Pilot project - Employment of people on the autistic spectrum	EMPL	Daniel SCHMIDT
06 04 08	Pilot project - Portplus - Sustainable energy plan for ports	ENER	Stefan TOSTMANN
06 04 15	Pilot project - Waste recovery and waste recycling for clean energy
15 02 31	Pilot project - Costs of studies for students coming from the ENP countries and for related academic activities	EAC	Ana MAGRANER
15 02 32	Pilot project - European Neighbourhood Policy — Enhancing education through scholarships and exchanges	EAC	Pedro MARTINEZ MACIAS
17 02 04	Pilot project - Transparency and stability in the financial markets	SANCO	Myriam CAZZANIGA
Heading 1b
13 03 23	Pilot project - Enhancing regional and local cooperation through the promotion of EU regional policy at a global scale	REGIO	Raphael GOULET
13 03 25	Pilot project - Actions in connection with the textile and footwear sector	ENTR	Ivone KAIZELER
Heading 2
05 02 17 01	Pilot project - Support for farmers' cooperatives
05 02 17 02	Pilot project - European farm prices and margins observatory
05 02 17 03	Pilot project - Support for farmers' and consumers' initiatives for low carbon emission, low energy consumption and locally marketed food production
07 03 16	Pilot project - Development of prevention activities to halt desertification in Europe	ENV	Andrea NAM
07 03 18	Pilot project - Recovery of obsolete vessels not used in the fishing trade	ENV	Laurence MATRINGE
07 03 19	Pilot project - Economic loss due to high non-revenue-water amounts in cities	ENV	Henriette FAERGEMANN
07 03 21	Pilot project - Certification of low-carbon farming practices	ENV	Jana POLAKOVA
07 03 22	Pilot project - Complex research on methods of controlling the spread of ragweed and pollen allergies	ENV	WAKENHUT François
11 09 03	Pilot project - To promote the replacement of vessels in the European commercial fleet with low environmental impact vessels
17 03 18	Pilot project - A European refund system for aluminium beverage cans	ENV	Diana OANCEA
Heading 3a
18 06 09	Pilot project - Impact assessment of legislative measures in contract law	JLS	Lenka ZDRAHALOVA
Heading 3b
15 04 46	Pilot project -Cultural heritage alert networks	JLS	F. KNECHCIAK
Heading 4
19 06 07	Pilot project - Support for surveillance and protection measures for Community vessels sailing through areas where piracy is a threat	AIDCO	Elisabeth SANDFUCHS
19 06 09	Pilot project - Programme for NGO-led peace building activities	RELEX	Christian MEUNIER
21 02 04	Pilot project - Finance for agricultural production	AIDCO	Simona MARI
21 05 01 08	Pilot project - Enhanced health care for victims of sexual violence in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)	AIDCO	Bronte FLECKER
Heading 5
16 02 05	Pilot project - European research grants for cross-border investigative journalism	COMM	Stefaan DE RYNCK
25 01 09	Pilot project – Inter-institutional system identifying long-term trends facing the EU	SG	Julien MOUSNIER

PREPARATORY ACTIONS

Line number	Heading	DG Resp.	Contact Person
Heading 1a
02 02 03 05	Preparatory action - Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs	ENTR	Gloria LORENZO LERONES
02 02 08 01	Preparatory action - European Destinations of Excellence	ENTR	Francesca TUDINI / Iuliana ALUAS
02 02 08 02	Preparatory action - Sustainable tourism	ENTR	Renate PENITZ
02 02 08 03	Preparatory action - Social tourism in Europe	ENTR	Alan VELLA
Heading 1b
13 03 24	Preparatory action — Promoting a more favourable environment for micro-credit in Europe	REGIO	Philippe DELVAUX
Heading 2
07 03 17	Preparatory action - Climate of the Carpathian Basin	ENV	Jacques DELSALLE
07 04 05	Preparatory action - EU rapid response capability	ENV	Martine BETRI DE MEYER
17 04 03 03	Preparatory action — Control posts (resting points) in relation to transport of animals	SANCO	Andrea GAVINELLI / Denis SIMONIN
Heading 3b
09 06 05	Preparatory action - Erasmus for Journalists	INFSO	Kalman DEZSERI
15 05 11	Preparatory action in the field of sport	EAC	Jaime BARDOLET
15 06 11	Preparatory action - European Year of Volunteering 2011	COMM	Jennifer WANNAN
17 02 03	Preparatory action - Monitoring measures in the field of Consumer policy	SANCO	David MAIR / Marie-Loise ALTMUTTER
Heading 4
07 02 04	Preparatory action - Environmental monitoring of the Black Sea Basin and a common European framework programme for development of the Black Sea region	ENV	Michail PAPADOYANNAKIS
09 06 01 02	Preparatory action - Implementation of the MEDIA 2007 programme in third countries	EAC	Irina ORSSICH
19 06 08	Preparatory action - Emergency response to the financial and economic crisis in developing countries	AIDCO	Angelo BAGLIO
19 08 01 05	Preparatory action - Minorities in Russia — Developing culture, media and civil society	AIDCO	Jyrki TORNI
19 10 01 06	Preparatory action - EU-Asia - Integration of policy and practice	AIDCO	Thierry ROMMEL
21 04 06	Preparatory action - Water management in developing countries	AIDCO	Louis du BREIL de PONTBRIAND
21 05 01 06	Preparatory action - Pharmaceutical-related transfer of technology in favour of developing countries	AIDCO	Cristina TORRES
21 05 01 07	Preparatory action - Research and development on poverty-related, tropical and neglected diseases	AIDCO	Cristina TORRES
22 02 09	Preparatory action - Preserving and restoring cultural heritage in conflict areas	ELARG	Anna Claire MICHAEL
Heading 5
26 03 03	Preparatory action - Erasmus public administration programme	HR	Hendrik VANTILBORGH

Working document on Cohesion policy - Heading 1b of the MFF

1. This working document focuses on the budgetary aspects of Cohesion policy, which consists of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), European Social Fund (ESF) and Cohesion Fund (CF), with a specific focus on the 2011 budget.

2. Given the deadlines for eligible expenditure for the 2000-2006 period, a very low level of payments in relation to the previous programming period is expected during 2011. Therefore, this working document focuses mostly on the 2007-2013 period, though your Rapporteur considers the swift closure of the 2000-2006 (and earlier) programming periods also as a priority.

State of play

3. For the 2007-2013 programming period, the Member States (MS) are required to submit the following documents to the Commission for approval: an independent audit body’s compliance assessment report, an opinion[11] about the system description of each operational programme (OP; total of 434 OPs among all MS), and an audit strategy. These elements are part of the 2007-2013 Management and Control System (MCS), the basic architecture of which consists of, at the national level, the Managing-, Certifying- and Audit Authorities, as provided for in the Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006[12].

4. The Commission initially anticipated compliance assessments to be completed by the end of 2008, and the first interim payments to be issued in early 2009. However, Commission's approval of most MS’ MCSs, in accordance with Article 71 of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006, was proceeding slowly and happened mostly in the second half of 2009, notably because of difficulties encountered at the national level with the transposition of complex EU regulatory requirements or the new organisational arrangements, which resulted in cumbersome procedures (see also below). This delay affected the level of payments to MS, and at the end of 2009, several MS had only received the pre-financing payments. At the same time, i.e. three years after the beginning of the programming period, the budgetary implementation rate for Cohesion policy was about half (12%) of that achieved at the same stage of the previous programming period.

5. While the European Parliament (and also the Council) repeatedly underscored the importance of full and efficient use of the available appropriations, the low absorption rate of all EU structural funds in the past years led to an increasing gap between commitment and payment appropriations under this Heading (see table below) and a significant rise in outstanding commitments (RALs) over time.

Budgetary implementation of Cohesion policy 2007-2013 (EUR)

	Outturn 2009		Outturn 2008		Outturn 2007
	CA	PA	CA	PA	CA	PA
13 03 16 ERDF - Convergence	22.417.259.853	11.719.113.679	22.214.199.721	5.042.066.871	20.980.317.541	2.962.793.999
13 03 17 ERDF - PEACE	31.466.303	9.678.184	30.849.316	6.745.369	30.244.428	4.496.913
13 03 18 ERDF - Regional competitiveness and empl.	4.633.542.658	2.088.250.347	4.988.612.298	975.969.847	5.325.424.141	592.878.567
13 03 19 ERDF - European territorial cooperation	1.044.712.714	291.003.601	1.148.761.991	248.832.150	884.635.554	129.987.703
13 03 20 ERDF - Operational technical assistance	38.518.918	28.402.091	39.092.010	41.100.334	28.622.403	1.290.670
Total European Regional Development Fund	28.165.500.446	14.136.447.902	28.421.515.336	6.314.714.571	27.249.244.067	3.691.447.852
13 04 02 Cohesion Fund	9.287.121.769	4.302.640.240	8.142.934.367	2.797.798.864	7.115.314.105	1.582.788.048
04 02 17 ESF - Convergence	7.305.903.755	4.390.658.515	7.007.279.761	1.604.058.625	6.759.975.961	1.035.501.851
04 02 18 ESF - PEACE	0	0	0	0
04 02 19 ESF - Regional competitiveness and empl.	3.477.243.743	2.616.162.792	3.603.844.752	764.099.609	3.726.328.031	478.419.579
04 02 20 ESF - Operational technical assistance	7.932.259	3.678.982	9.635.899	2.084.758	7.969.537	31.999
Total European Social Fund	10.791.079.757	7.010.500.289	10.620.760.412	2.370.242.992	10.494.273.529	1.513.953.429
TOTAL ERDF + CF + ESF	48.243.701.972	25.449.588.431	47.185.210.115	11.482.756.427	44.858.831.701	6.788.189.329

(continued)	Budget 2010		Total outturn 2007-2009
	CA	PA	CA	PA
13 03 16 ERDF - Convergence	22.782.329.782	14.884.200.000	65.611.777.115	19.723.974.548
13 03 17 ERDF - PEACE	32.095.629	15.600.000	92.560.047	20.920.467
13 03 18 ERDF - Regional competitiveness and empl.	4.261.005.835	3.330.700.000	14.947.579.097	3.657.098.761
13 03 19 ERDF - European territorial cooperation	1.069.579.848	520.400.000	3.078.110.259	669.823.454
13 03 20 ERDF - Operational technical assistance	50.000.000	41.600.000	106.233.330	70.793.095
Total European Regional Development Fund	28.195.011.094	18.792.500.000	83.836.259.848	24.142.610.325
13 04 02 Cohesion Fund	10.185.294.880	4.350.000.000	24.545.370.241	8.683.227.152
04 02 17 ESF - Convergence	7.473.667.217	5.256.700.000	21.073.159.477	7.030.218.992
04 02 18 ESF - PEACE	p.m	p.m
04 02 19 ESF - Regional competitiveness and empl.	3.343.826.311	2.416.700.000	10.807.416.526	3.858.681.980
04 02 20 ESF - Operational technical assistance	10.471.454	10.500.000	25.537.695	5.795.739
Total European Social Fund	10.827.964.982	7.683.900.000	31.906.113.698	10.894.696.710
TOTAL ERDF + CF + ESF	49.208.270.956	30.826.400.000	140.287.743.787	43.720.534.187
Outstanding commitments (only for the period 2007-2013)	n.a.		96.567.209.600

Source: Commission's reports on budgetary outturn, 2010 General Budget and own calculation

6. The commitments appropriations budgeted and implemented, as presented above, are those foreseen in the financial envelops, which were decided upon in advance for each year of the 2007-2013 period for all Funds. They are, therefore, well in line with the annual allocation to Heading 1b, as foreseen by the Multiannual Financial Framework.

7. The financial programming for Heading 1b for years 2010 and 2011 (commitments) is presented below. In this respect, as mentioned in your Rapporteur's previous working document on financial programming, it should be noted that a discussion on the margin in the sub-heading 1b is irrelevant, because the financial programming is adapted to the needs identified by each Member State.

Financial programming - Heading 1b (EUR million)

	HEADING 1B - COHESION FOR GROWTH AND EMPLOYMENT
		2010	2011
TSF	Total Structural Funds	39.191,847	39.688,663
TCF	Total Cohesion Funds	10.190,245	10.961,150
	Total programmes Heading 1B	49.382,092	50.649,813
	Other expenditure	5,500
	TOTAL HEADING 1B	49.387,592	50.649,813
	Financial framework ceiling	49.388,000	50.651,000
	Margin	0,408	1,187

Source: European Commission

8. As compared to operational programmes, the situation of major projects is even more sensitive since they have the lowest MCS approval rate (101 out of 949 as of 1 March 2010) and therefore very low implementation rates. According to DG REGIO Director General[13], the economic crisis and the resulting constraints on national budgets will probably result in the abandonment of some of them.

9. The very slow start-up of the period was reported to be mostly due to:

- delays in agreements on the EU budget, the adoption of the Regulations and the negotiations of programmes,

- the requirement for national authorities to establish compliance assessments on Management and Control Systems

- the compulsory approval of MCS before making any interim payment,

- the work linked to management of the overlapping programming periods: national authorities still work on the conclusion of 2000-2006 programmes,

- in many cases, the unclear distribution of tasks nationally, insufficient experience or a lack of administrative capacity in both managing authorities and beneficiaries and internal reorganisation processes of public administrations

- the impact of the global economic recession that started in autumn 2008.

10. The table below shows the latest implementation figures available per MS (as of 24/02/2010) for all three Funds taken together.

Absorption rates and figures by MS (all Funds) as per 24/02/2010 (EUR million)

Country	Decided	Committed	Paid	Paid / committed	Paid / Decided
AT	1.204,479	679,586	245,575	36,14%	20,39%
BE	2.063,501	1.276,387	418,387	32,78%	20,28%
CB	7.815,225	4.271,354	791,157	18,52%	10,12%
CY	612,435	480,393	93,348	19,43%	15,24%
CZ	26.302,604	14.035,435	3.280,128	23,37%	12,47%
DE	25.488,616	14.393,826	4.915,749	34,15%	19,29%
DK	509,577	282,512	78,783	27,89%	15,46%
EE	3.403,460	1.690,292	780,239	46,16%	22,92%
ES	34.657,734	21.649,371	4.793,282	22,14%	13,83%
FI	1.595,966	952,314	279,693	29,37%	17,52%
FR	13.449,221	7.456,226	2.102,815	28,20%	15,64%
GB	9.890,937	5.822,786	1.754,316	30,13%	17,74%
GR	20.210,261	11.761,802	2.236,584	19,02%	11,07%
HU	24.921,149	13.115,732	3.298,703	25,15%	13,24%
IE	750,725	572,948	219,708	38,35%	29,27%
IT	27.965,315	15.742,591	3.367,328	21,39%	12,04%
LT	6.775,493	3.418,579	1.530,561	44,77%	22,59%
LU	50,487	27,990	7,210	25,76%	14,28%
LV	4.530,448	2.272,505	763,077	33,58%	16,84%
MT	840,123	465,645	98,987	21,26%	11,78%
NL	1.660,003	920,315	225,693	24,52%	13,60%
PL	65.221,853	35.049,048	9.555,918	27,26%	14,65%
PT	21.411,561	12.034,498	2.863,450	23,79%	13,37%
SE	1.626,092	901,514	262,692	29,14%	16,15%
SI	4.101,049	2.250,815	578,510	25,70%	14,11%
SK	11.360,620	5.770,092	1.302,742	22,58%	11,47%
BG	6.673,628	3.189,422	645,324	20,23%	9,67%
RO	19.213,037	8.669,953	1.982,597	22,87%	10,32%
Sum:	344.305,598	189.153,933	48.472,557	25,63%	14,08%

Source: DG Regional Policy

11. The reasons brought forward to explain the above differences in absorption rates between MS include the following:

- the strategies and content of the programmes vary. For example, programmes that include complex large infrastructures have longer lead times than others,

- differences in national administrative structures,

- MS were not at the same stage in the finalization of the programmes of the previous programming period and it has delayed the start of the new period. In addition, several extensions of the 2000-06 programmes' eligibility periods (until the 1 July 2010 for ESF and ERDF) still require resources from some of the MS, which would have otherwise been used for the 2007-13 period.

12. In the joint declarations on the implementation of Cohesion policy of November 2008, April 2009 and November 2009, the three institutions underlined the necessity to further accelerate the implementation of structural and cohesion funds, notably through the request that the approval of MCS be sped up.

13. In November 2009, the institutions also noted that the approval rates of MCSs and Major Projects (MPs) had gradually improved, but considered that the pace of approval was still too slow.

14. In its priorities for 2011 budget, the Parliament welcomed the submission of MCS descriptions by the MSs for almost all OPs, and the Commission’s 87% approval rate by the end of 2009.

15. According to the latest update by the Commission (12 March 2010), almost all MCS reports had been submitted by MS (428 programmes out of 434). 94% of the programmes (406) had their MCS accepted and 87% of the programmes (377) have had at least one interim payment. The Commission's approval of the last MCS can therefore be expected to result in a considerable increase in interim payments in 2010 and 2011.

16. This is confirmed by the table below which provides a breakdown of these figures (at the same date) between the ESF and ERDF/CF.

Payments by types until 12/03/2011 (million EUR)

Fund	[14]Total allocation 2007-13	Advance payments 2007-09	Interim payments 2008 & 2009	Interim payments 2010
ESF	76 253,0	6 093,0	4 795,9	454,9
ERDF/CF	269 400,2	23 290,4	9 447,5	4 920,3
TOTAL	345 653,1	29 383,4	14 243,4	5 375,2

Source: Commission's reply to the Committee on Budgets' question in view of the 17/03/2010 Monitoring group meeting on Cohesion policy

17. This table shows that interim payments made during the first 70 days of 2010 already represent some 38% of those made in 2008 and 2009. This can be considered as an encouraging signal for the swift implementation of Cohesion policy in the coming months and in 2011.

18. Nevertheless, the Commission should continue to work closely, especially with those MS with low absorption rates during the previous programming period, in order to keep the momentum and further improve the situation.

Simplification, advance payments and recent legislative proposals

19. In spring 2009, the Commission launched the European Recovery Package with a series of measures to help speed up the implementation of the Funds. The initiative included a change of the legislative framework, which provided for additional advances of EUR 6.25 billion and contained a series of simplification elements which were intended to offer more flexibility in programme implementation (for example a full reimbursement of the state aid schemes prior their implementation). All advance payments under the European Recovery Package were paid to the MS in April 2009.

20. In their November 2009 joint declaration, the European Parliament and the Council stated that they believed that opportunities provided by the use of structural funds could be employed for more targeted actions that facilitate overcoming the effects of the economic crisis, particularly those which support growth and competitiveness and limit job losses.

21. The recent and ongoing simplification exercise and the subsequent modifications of the regulations (notably the further increase in advance payments and the flexibility in the decommitment of 2007 appropriations) will have undoubtedly a positive impact on the pace of implementation in the MS and are expected to reduce the administrative burden for beneficiaries and the managing bodies[15].

22. From a technical point of view, further information could be requested on the method for applying the 1/6th of 2007 appropriations' 'recommitments' to spread over the years 2008-2013. Will this entail that no payment will be applied to 2007 appropriations and that first 2007-2013 payments will be made on 2008 appropriations? What will be the budgetary treatment of such a mechanism? Will this have an impact on the margin under the MFF ceiling?

23. Regarding the modifications linked to simplification, the ongoing modification proposal is a third one, following the modification of Art. 55 of the Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 and the proposals made under the recovery package in spring 2009. All these simplification measures attempt to make the rules simpler, clearer and less bureaucratic, thus more attractive to the beneficiaries or potential beneficiaries. As a result, the Commission expects more project promoters to be attracted to apply for funding which should result in faster absorption.

24. However, it should be noted that difficulties were experienced at national level, for instance with the national transposition of EU regulatory requirements[16], the new organisational arrangements (establishment of the Managing- Certifying- and Audit Authority), human resource aspects and the establishment of the required tools (electronic information and communication systems, implementation guidelines). In this respect, your Rapporteur would like to stress, as a matter of priority for the next programming period at the latest, that (further) structural improvements and simplification measures are needed to avoid recurrent under-implementation and to ensure that payment appropriations develop in an orderly manner compared to commitment appropriations.

25. Still, all in all, recent simplification exercises should, together with the mechanical effect of increased advance payments and that of still having 2007 appropriations available over the period, lead to an increased need for payment appropriations in 2011.

Prospects for 2011

26. The Cohesion policy accounts for 35,6 per cent of the financial framework for 2007-2013. For year 2011, the MFF ceiling for Heading 1b is set at EUR 50,65 billion at current prices.

27. Your Rapporteur would like to underline that, as far as the 2011 Budget is concerned, no real margin for manoeuvre will exist for commitment appropriations since they should amount to the annual pre-allocated envelops decided in the beginning of the period, subject to a possible adjustment, as foreseen by Art. 17 of the Interinstitutional agreement on budgetary discipline and sound financial management.

28. Besides, following the recent legislative modifications, some amounts stemming from 2007 non-decommitted appropriations will be available in 2011. The main question is therefore about the level of payment appropriations to be included in the budget.

29. For the reasons presented above, payment appropriations will certainly require a significant increase as compared to previous years. Indeed, they should be sufficient to match the following needs:

- to cover the possible increase of advance payments not already financed through 2010 budget appropriations,

- 2011 is likely to be the first full year for which all MCS will be approved and therefore interim payments made for all OPs: the programming period will finally come, in its fifth year of implementation, to the cruising speed,

- additional commitments will be available since 1/6th of 2007 commitments will be added for each of the years 2008-2013. This will give extra chances for unpaid commitments to be channelled on the ground[17],

- in addition, those 2007 appropriations reallocated to years 2009 and 2010 may increase the level of appropriations carried over to 2011,

- the concrete implementation of projects can also reasonably be expected to increase, notably due to the simplification measures mentioned above,

- MS will be less and less distracted by the previous programming period.

30. However, since, due to urgency, no impact assessment of the last two Commission's simplification proposals was made, the additional funding to be granted over the coming years, and particularly in 2011, cannot be estimated with any certainty at the present stage. It should, however, be borne in mind that only the additional advance payments for ESF and Cohesion Fund for 5 MS are estimated at EUR 775 million. It cannot indeed be guaranteed that payments budgeted for 2010 will be sufficient, which would put an extra pressure on the 2011 budget.

31. Still, for all the above reasons, your Rapporteur is of the opinion that Heading 1b will require a much increased level of payments in 2011.

Quality of Cohesion policy implementation

32. According to the Parliament's priorities for the 2011 budget, improving the implementation and the quality of spending should constitute a guiding principle for achieving the optimal use of the EU budget and evidence-based policy making. Improved monitoring and evaluation systems are crucial in this respect, with due consideration to clearly defined objectives, targets and intervention logics. In this respect, the Commission's strategic synthesis report, expected in April 2010, might provide significant contributions to the evaluation of the implementation of Cohesion policy on the ground.

33. The aim would be to achieve a better balance between, on the one hand, the rules and procedures required for ensuring the legality and regularity of EU expenditure and, on the other, making cohesion policy more performance-oriented and cost-efficient, in line with EP priorities for the 2011 budget. Indeed, some observers and actors at the national level consider that 2007-13 regulatory requirements are still inclined towards control rather than content issues (i.e. control deflects, to some extent, attention from content). As a result, Structural Funds managers dedicate more time to assessing compliance with financial management and control requirements than to achievement of programme objectives.

34. There appears, therefore, to be a need for creating a stronger focus on the achievement of objectives as opposed to the legality and regularity of the absorption of funds. The changes brought to the legislative framework in 2009, which attempted to reduce the control burden on the MS without derogating from the key rules as regards to sound financial management, and the ongoing action plan on structural funds[18] should be considered in this context.

35. In its replies to Committee on Budgets' questions in view of the 17 March Monitoring Group meeting on Cohesion policy, the Commission underlined that it did not follow up on the use of advance payments in itself[19]. The increases in advance payments foreseen by the recent changes in the regulation imply therefore that a greater amount of Structural Funds will stay less monitored or unmonitored at all, which raises some concerns. While Commissioner Samecki recently sent a letter to invite the MS to report on the absorption of additional advances, the Commission may still be invited to further address this problem through enhanced scrutiny of the advance payments. It may also be asked to report to the EP on their use, in line with EP priorities for the Budget 2011 requesting that full and updated information be delivered to the budgetary authority in time.

Preliminary conclusions: achieving EU priorities

36. In the context of the new EU-2020 Strategy, the Commission already underlined the significant contribution that could be brought by Cohesion policy, as was the case in the current and previous programming period regarding Lisbon Strategy for growth and jobs. It committed itself to aligning the Cohesion Policy objectives with the Europe 2020 vision in terms of promoting smart, greener and competitive growth of regional economies based on knowledge, innovation and resource efficiency, also by reinforcing combined efforts and taking advantage of synergies among related community policies.

37. The Commission mentioned that, within the EUR 350 billion envelop devoted to Cohesion policy for the 2007-2013 period, between EUR 200 and 250 billion would be earmarked towards EU-2020 objectives[20].

38. In addition to the reasons presented above, the last comment makes, in your Rapporteur's view, the need for an appropriately ambitious payment allocation to Cohesion policy in the 2011 budget even more pressing. 2011 will indeed be the 5^th implementation year in the current programming period and OPs will reach a level of maturity that implies their speedy execution.

39. Based on the above considerations, your Rapporteur would like to highlight below the pending questions and requests in view of the next budgetary procedure:

- the Commission should continue to work closely especially with those MS with a low absorption rate during the previous programming period, in order to keep the momentum and further improve the situation,

- further structural improvements and simplification measures may be needed to avoid recurrent under-implementation,

- the Parliament should be kept informed about the content of the possible adjustment to the financial envelops foreseen by Art. 17 of the Interinstitutional agreement,

- the Commission should present the method for applying 1/6ths of 2007 appropriations' 'recommitments' to be spread over the years 2008-2013. How will 2007 non-decommitted appropriations be made available in 2011? Will this entail that no payment will be associated to 2007 appropriations? What will be the budgetary treatment of such a mechanism? Will this have an impact on the margin under the MFF ceiling?

- since it cannot be guaranteed that budgeted payments for 2010 will be sufficient to cover additional advance payments and interim payments, Parliament should be kept regularly informed about the budgetary implications of both: any possible amending budget in 2010 and any possible extra pressure on the 2011 budget,

- the Commission should propose how to better focus on the achievement of objectives as opposed to the legality and regularity, without derogating from the key rule as regards sound financial management,

- the Commission should address the issue of the weak control arrangement in the start-up phase, notably through enhanced scrutiny of the advance payments, and report back to the EP on their use.

Introduction

The working document presents, in budgetary terms, the programmes and activities supporting Youth-education-mobility, analyses the financial support that the EU budget provides for these instruments and the implementation rate in 2009, 2010, compared to the figures proposed in 2011 DB and assesses, when relevant, their evolution. It aims at providing the Members of the Committee on Budgets with a supplementary support for the budget procedure 2011.

The working document identifies, in its first part, the programmes and activities directly or indirectly supporting Youth, presents, in the second part, the relevant key budgetary elements, by policy area, showing the evolution of annual appropriations attributed to Youth programmes in 2009 and 2010 budgets, their implementation rates and provides the draft budget 2011 figures. In a third part, the working document presents, also, the financial situation of the agencies implementing the Youth related programmes and activities.

I. DEFINITION OF BUDGETARY INSTRUMENTS REGARDING YOUTH-EDUCATION-MOBILITY

1.1. Budgetary instruments providing direct support to Youth

In the framework of the EU budget, Youth is directly supported by specific multi-annual programmes as Lifelong Learning (LLL), Erasmus Mundus, Youth in Action (YiA), People specific programme for mobility of researchers (FP7 sub-programme), completed by a number of specific pilot projects and preparatory actions (PP/PA). Besides Youth in action programme and some of the PP/PA regarding Youth, financed under the heading 3b, these programmes and activities are funded under the heading 1a of the MFF. The international dimension of the actions supporting Youth is funded under heading 4 of the budget (cooperation with non-member countries on education and vocational training and the European Training Foundation (ETF)).

1.1.1. The Lifelong Learning Programme (LLL) comprises four sectoral programmes on school education (Comenius), higher education (Erasmus), vocational training (Leonardo da Vinci) and adult education (Grundtvig), as well as the Jean Monnet action and the transversal programme supporting specific key activities, such as language learning, offering opportunities for learners, teachers and trainers to study or teach in another MS.

It contributes to the development of the EU as an advanced knowledge-based society, with sustainable economic development, more and better jobs and greater social cohesion. In particular, it aims to foster interchange, cooperation and mobility between education and training systems within the Union so that they become a world quality reference. The programme supports multilateral partnerships and projects, transnational mobility and Union-wide exchanges.

1.1.2. Erasmus Mundus (II) programme is the EU cooperation and mobility programme in the field of higher education. It aims at enhancing the quality of the European higher education and promoting intercultural understanding through cooperation with non-Members States. It is also contributes to increasing attractiveness of European higher education worldwide.

1.1.3. The Youth in Action programme aims at promoting active citizenship among the young and their European citizenship in particular. It includes the European Voluntary Service, which aims at boosting young people's participation in various forms of voluntary activities, as well as a grant to the European Youth Forum.

The added value of the Youth in Action programme relates to its two main objectives: enhancement of the human resources in Europe through a particular support to non formal learning experiences and development of active citizenship (including European citizenship) of young people. On both aspects, the added value resides in the European Union's ability to showcase the benefit of initiatives supporting the mobility of young people, as well as the benefit, for Youth NGOs, to 'Europeanise' their work. In most countries no such programmes of mobility exist.

Moreover, the possibilities to exchange best practices (notably through the dissemination of results achieved by the projects) or to complement at national/regional level the 'seed money' of Youth in Action generate a strong multiplying effect which justifies an action at European level. In addition, this mobility and other supported projects help making the European Union closer to young people and include those young people with fewer opportunities who would have less possibilities to participate in other European schemes.

1.1.4. People programme for mobility of researchers: The capacity to attract and retain abundant and highly trained qualified researchers in Europe is a necessary condition to advance science and to underpin innovation, as well as an important factor to attract and sustain investments in research by public and private entities.

Against the background of growing competition at world level, the 'People' Specific Programme (FP7) aims at making Europe more attractive for the best researchers, by:

- fostering the development of an open European labour market for researchers free from all forms of discrimination and the diversification of skills and career paths of researchers;

- stimulating people to enter into the researchers' profession and encouraging European researchers to stay in Europe via amongst other such reintegration grants;

- structuring throughout Europe the organisation, performance and quality of research training, the active career development of researchers, knowledge-sharing through researchers between industry and academia and research organisations, and strong participation of women and early-stage researchers in research and development.

The Marie Curie actions contribute to upgrade skills of researchers at all career stages for a better employability in both public and private sectors through research programmes which aim at boosting innovation in Europe.

1.2. Budgetary instruments providing indirect support to 'Youth'

In addition to the main programmes supporting youth-education-mobility, some other EU programmes are also providing support for young people. A supplementary funding is provided through the employment and social affairs policy area (Progress programme, EURES, Mobility actions, European Social Fund (ESF)), regional development policy area (European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)), common agriculture policy and notably, the rural development policy supporting the young farmers, European Fisheries Fund (EFF), which are respectively funded under heading 1a, 1b and 2 of the EU budget. Nevertheless, in the framework of these policy areas, there are no particular budget lines or earmarked appropriations specifically dedicated to Youth.

1.2.1. PROGRESS programme is one of the instruments providing support to the Members states in developing and implementing employment and social policies in five areas: Employment, Social inclusion and protection, Working conditions, Non-discrimination and Gender equality. It targets Member States, local and regional authorities, public employment services and national statistics offices. Specialised bodies, universities and research institutes, as well as the social partners and non-governmental organisations can participate.

Progress programme is instrumental in providing analysis and policy advice on EU policy agenda, monitoring/assessment and reporting on the implementation of EU legislation and policies, promoting policy transfer, identification and dissemination of good practices in related policy areas, mutual learning and support among MSs, rallying support and promoting the involvement of key EU and national stakeholders; it does not support directly youth and mobility activities.

1.2.2. European Employment Service (EURES) consists of a network of more than 800 EURES advisers and web-sites gathering all of job vacancies from Public Employment Services of the EURES Member States (EU, EEA and CH) with information about leaving and working conditions in the MSs.

EURES aims at promoting the geographical and professional mobility of workers in Europe in order to overcome the remaining obstacles to the free movement and contribute to the emergence of a real labour market at European level.

1.2.3. European Social Fund (ESF) is the main instrument for investment in education and training under the Cohesion Policy. Within the strategic priorities for the thematic and regional operational programmes there is always a scope focussing the actions on different target groups, of which the young people. Depending on the specific situation in each MS and region, the ESF supports different projects targeting young people either through facilitating their transition from education to work, or helping them back into the education to raise their skill levels.

1.2.4. The European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) supports mainly infrastructure in education and training. The support is however not specifically targeting young people and does not promote mobility. The ERDF support to education and training (excluding infrastructure) is marginal.

1.2.5. The Common Agricultural Policy supports several measures for young farmers under its rural development pillar ("setting up of young farmers" measure). Young farmers can also benefit from other measures such as "Vocational training and information actions" and "Modernisation of agricultural holdings" where specific actions in favour of youth are frequent.

1.2.6. The European Fisheries Fund (EFF) provisions relevant in the field of Youth can be found under the measure "Socio-economic compensation for the management of the Community fishing fleet"[21]. It is up to the Member States to decide on the amount they wish to devote to these measures. It has not been possible to provide figures on the budget allocated to these specific actions.

II. Budgetary structure Youth - mobility-education programmes and activities

Title 15 of the budget covers the major part of the Youth programmes and activities. Several mobility actions are funded from the Title 04 of the budget, as part of employment and social affairs policy area. Nevertheless, there are no programmes dedicated directly to Youth in this policy area.

2.1. Education and culture policy area (15)

Table: 'Youth-education-mobility' programmes funded under the title 15:

			Budget 2009				Budget 2010				DB 2011
BL	Title	MFF	CA	Impl %	PA	Impl %	CA	Impl[22] %	PA	Impl[23] %	CA	PA
15 02 02 05	Erasmus Mundus programme	1a	75 523 024	100	75 894 879	99,9	94 163 000	-	78 800 000	0,76	94 540 000	88 000 000
15 01 04 14	Erasmus Mundus Admin expenditure	1a	1 326 664	99,6	1 326 664	48,0	770 000	18,8	770 000	10,3	996 000	996 000
15 02 03	Cooperation with non-members countries on education and vocational training	4	7 598 370	98,9	3 569 764	97,9	8 000 000	0,4	5 200 000	31,1	9 000 000	5 000 000
15 01 04 17	Idem – Admin expenditure	4	114 983	100	114 983	48,0	65 000	-	65 000	5,4	80 000	80 000
15 02 22	Lifelong learning programme	1a	1 087 476 158	100	1 018 078 157	100	982 313 500	74,9	953 200 000	22,0	1 009 655 000	956 000 000
15 01 04 22	LLL Admin expenditure	1a	9 371 661	100	9 371 661	61,3	8 843 000	23,8	8 843 000	12,1	9 000 000	9 000 000
15 05 55	Youth in Action programme	3b	144 087 708	100	137 645 004	100	124 106 000	61,2	121 000 000	20,1	126 108 000	117 000 000
15 01 04 55	Youth in Action Admin expenditure	3b	986 063	100	986 063	69,2	780 000	32,8	780 000	12,6	780 000	780 000
15 07 77	People programme for mobility of researchers (FP7)	1a	543 908 038	100	412 891 192	100	534 190 000	0,5	284 000 000	11,2	754 407 000	500 000 000

Source: Commission Working documents - DB 2011 figures

Despite a very high level of implementation of the budget lines of title 15, reaching for a major part an execution level of 100%, the DB 2011 increase in commitments is rather limited, except for the People specific programme, which has been considerably increased both in commitments and payments.

Globally, the level of payments remains stable. A more important increase has been proposed for Erasmus Mundus programme (+12%), while the payments for Youth in action programme has been decreased by 3,3% in the DB 2011.

2.1.1. Erasmus Mundus: The global amount of appropriations, proposed in the DB 2011, amounts to EUR 94,5 million in CA and EUR 88,0 million in PA for the operational expenditure and to EUR 0,996 millions for the administrative expenditure. If compared to 2010, the programme's operational expenditure has been slightly increased by EUR 0,3 million in CA (+0,4 % ) and by EUR 9 million in PA (+11,7%).

In 2011, the programme will continue to finance new categories of individual grants (to doctoral candidates and to European students who attend Erasmus Mundus master courses). 2010 is the first year in which all elements of the new Erasmus Mundus (II) programme become fully operational.

The ex-post evaluation of the first Erasmus Mundus programme (2004-2008) showed that the programme has led to an increase in the number of third-country students attending participating departments and institutions. Many of the course representatives consulted during the evaluation noted that Erasmus Mundus has allowed their departments to attract third country students from a wider range of countries and thus to break with traditional patterns of recruitment. Moreover, 89% of course co-ordinators surveyed said that Erasmus Mundus students were either "significantly above" (53%) or "above" (36%) the average standard of masters students at their university[24].

2.1.2. Lifelong learning programme: DB 2011 proposes a global amount of EUR 1.009,6 million in CA and 956 million in PA for the LLL programme. If compared to 2010 budget figures, this increase corresponds to +EUR 27 million in CA (+2,8%) and +2,8 million in PA (+0,3%).

For 2011, this appropriation is programmed to support the following three specific objectives:

- Development of the European area of lifelong learning and foster mobility in view of strengthening Europe's competitiveness, building its knowledge-intensive economy and deepening the sense of European identity and citizenship (EUR 896,125 million)

- Modernisation and reform of EU education and training systems in line with the Europe 2020 strategy (EUR 101,730 million)

- Modernisation and reform of EU education and training systems in line with the Europe 2020 strategy; Make Multilingualism enabling European citizens to use several languages, to access culture and to participate as active citizens in view of them benefitting from better communication, inclusiveness and wider employment as well as business opportunities (EUR 11,800 million)

2.1.3. Youth in Action programme (YiA): The overall amount, suggested in the DB 2011 for YiA, is EUR 126,1 million in commitments and EUR 117,0 million in payments for the operational expenditure with only EUR 0,78 million foreseen for the administrative expenditure.

If compared to 2010 budget, this represents an increase in commitments by only 1,6% and a decrease in payment by 3,3%, while, as indicated in the table above, the implementation rate at 19 April 2010 was already 61,2% and 100% at the end of 2009.

Commission's evaluation of the Youth Programme (2000-2006) has confirmed the effectiveness of the programme, as regards the employability and professional orientation of young people (whose skills develop through the non formal education experiences which stem from their participation in the Programme), as well as the development of their citizenship and sense of solidarity and sense of being European.

2.1.4. People Programme: DB 2011 proposes EUR 754,407 million in CA and EUR 500 million in PA for this programme. This corresponds to an increase of 41,2% in CA (+220 million) and to 76% increase in PA (+ EUR 216 million), as compared to budget 2010.

In accordance with the Commission working documents[25], the DB 2011 substantial increase of the People Specific Programme responds to the increased level of demand for the different programme's objectives and the key policy areas set out in the programme. The biggest share of the 2011 budget will continue supporting the initial training of researchers through Marie Curie Initial training networks (ITN) Actions. It shall also allow to increase the appropriations of intra European and international mobility of researchers and support their career development through individual fellowships and co-funding of regional, national and international Programmes (COFUND), World fellowships (OIF, IIF and IRSES), Intersectoral mobility (ITN and Industry-Academia Partnerships and Pathways (IAPP) actions).

The actions to promote the 5th freedom though the implementation of the "European Partnership for Researcher" (EPR) for better careers and mobility which includes the EURAXESS "Researchers in Motion" activities, stakeholders' consultations and data collection and the study on the EU pension Fund are foreseen to be continued in 2011. In addition, new activities shall be launched including the expansion of EURAXESS links, a feasibility study for a Researchers Card and further analyses and preparation of policies concerning researcher's mobility and career and patterns in view of a European partnership for Researchers (EPR) Communication.

The Research Executive Agency (REA) is responsible for the management of all the programme areas of the People Programme with the exception of policy related actions for the development of an open labour market for researchers. Since the establishment of the new Commission it falls under the competences of the DG EAC. This also implied a change of nomenclature - 15 07 77 (title 15: education and culture), instead of the previews 08 11 01 (title 08: Research).

2.2. Employment and social affairs policy area (title 04)

2.2.1. Social dialogue and the Community social dimension (04 03 03)

			Budget 2009			Budget 2010			DB 2011
BL	Title	MFF	CA	PA	Impl (CA) %	CA	PA	Impl[26] (CA) %	CA	PA
04 03 03 01	Industrial relation and social dialogue	1a	15 328 292	13 679 843	99	16 000 000	14 000 000	7	16 390 000	14 000 000
04 03 03 02	Information and training measures for workers’ organisations	1a	16 922 212	16 209 903	100	16 400 000	15 000 000	19	16 700 000	15 000 000
04 03 03 03	Information, consultation and participation of representatives of undertakings	1a	6 873 440	5 271 298	94	7 300 000	5 500 000	-	7 300 000	5 500 000
Total			39 123 944	55 161 044		39 700 000	34 500 000		40 390 000	34 500 000

Source: Commission Working documents - DB 2011 figures

Social dialogue and the EU social dimension activities aim at strengthening the role of social dialogue and promote the adoption of agreements between the social partners. It provides support for actions undertaken by social partners to promote social dialogue and for issues related to the impact of globalisation on EU actors. It also co-finances the work programme of Trade Union research and Training Institute (ETUI-REHS), supports training activities of worker' organisations, research and exchange of best practice on industrial relations in Europe, Social Partners' actions to improve and promote the Lisbon strategy, the information, consultation and participation of representatives of undertakings.

DB 2011: The appropriations remain stable. Globally, the DB 2011 has not foreseen any increase in appropriation for these budget lines, except a minor increase in commitments only for the following budget lines 04 03 03 01, 04 03 03 02 (by EUR 0,39 and 0,3 million respectively).

2.2.2. EURES - European Employment Service (04 03 04)

EURES : Budget appropriations and implementation rate

			Budget 2009			Budget 2010			DB 2011
BL	Title	MFF	CA	PA	Impl (CA) %	CA	PA	Impl[27] (CA) %	CA	PA
04 03 04	EURES	1a	19 838 034	15 121 218	100	19 100 000	16 000 000	7	19 500 000	16 000 000
04 01 04 04	EURES Admin expenditure	1a	477 975	477 975	99	470 000	470 000	36	470 000	470 000

Source: Commission Working documents - DB 2011 figures

According to the Commission working document, because of the current crisis the use of the EURES has heavily increased. Thus the Commission intends to further develop the Service and, notably, reinforce the job matching services of EURES.

The appropriation foreseen in the DB 2011 remain stable; an increase of EUR 0,4 million only has been proposed for 2011 in commitments. The operational expenditure amounts to EUR 19,5 million in commitments and EUR 16 million in payments.

EURES 2011 programming (in commitments):

EUR 2,3 million:          Development of the EURES Website and Help-Desk and the Job Mobility Portals

EUR 15 million:           Support of Public Employment services in contributing to the development of European labour markets open and accessible to all through EURES

EUR 2,2 million:          Information and communication activities, training, networking of EURES and the organisation of the Job Days

2.2.3. PROGRESS - EU Programme for employment and social solidarity (04 04 01)

Progress: Budget appropriations and implementation rate

			Budget 2009			Budget 2010			DB 2011
BL	Title	MFF	CA	PA	Impl (CA) %	CA	PA	Impl[28] (CA) %	CA	PA
04 04 01 01	Employment	1a	22 839 918	13 644 597	9	23 400 000	19 000 000	2	19 787 500	17 000 000
04 04 01 02	Social protection and inclusion	1a	30 693 237	22 585 865	98	32 450 000	25 000 000	-	27 755 000	26 500 000
04 04 01 03	Working conditions	1a	11 652 418	7 380 312	100	10 320 000	7 500 000	10	8 425 000	8 500 000
04 04 01 04	Anti-discrimination and Diversity	1a	22 720 684	18 843 184	97	24 050 000	19 000 000	20	20 137 500	18 000 000
04 04 01 05	Gender equality	1a	12 966 402	10 698 941	94	13 470 000	10 000 000	5	11 790 000	10 000 000
04 04 01 06	Support for implementation	1a	1 393 077	853 514	54	1 750 000	1 500 000	-	1 355 000	1 200 000
04 01 04 10	Progress Admin expenditure	1a	3 706 021	3 706 021	99	4 130 000	4 130 000	27	4 380 000	4 380 000
TOTAL			105 971 757	77 712 434		109 570 000	86 130 000		93 630 000	85 580 000

Source: Commission Working documents - DB 2011 figures

2.3. Other policy area (indirect support to Youth)

According to the data provided by the Commission during the budgetary monitoring group on the implementation of policy instruments regarding Youth of 4 May 2010, the following policy area provides supplementary funding in favour of young people:

· Title 04: European Social Fund (ESF) allocates directly EUR 8,3 billion, which represents roughly 11 % of its overall budget (2007-2013), to reforms of Member States' education and training systems which are mainly targeted young people. According to the last available data around on third of ESF beneficiaries are young people (2,5 million of young people in 2008).

· Title 05: The Common Agricultural Policy provides supports for young farmers through the following measures:

"Setting up of young farmers"- EUR 2.894 million euro for around 186,800 beneficiaries foreseen by the Commission. By January 2010, MSs had declared a total amount of EUR 537,7 million for this measure, which represents 2.7% of the total EAFRD amount paid from the beginning of the current programming period.

"Vocational training and information actions" and "Modernisation of agricultural holdings" for which the total programmed amounts for the period 2007-2013 are EUR 1.085,9 million and EUR 10.619,1 million respectively.

· Title 13: The European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) support to education and training (excluding infrastructure) is around EUR 1,6 billion over the 2007-2013 programming period.

III. AGENCIES - Decentralised management of the programmes

3.1. Decentralised Agencies

The European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (Cedefop) and the European Training Foundation (ETF) are active in supporting the development of the Vocational Education and Training (VET) policies, skills and related employment issues, which are all very relevant to young people. However, it should be noted that they do not implement programmes or actions directly.

Decentralised Agencies: Cedefop and ETF Budget appropriations and staff

				B 2009		B 2010		DB 2011
Article	Agency	Seat	Cat	B voted	Staff	B voted	Staff	B voted	Staff
15 02 25	European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training	Thessaloniki	1a	16,8	101	16,9	101	15,7	101
15 02 27	European Training Foundation	Turin	4	19,9	96	18,3	96	19,8	96

(in EUR million)

Source: Commission Working documents - DB 2011 figures

3.1.1. European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (CEDEFOP)

Cedefop is the EU’s agency for European VET policy. The aim of the Centre is to assist the Commission in encouraging, at EU level, the promotion and development of vocational training and of in-service training. To that end, in the framework of the guidelines laid down by the EU, it shall contribute, trough scientific and technical activities, to the implementation of a common vocational training policy.

As such, the Cedefop supports the implementation of:

· the European qualifications framework (EQF), which is a tool for comparing qualifications throughout Europe to support lifelong learning and educational and job mobility,

· The European credit system for VET (ECVET), which enables learning outcomes to be transferred from one qualifications system to another, or between general and vocational education, to promote lifelong learning through VET,

· Europass, which is a portfolio of five instruments to make people’s skills and qualifications more easily understood in Europe,

· The new skills for new jobs agenda by carrying out skill needs and supply forecasts.

3.1.2. European Training Foundation (ETF)

The ETF operates in the framework of the EU’s external assistance policies; specifically, the EU’s Enlargement, Neighborhood and Development and Co-operation policies. Its objective is to contribute to improving human capital development through the improvement of vocational training systems. Through its policy analysis, advisory and capacity building actions, the ETF supports knowledge dissemination and policy management to promote realistic priority and objective setting.

3.2. Executive Agency for Education, Audiovisual and Culture (EACEA)

The implementation of programmes covered by the title 15 is largely externalised (indirect centralised management) by recourse to the EACEA and the network of National Agencies (NAs), which tasks are not limited to the administrative management but also to the implementation of the programmes.

EACEA manages the major part of the programmes of the education and culture policy area[29], namely Lifelong Learning, Youth in action, Erasmus Mundus I and II, TEMPUS III and IV programmes as well as the Agreements with USA and Canada.

In 2010 the EACEA is in the 5th year of its operational lifetime. The required budget for 2011 is relatively stable compared to 2010, the net increase of the total 2011 budget being limited to EUR 0,2 million (0,5%).

EACEA operating budget appropriation and staff:

(in EUR million)

				B 2009		B 2010		DB 2011
Article	Agency	Seat	Cat.	B voted	Staff	B voted	Staff	DB	Staff
15 01 04 30 15 01 04 31 15 01 04 32 16 01 04 30 19 01 04 30 22 01 04 30	Executive Agency for Education, Audiovisual and Culture	Brussels	1a 3b 4 3b 4 4	22,40 16,10 0,60 3,33 4,02 1,24	99 295	21,20 15,84 0,59 3,37 4,32 1,34	102 310	21,44 15,64 0,60 3,37 4,62 1,22	102 314
Total EAC EA				47,69	394	46,67	412	46,90	416

Source: Commission Working documents - DB 2011 figures

The figures presented for EACEA human resources in the table above correspond to the Establishment plan posts and, in italic, to the number of contract agents per year.

IV. EUROPE 2020 STRATEGY

The EU 2020 Strategy aims at creating a model for growth and jobs for a sustainable society based on innovation and people. With in the new strategy, as proposed by the Commission[30], the aspect of youth, mobility and education plays a crucial role; the so-called 'Youth on the Move' flagship initiative become on of the strategy's cornerstones. Moreover, the issues concerning the young people are also referred to in other flagship initiatives as 'Innovation Union', 'A digital agenda for Europe' and 'An agenda for new skills and jobs', which could strength in the future the link between youth-education-mobility.

"Innovation Union" to improve framework conditions and access to finance for research and innovation so as to ensure that innovative ideas can be turned into products and services that create growth and jobs.

"Youth on the move" to enhance the performance of education systems and to facilitate the entry of young people in the labour market.

"A digital agenda for Europe" to speed up the roll-out of high-speed internet and reap the benefits of a digital single market for households and firms.

"An agenda for new skills and jobs" to modernise labour markets and empower people by developing their of skills throughout the lifecycle with a view to increase labour participation and better match labour supply and demand, including through labour mobility.

(See annex 2).

Conclusions of the Rapporteur

The European Parliament has already identified youth as one of its key priorities for the 2011 budget [31]. In this context, youth should be perceived as an EU cross-cutting theme, developing synergies between different policy areas relating to youth, education and mobility, facilitating and encouraging social inclusion, empowerment, skills development and mobility of young people, regardless their educational background.

This working document clearly demonstrates the impressive implementation rates of practically all youth-related community programmes, often corresponding to full absorption of the funds available. The demand for participation in these programmes is very high and, therefore, further investment in this field would be most welcome.

Your Rapporteur would like to emphasise the unquestionable European added value of these youth instruments that greatly contribute to the creation of a strong European civil society and the fostering of a European identity. It should also be stressed that the objective to fulfil such an ambitious mission runs counter to a very modest financial allocation that the EU budget foresees for youth programmes. For example, the latest information available for the Youth in Action programme shows that in 2008 alone, 7.380 projects were granted from the YiA benefiting 132.510 participants[32].

In this context, your Rapporteur fully appreciates the Commission decision to dedicate one of the Europe 2020 Strategy flagship initiatives to youth, education and training, as this will create an unprecedented impetus for the development of a comprehensive EU youth strategy. The economic crisis has also made imperative the need to support young people, especially in their transition from the education system to the labour market.

For these reasons, an appropriate budget allocation should be ensured for such youth related programmes and instruments. In view of the October reading for the 2011 Budget, your Rapporteur will present concrete proposals on which budget lines would need to be reinforced in order to achieve this objective.

Annex n°1

Pilot Projects and Preparatory Actions related to Youth:

(in EUR million)

PP/PA	BL	MFF	Phase	DB 2011CA PA		B 2010 CA PA		B 2009 CA PA		Comments
Pilot Projects
PP Measures of employment Maintenance	04 03 10	1a	PP 2	-	0,7	1	0,6			2010 PP, 3 studies have been launched in 1st quarter of 2010; information and exchange of good practices activities will follow in 2011
PP Enhancing mobility and integration of workers	04 03 11	1a	PP 2	-	0,7	1	0,5			2010 PP, to be included in the EURES specific grant agreements
PP to encourage conversion of precarious work into work with rights	04 04 08	1a	PP 2	-	0,7	1	1			2010 PP, the contracts shall be signed by the end of 2010
PP accompanying workers during industrial change	04 04 10	1a	Cpp	-	p.m.	p.m.	0,5	0,-	0,19	-
PP to cover costs of students for personnel coming from the ENP countries and for related academic activities	15 02 31	1a	PP 2	1,5	1,5	1,5	1,5			2010 PP Scholarships for ENP countries to College of Europe (Bruges & Natolin)
PP – ENP- Enhance education through scholarships and exchanges	15 02 32	1a	PP 2	p.m.	p.m.	1	1			2010 PP Scholarships, ENP counties, Master's degree in European Studies 2010-11
Preparatory actions
PA Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs	02 02 03 05	1a	PA 3	2	4,6	5	3,6	4,99	0,18	2009 PA Commission intends to draft a legal basis proposal by the end of 2010
PA-Erasmus style programme for apprentices	15 03 23	1a	Cpp	-	0,3	-	0,3	0,99	1,05	2008 PA
PA Amicus – Association of MSs Implementing a Community Universal Service	15 05 10	3b	Cpp	-	0,4	-	1,06	0, -	1,16	2008 PA, ex-PP
PA European Year of Volunteering (EYV) 2011	16 05 03 01 ex 15 06 11	3b	PA 2	-	3	3	2,2			2010 PA preparing the ground for a successful EYV; The legal basis-adopted in 2009
PA Erasmus public administration programme	26 03 03	5	PA 2	p.m.	1	2	1			2010 PA Ex-PP 26 03 02

Annex n°2

Extracts form the EU 2020 Strategy - Flagship initiatives relating to Youth

Flagship initiative: "Youth on the move"

The aim is to enhance the performance and international attractiveness of Europe's higher education institutions and raise the overall quality of all levels of education and training in the EU, combining both excellence and equity, by promoting student mobility and trainees' mobility, and improve the employment situation of young people.

At EU level, the Commission will work:

To integrate and enhance the EU's mobility, university and researchers' programmes (such as Erasmus, Erasmus Mundus, Tempus and Marie Curie) and link them up with national programmes and resources;

To step up the modernisation agenda of higher education (curricula, governance and financing) including by benchmarking university performance and educational outcomes in a global context;

To explore ways of promoting entrepreneurship through mobility programmes for young professionals;

To promote the recognition of non-formal and informal learning;

To launch a Youth employment framework outlining policies aimed at reducing youth unemployment rates: this should promote, with Member States and social partners, young people's entry into the labour market through apprenticeships, stages or other work experience, including a scheme ("Your first EURES job") aimed at increasing job opportunities for young people by favouring mobility across the EU.

At national level, Member States will need:

To ensure efficient investment in education and training systems at all levels (pre-school to tertiary);

To improve educational outcomes, addressing each segment (pre-school, primary, secondary, vocational and tertiary) within an integrated approach, encompassing key competences and aiming at reducing early school leaving;

To enhance the openness and relevance of education systems by building national qualification frameworks and better gearing learning outcomes towards labour market needs.

To improve young people's entry into the labour market through integrated action covering i.a guidance, counselling and apprenticeships.

Flagship Initiative: "An Agenda for new skills and jobs"

The aim is to create conditions for modernising labour markets with a view to raising employment levels and ensuring the sustainability of our social models. This means empowering people through the acquisition of new skills to enable our current and future workforce to adapt to new conditions and potential career shifts, reduce unemployment and raise labour productivity.

At EU level, the Commission will work:

To define and implement the second phase of the flexicurity agenda, together with European social partners, to identify ways to better manage economic transitions and to fight unemployment and raise activity rates;

To adapt the legislative framework, in line with 'smart' regulation principles, to evolving work patterns (e.g. working time, posting of workers) and new risks for health and safety at work;

To facilitate and promote intra-EU labour mobility and better match labour supply with demand with appropriate financial support from the structural funds, notably the European Social Fund (ESF), and to promote a forward-looking and comprehensive labour migration policy which would respond in a flexible way to the priorities and needs of labour markets;

To strengthen the capacity of social partners and make full use of the problem-solving potential of social dialogue at all levels (EU, national/regional, sectoral, company), and to promote strengthened cooperation between labour market institutions including the public employment services of the Member States;

To give a strong impetus to the strategic framework for cooperation in education and training involving all stakeholders. This should notably result in the implementation of life-long learning principles (in cooperation with Member States, social partners, experts) including through flexible learning pathways between different education and training sectors and levels and by reinforcing the attractiveness of vocational education and training. Social partners at European level should be consulted in view of developing an initiative of their own in this area;

To ensure that the competences required to engage in further learning and the labour market are acquired and recognised throughout general, vocational, higher and adult education and to develop a common language and operational tool for education/training and work: a European Skills, Competences and Occupations framework (ESCO).

At national level, Member States will need:

To implement their national pathways for flexicurity, as agreed by the European Council, to reduce labour market segmentation and facilitate transitions as well as facilitatig the reconciliation of work and family life;

To review and regularly monitor the efficiency of tax and benefit systems so to make work pay with a particular focus on the low skilled, whilst removing measures that discourage self-employment;

To promote new forms of work-life balance and active ageing policies and to increase gender equality;

Promote and monitor the effective implementation of social dialogue outcomes;

To give a strong impetus to the implementation of the European Qualifications Framework, through the establishment of national qualification frameworks;

To ensure that the competences required to engage in further learning and the labour market are acquired and recognised throughout general, vocational, higher and adult education, including non formal and informal learning;

To develop partnerships between the worlds of education/training and work, in particular by involving social partners in the planning of education and training provision

Flagship Initiative: "A Digital Agenda for Europe"

The aim is to deliver sustainable economic and social benefits from a Digital Single Market based on fast and ultra fast internet and interoperable applications, with broadband access for all by 2013, access for all to much higher internet speeds (30 Mbps or above) by 2020, and 50% or more of European households subscribing to internet connections above 100 Mbps.

At EU level, the Commission will work:

To provide a stable legal framework that stimulates investments in an open and competitive high speed internet infrastructure and in related services;

To develop an efficient spectrum policy;

To facilitate the use of the EU's structural funds in pursuit of this agenda;

To create a true single market for online content and services (i.e. borderless and safe EU web services and digital content markets, with high levels of trust and confidence, a balanced regulatory framework with clear rights regimes, the fostering of multi-territorial licences, adequate protection and remuneration for rights holders and active support for the digitisation of Europe's rich cultural heritage, and to shape the global governance of the internet;

To reform the research and innovation funds and increase support in the field of ICTs so as to reinforce Europe's technology strength in key strategic fields and create the conditions for high growth SMEs to lead emerging markets and to stimulate ICT innovation across all business sectors;

To promote internet access and take-up by all European citizens, especially through actions in support of digital literacy and accessibility.

At national level, Member States will need:

To draw up operational high speed internet strategies, and target public funding, including structural funds, on areas not fully served by private investments;

To establish a legal framework for co-ordinating public works to reduce costs of network rollout;

To promote deployment and usage of modern accessible online services (e.g. e-government, online health, smart home, digital skills, security).

Flagship Initiative: "Innovation Union"

The aim of this is to re-focus R&D and innovation policy on the challenges facing our society, such as climate change, energy and resource efficiency, health and demographic change. Every link should be strengthened in the innovation chain, from 'blue sky' research to commercialisation.

At EU level, the Commission will work:

To complete the European Research Area, to develop a strategic research agenda focused on challenges such as energy security, transport, climate change and resource efficiency, health and ageing, environmentally-friendly production methods and land management, and to enhance joint programming with Member States and regions;

To improve framework conditions for business to innovate (i.e. create the single EU Patent and a specialised Patent Court, modernise the framework of copyright and trademarks, improve access of SMEs to Intellectual Property Protection, speed up setting of interoperable standards; improve access to capital and make full use of demand side policies, e.g. through public procurement and smart regulation);

To launch 'European Innovation Partnerships' between the EU and national levels to speed up the development and deployment of the technologies needed to meet the challenges identified. The first will include: 'building the bio-economy by 2020', 'the key enabling technologies to shape Europe's industrial future' and 'technologies to allow older people to live independently and be active in society';

To strengthen and further develop the role of EU instruments to support innovation (e.g. structural funds, rural development funds, R&D framework programme, CIP, SET plan), including through closer work with the EIB and streamline administrative procedures to facilitate access to funding, particularly for SMEs and to bring in innovative incentive mechanisms linked to the carbon market, namely for fast-movers;

To promote knowledge partnerships and strengthen links between education, business, research and innovation, including through the EIT, and to promote entrepreneurship by supporting Young Innovative Companies.

At national level, Member States will need:

To reform national (and regional) R&D and innovation systems to foster excellence and smart specialisation, reinforce cooperation between universities, research and business, implement joint programming and enhance cross-border co-operation in areas with EU value added and adjust national funding procedures accordingly, to ensure the diffusion of technology across the EU territory;

To ensure a sufficient supply of science, maths and engineering graduates and to focus school curricula on creativity, innovation, and entrepreneurship;

To prioritise knowledge expenditure, including by using tax incentives and other financial instruments to promote greater private R&D investments

A. General comments

On 8 July, Coreper adopted its position on DB 2011, to be officially endorsed by the Council in mid-August after the consultation period of national parliaments. Your rapporteur notes that, despite the new procedural and institutional environment stemming from the Lisbon Treaty, the Council has shown reluctances to take on board priorities put forward by the European parliament for 2011 Budget. As a consequence, the trilogue held on 30 June brought to the light the divergences between the two branches of the budgetary authority and did not leave real margin of manoeuvre for potential compromises.

As a reminder, the mandate of the EP delegation comprised points of specific interest for the trilogue, such as:

- budgetary implications of the European Stabilisation Financial Mechanism;

- budgetary implications of the EU 2020 Strategy;

- youth-related programmes;

- financial sustainability and manageability of heading 1a, including the changes made by the Lisbon Treaty;

- heading 4, including the setting up of the European External Action Service;

- the limited margins in the DB 2011 and the need for a revision of the current MFF.

Council put forward several political messages that are reflected in its position on DB 2011:

- budget 2011 should be marked by budgetary discipline, to be understood as further decreases in appropriations;

- margins have to be increased to allow political evolution of the EU and unforeseen events;

- the volume of payment appropriations should be closely monitored and contained

On global figures, the Council voted a decrease of commitment appropriations in DB 2011 by EUR 788 million across all headings, reducing the increase over Budget 2010 to only 0.21 % (compared to an already limited 0.77% proposed by the Commission).

On the payments' side, Council voted its now recurring sharp decrease across all headings, proposing a global reduction of EUR 3.6 billion, to EUR 126 538 million. Council's position therefore puts forward a discrepancy of more than EUR 15 billion between CA and PA.

B. Situation by headings

Heading	Council position		Difference fromDB 2011 (amount)		Difference from budget 2010(ABs 1 and 2 included) (%)		Margin below existing FF
	Commitments	Payments	Commitments	Payments	Commitments	Payments
1. Sustainable growth
1a. Competitiveness for growth and employment	12 890 302 270	11 218 574 170	-46 550 000	-841 140 000	-10.25	-1.10	96 697 730
European Globalisation Adjustment Fund	500 000 000	0	0	-50 000 000
Total 1a	13 390 302 270	11 218 574 170	-46 550 000	-891 140 000	-9.91	-1.10	96 697 730
1b. Cohesion for growth and employment	50 970 093 784	41 465 796 740	0	-1 075 000 000	+3.21	+13.97	16 906 216
Total 1 (EGF included)	64 360 396 054	52 684 370 910	-46 550 000	-1 966 140 000	+0.17	+10.39	113 603 946
2. Preservation and management of natural resources	59 011 601 738	57 314 977 696	-474 646 651	-820 707 600	-0.82	-1.41	1 326 398 262
of which Market related expenditure and direct aids	43 277 214 300	43 181 073 758	-470 187 600	-475 687 600	-1.24	-1.19	1 189 375 700
3. Citizenship, freedom, security and justice
3a. Freedom, security and justice	1 124 342 740	802 963 740	-10 910 000	-49 610 000	+11.71	+8.72	81 657 260
3b. Citizenship	667 977 000	619 674 000	+160 000	-19 305 000	0	-6.02	15 023 000
Total 3	1 792 319 740	1 422 637 740	-10 750 000	-68 915 000	+7.04	+1.77	96 680 260
4. The EU as a global player	8 265 929 377	7 010 864 867	-93 740 000	-387 899 000	+4.74	-7.00
Emergency Aid Reserve	253 860 000	0	0	-203 000 000	+2.00	-100.00
Total 4	8 519 789 377	7 010 864 867	-93 740 000	-590 899 000	+4.65	-9.98	164 070 623
5. Administration	8 093 227 556	8 094 282 556	-162 146 733	-162 146 733	+2.47	+2.49
GENERAL TOTAL	141 777 334 465	126 527 133 769	-787 833 384	-3 608 808 333	+0.22	+2.91	2 023 525 535
Payment appropriations, as a % of GNI		1.02

1. Heading 1a "Competitiveness for growth and employment"

Council decreases appropriations by EUR 43,5 million in commitments and EUR 889 million in payments (respectively decrease of 0,3% and 7,3%, comparing to DB 2011). These cuts concern mainly a number of policy areas directly contributing to the European economic recovery, the boosting of the competitiveness and encouraging mobility: enterprise (-9,7 million in CA and -102,4 million in PA), employment and social affairs (-1,65 million in CA and -63,55[33] million in PA), mobility and transport (-8,5 million in CA and -130,0 million in PA), research (-9,2 million in CA and -344,7 million in PA), energy (-0,9 million in CA and -29,0 million in PA), education and culture (-2,9 million in CA and -136,4[34] million in PA) and information society and media (-8,3 million in CA and -67,9 million in PA).

It is to be noted that PA have been cut in Progress, Marco Polo II and FP7 programmes (by EUR 7,45 million for Progress, EUR 9 million for Marco Polo II and by almost EUR 400 million for FP7).

Most importantly, budget lines covering EP priority on Youth-Education-Mobility are drastically reduced in PA: EURES (European Employment Services) by EUR 1 million, Erasmus Mundus by EUR 8 million, Lifelong learning programme by EUR 25,5 million and People programme by EUR 100 million.

2. Heading 1b "Cohesion for growth and employment"

Council's position on the DB does not modify Commission's proposal in commitments. They remain therefore at the level of EUR 50 970 million (+3.2% as compared to 2010), EUR 39 891.5 million of which are for the Structural Funds (ERDF and ESF) – an amount similar to the 2010 figure – and EUR 11 078.6 million for the Cohesion Fund.

This position on commitment appropriations is well in line with the allocations set out in the MFF, taking into account the technical adjustment to the financial framework for 2011 (increase of EUR 336 million), as provided for in point 17 of the IIA.

On the other hand, the Council has adopted a restrictive approach on payments, which decrease by EUR 1 075 million as compared to Commission's estimates of payment needs for 2011, that were already assessed as possibly underestimated by the European Parliament[35]. Half of these cuts (EUR 560 million) concern the previous programming period appropriations, and mainly the completion of 2000-2006 Cohesion Fund projects. As far as the current 2007-2013 programming period appropriations are concerned, the main cut concerns the payments devoted to the completion of the European Regional Development Fund - Regional Competitiveness and Employment objective (- EUR 328 million).

Such an approach does not take account of the slow start of programme implementation at the beginning of the 2007-2013 period, which will therefore need to catch up strongly, particularly in 2011, nor the following circumstances, identified in Parliament's mandate for the Trilogue referred to above, which also plead for a more ambitious increase in payment appropriations:

- recent legislative changes, which notably aim at facilitating the management of EU funding and accelerating investments;

- 2011 will be the first full year when all Management and Control Systems will be approved, which is a precondition for interim payments, which means that the implementation of programmes will reach cruising speed, projects being already selected for more than 93 billion or 27% of the total financial volume for the period, as per end of March 2010;

- the closure of the 2000-2006 programmes is expected to continue in 2011, thereby requiring final payments to be made but also freeing up some resources to further speed up implementation of 2007-2013 programmes.

The level of EUR 1 075 million in payments withdrawn from Commission's proposal, which limits the 2011 increase to 13.9% to a level of EUR 41 466 million can therefore be considered as worrying. Nevertheless, it should be noted that the draft declaration on a specific procedure regarding payment appropriations under 1b[36] is completely in line with Parliament's position as presented in the mandate for the Trilogue.

3. Heading 2 "Preservation and management of natural resources"

The Councils attitude to use agriculture as a reservoir to meet other obligations is confirmed, as savings are being made of EUR 474 million in CA and EUR 820 million in PA. It could already be foreseen that the margin created by this exercise (EUR 1.326,4 million) will serve to finance other EU priorities. This happened four times in the recent years (it was only possible to agree the annual budgets either by using up the existing margins in the different headings of the MFF or through recourse to the revision provided for by paragraph 23 of the IIA of 17 May 2006 by using the margins available below the ceilings of Heading 2).

The artificial small margin so created by the cuts under Heading 2 makes it very difficult for the EU to respond appropriately to market crises, animal diseases, market volatilities and unexpected global events.

As regards the severe cuts in payments (EUR 820 million, of which EUR 98 million from Rural development and 38 million from LIFE+), it is likely to endanger execution of commitment appropriations in 2011 also : actually, in order to have sufficient credits to meet payments arising from existing commitments (and also to avoid the risk of late payment and the associated costs), Finance Unit in the Commission would first allocate payment appropriations to honour the legal obligations already entered and which fall due in 2011 (such as interim & final payments) as the total value of commitments actually signed will be less than the amount of commitment appropriations in the budget. Severe cuts in payments could possibly encourage Finance Units to slow down the rate of signing of new legal commitments, especially in the final quarter of the year.

It is to be noted that the share of CAP expenditure in the EU budget has steadily decreased from nearly 75% in 1985 to a projected 39,3% in 2013, and the decline in budgetary expenditure on market measures is even more significant, from 74% of all CAP expenditure in 1992 to less than 10% at present.

Finally, it should be underlined that the political signification of the common fisheries policy (CFP) is not adequately reflected in DB 2011 and the Council's Position aggravates the situation by reducing sharply the PA in European Fisheries Fund lines (by EUR 95 and EUR 44 million).

4. Heading 3a "Freedom, security and justice"

In its conclusions on the budget guidelines for 2011, the only comment Council made regarding 3a was to recall "the importance of allocating sufficient resources to EU policies such as immigration". Nevertheless, its main cuts in payment appropriations (EUR 25,65 million out of EUR 41,25 million) relate to three main funds implementing the immigration policy (the External Borders Fund, the European Fund for the Integration of Third-country nationals and the European Return Fund), a reduction of 7,37% compared to DB 2011.

The main cut in CA (by EUR 1 million, representing a decrease by 18,52%) concerns Prince (information measures in relation to the establishment of an area of freedom, security and justice, such as internal web sites, public events, communication products, Eurobarometer surveys, etc.). This gives rise to questions concerning the success of the Stockholm Programme, especially in view of the recent draft Council conclusions on the Commission's Action Plan for implementing the Stockholm Programme, stating that "some of the actions proposed by the Commission are not in line with the Stockholm Programme and that others, being included in the Stockholm Programme, are not reflected in the Communication of the Commission", and calling "on all parties concerned to ensure due implementation of all necessary measures and actions stemming from the Stockholm Programme, including those not present in the above Commission proposal".

Concerning SIS II, for which Parliament advocated to hold funds in reserve, Council does not amend CA, and only proposes to reduce payments by 11,9% (- EUR 2.5 million).

5. Heading 3b "Citizenship"

The unique increase for appropriations proposed by the Council throughout the whole DB 2011 concerns a new preparatory action (EUR 4 million) for the preservation of commemorative sites in Europe such as the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp. This new budget line counterbalances the decrease in CA for Civil Protection Instrument (a reduction by EUR 2.1 million, representing a drop by more than 11 %).

As regards PA, main cuts concern EU action in the field of health (- EUR 8.1 million, a drop by nearly 23%) and Culture Programme 2007-2013 (- EUR 3.85 million).

In total, as compared to DB 2011, Council reduces payments by EUR 19,3 million (-3,02%), and increase commitments by EUR 1,65 million (+ 0,25%).

6. Heading 4 "the EU as a global player"

The Council intends to create a margin under this heading, in order to face potential arising crisis in third countries. Compared to DB 2011 (EUR 70.3 million), the margin increases to an amount of EUR 164 million.

In order to allow such an increase of the margin, the proposed cuts by nearly EUR 94 million are mainly for:

- Operational expenditure under instruments for enlargement / cross border cooperation with accession countries (- EUR 52 million): this approach is questionable since all parties agree on the fact that 2011 will be a milestone for all countries at the different steps of the accession process. In its DB 2011, the Commission had actually proposed an increase by more than 13 % of CA for enlargement, a proposal that EP welcome in its resolution on the mandate for trilogue.

- Expenditure on administrative management: a decrease by EUR 24.65 million, out of which EUR 16 million from DCI, EUR 4.75 million from IPA, EUR 1.2 million from ENPI, EUR 1.2 million from IfS, EUR 1 million from EIDHR, and EUR 0.5 million from HUMA). It is to be noted that the proposed decreases in administrative expenditure are neither correlated in proportion to the overall allocations of operational expenditure by instruments, not linked to the implementation rate which are all above 80 % by mid-June 2010 (with the exception of administrative expenditure for Humanitarian Aid).

- Macro financial Assistance (decrease by EUR 15 million in CA): Council proposes to almost restore the level of appropriations adopted in Budget 2010.

As regards payment appropriations, the proposed cuts amount to EUR 591 million (including total emptying of PA for the Emergency Aid reserve, from EUR 203 million). In its DB 2011, the Commission had already proposed a decrease by EUR 186 compared to budget 2010, stating that outstanding commitments (RAL) on completion lines had diminished substantially.

This further cut by EUR 591 million by the Council, leading to a decrease by nearly 10 % in payment appropriations compared to 2010, does not affect completion lines but operational lines of all running programmes (with the noticeable exception of CFSP).

7. Heading 5 "Administration"

Council's position is to cut Commission's DB proposal by EUR 162.15 million, reducing the level of administrative expenditure for all institutions to EUR 8 094 million, i.e. an increase of 2.5% as compared to 2010, leaving a margin of EUR 323 million.

Some of the assumptions underlying the cuts and Council's approach consisting of applying a standard flat rate abatement on salaries taking into account the current vacancy rate may potentially have a detrimental effect on the smooth functioning of the institutions. It is important to stress that, as called for in Parliament's guidelines, an individual analysis is necessary for each one of them.

Council's overall cuts reduce by some 2% Commission's initial proposal. They mainly affect:

- European Commission's expenditure, including European Offices (- EUR 80 million or -2.1%, among which cuts for offices range from -0.75% for EPSO to -3.15% for PMO),

- European schools (- EUR 13 million or -7.5%),

- The Economic and Social Committee (EESC) (- EUR 14 million or -10.3%),

- The Committee of Regions (COR) (- EUR 10 million or -11.2%),

- Pensions (- EUR 23 million or -1.8%).

It is also interesting to note that, after Parliament (for which the gentlemen's agreement apply) and the Ombudsman (the expenditure of which is marginal), Council's smaller cut was brought to its own expenditure (only -1.3%), when the cuts made to the EESC and the COR go beyond 10%.

In general, the Council wishes to limit the increase of all Institutions to a maximum of 2 % except for the EDPS, no new posts are created except for European Council and the Council is also rejecting the budgeting of 1.85% salary and pension annual adjustment pending the outcome of the Court proceedings. This is not good budgetary management since the original full 3.7% salary adjustment proposed in 2009 could become fully payable should the Court of Justice rule in the Commission's favour. It would therefore be more prudent to budget it now.

An additional Council reduction relates to the possible accession date of Croatia which the Council is now calculating as from 1 July 2012. This does not correspond to the current/previous working assumptions and the Parliament could therefore maintain the current scenario of 1 January 2012. As far as we know, the Commission, for its part, also used the 1 January 2012 as its working assumption in the DB and has not made any other announcement. It is important that the Council clarifies its position in more detail.

8. Agencies

Council's position on EU decentralised agencies was based on the following principles regarding the evolution of their appropriations as compared to 2010:

- limitation of the increase to 1.5% for 'cruising speed' agencies,

- limitation of the increase to 3% for agencies entrusted with new tasks, with only half of the post requested,

- no modifications brought to Commission's proposal for new agencies.

This adds to Commission's own limitations concerning the deduction of agencies' assigned revenue stemming from previous year's surpluses and previous year's budgetary under implementation. This approach though permitted the overall stabilisation of EU budget expenditure on decentralised agencies at EUR 679 million, which is now being decreased to EUR 666 million.

In total, EUR 13.5 and 11.8 million are withdrawn from agencies' budget, respectively in commitment and payment appropriations, as compared to Commission's initial proposal. This discrepancy between commitment and payment appropriations stems from cuts brought in commitments, but not in payments for the European Environment Agency and the European Food Safety Authority.

These cuts affect about half (15) of EU decentralised agencies in a differentiated manner: when the cuts proposed for most agencies are below 1%, they are close to or even above 5% for the European Railway Agency and the European Police College. Cuts in additional staff amount to 4 AD and 3 AST-grade posts.

Half of the appropriations initially foreseen for the Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice is put in reserve by the Council, under the assumption that the advancement of the legislative process will not allow the agency to be operational before mid-2011.

C. Annexes:

- Summary by Category and MFF programme, as adopted by Coreper

- Council's draft declarations on payment appropriations

- Conclusions adopted in trilogue on dates and modalities for the functioning of the Conciliation committee

- 2011 budgetary procedure: indicative timing

C. Annexes:

Summary by Category and MFF programme, as adopted by Coreper

Heading Title and Ceiling	2010 Budget		2011 Draft Budget		2011 Council Position		Difference (Council:DB)
	Commitments	Payments	Commitments	Payments	Commitments	Payments	Commitments		Payments
1: Sustainable Growth	64.249.445.345	47.727.155.803	64.406.946.054	54.650.510.910	64.360.396.054	52.684.370.910	-46.550.000	-0,07%	-1.966.140.000	-3,60%
63.974.000.000	Margin*		67.053.946		113.603.946
1.1: Competitiveness for growth and employment	14.862.853.253	11.343.270.803	13.436.852.270	12.109.714.170	13.390.302.270	11.218.574.170	-46.550.000	-0,35%	-891.140.000	-7,36%
12.987.000.000	Margin*		50.147.730		96.697.730
Seventh Research framework programme	7.542.425.000	6.373.875.000	8.586.667.000	7.018.286.100	8.558.552.000	6.462.771.100	-28.115.000	-0,33%	-555.515.000	-7,92%
(including sixth Research framework programme
Nuclear Decommissioning (Slovakia,	255.000.000	220.000.000	258.000.000	200.000.000	258.000.000	200.000.000	0	0
Lithuania, Bulgaria)
Energy projects to aid economic recovery	500.000.000	0	500.000.000	50.000.000	500.000.000	0	0	0	-50.000.000	-100%
Energy projects to aid economic recovery	1.980.000.000	1.027.482.000	0	1.074.766.600	0	1.074.766.600	0	0
Decommissioning (Direct research)	26.900.000	33.000.000	26.270.000	30.000.000	26.270.000	30.000.000	0	0
Ten	1.083.900.000	931.794.000	1.266.150.000	935.300.000	1.265.070.000	824.720.000	-1.080.000	-0,09%	-110.580.000	-11,82
Galileo	894.400.000	453.500.000	195.941.800	554.000.000	194.491.800	552.550.000	-1.450.000	-0,74%	-1.450.000	-0,26%
Marco Polo	63.940.000	36.675.000	65.865.000	33.665.000	65.725.000	24.525.000	-140.000	-0,21%	-9.140.000	-27,15
Lifelong learning and Erasmus Mundus	1.107.288.500	1.075.812.000	1.135.635.000	1.076.240.000	1.135.435.000	1.042.540.000	-200.000	-0,02%	-33.700.000	-3,13%
CIP Entrepreneurship and innovation	302.113.000	198.622.200	316.044.000	163.069.000	314.744.000	97.769.000	-1.300.000	-0,41%	-65.300.000	-40,04
CIP ICT policy support	112.400.000	95.160.000	120.600.000	103.400.000	120.600.000	88.400.000	0	0	-15.000.000	-14,51
CIP Intelligent energy	111.195.000	65.903.300	112.000.000	53.301.000	111.300.000	46.601.000	-700.000	-0,63%	-6.700.000	-12,57
Social policy agenda	214.550.000	180.510.000	191.330.000	175.110.000	189.290.000	161.560.000	-2.040.000	-1,07%	-13.550.000	-7,74%
Customs 2013 and Fiscalis 2013	75.450.000	47.432.000	81.932.000	58.932.000	81.932.000	58.932.000	0	0
Decentralised agencies	251.081.753	247.397.803	237.994.470	237.994.470	234.949.470	234.949.470	-3.045.000	-1,28%	-3.045.000	-1,28%
Other actions and programmes	342.210.000	356.107.500	342.423.000	345.650.000	333.943.000	318.490.000	-8.480.000	-2,48%	-27.160.000	-7,86%
1.2: Cohesion for growth and employment	49.386.592.092	36.383.885.000	50.970.093.784	42.540.796.740	50.970.093.784	41.465.796.740	0	0	-1.075.000.000	-2,53%
50.987.000.000	Margin	16.906.216			16.906.216
Convergence objective	30.255.996.999	22.519.800.000	31.406.373.076	25.831.400.000	31.406.373.076	25.831.400.000	0	0
Regional competitiveness and employment	7.604.832.146	6.095.900.000	7.084.823.108	7.835.400.000	7.084.823.108	7.093.400.000	0	0	-742.000.000	-9,47%
objective
European territorial cooperation objective	1.242.911.613	818.200.000	1.312.201.407	1.040.300.000	1.312.201.407	982.300.000	0	0	-58.000.000	-5,58%
Technical assistance	88.106.454	88.035.000	88.100.000	72.900.000	88.100.000	72.900.000	0	0
Cohesion fund	10.190.244.880	6.854.950.000	11.078.596.193	7.752.750.000	11.078.596.193	7.477.750.000	0	0	-275.000.000	-3,55%
Other actions and programmes	4.500.000	7.000.000	0	8.046.740	0	8.046.740	0	0
2: Preservation and Management of Natural Resources	59.498.833.302	58.135.640.809	59.486.248.389	58.135.685.296	59.011.601.738	57.314.977.696	-474.646.651	-0,80%	-820.707.600	-1,41%
60.338.000.000	Margin		851.751.611		1.326.398.262
Agriculture markets	43.417.420.000	43.416.522.586	43.374.505.132	43.376.461.358	42.913.692.532	42.915.648.758	-460.812.600	-1,06%	-460.812.600	-1,06%
Fisheries markets	30.496.768	31.000.000	29.996.768	27.500.000	29.996.768	27.500.000	0	0
Animal and plant health	371.885.000	253.685.000	342.900.000	252.800.000	333.525.000	237.925.000	-9.375.000	-2,73%	-14.875.000	-5,88%
Rural development	14.363.564.633	13.399.280.000	14.436.116.552	13.404.365.000	14.435.651.552	13.260.900.000	-465.000	0,00%	-143.465.000	-1,07%
European Fisheries Fund	644.028.678	481.080.000	658.285.042	488.822.859	658.020.991	345.772.859	-264.051	-0,04%	-143.050.000	-29,26
Fisheries governance and international	277.530.000	252.460.000	262.175.000	250.473.000	260.510.000	245.378.000	-1.665.000	-0,64%	-5.095.000	-2,03%
agreements
Life+	306.855.000	215.820.000	333.500.000	268.225.000	331.900.000	215.125.000	-1.600.000	-0,48%	-53.100.000	-19,8
Decentralised agencies	42.953.223	43.113.223	43.769.895	43.769.895	43.304.895	43.459.895	-465.000	-1,06%	-310.000	-0,71%
Other actions and programme	44.100.000	42.680.000	5.000.000	23.268.184	5.000.000	23.268.184	0	0
3: Citizenship, Freedom, Security and Justice	1.674.487.370	1.397.957.870	1.803.069.740	1.491.552.740	1.792.319.740	1.422.637.740	-10.750.000	-0,60%	-68.915.000	-4,62%
1.889.000.000	Margin		85.930.260		96.680.260
3.1: Freedom, security and justice	1.006.487.370	738.570.370	1.135.252.740	852.573.740	1.124.342.740	802.963.740	-10.910.000	-0,96%	-49.610.000	-5,82%
1.206.000.000	Margin	70.747.260	81.657.260
Solidarity and management of migration flows	517.150.000	349.290.000	612.590.000	431.110.000	611.340.000	403.410.000	-1.250.000	-0,20%	-27.700.000	-6,43%
Security and safequarding liberties	106.900.000	73.729.000	133.000.000	66.700.000	133.000.000	62.400.000	0	0	-4.300.000	-6,45%
Fundamental rights and justice	77.500.000	58.690.000	78.000.000	64.920.000	77.700.000	60.620.000	-300.000	-0,38%	-4.300.000	-6,62%
Decentralised agencies	239.837.370	213.837.370	252.462.740	241.137.740	244.102.740	232.777.740	-8.360.000	-3,31%	-8.360.000	-3,47%
Other actions and programmes	65.100.000	43.024.000	59.200.000	48.706.000	58.200.000	43.756.000	-1.000.000	-1,69%	-4.950.000	-10,16
3.2: Citizenship	668.000.000	659.387.500	667.817.000	638.979.000	667.977.000	619.674.000	160.000	0,02%	-19.305.000	-3,02%
683.000.000	Margin		15.183.000		15.023.000
Public health and consumer protection programme	73.290.000	63.300.000	75.350.000	73.850.000	75.350.000	65.750.000	0	0	-8.100.000	-10,97
Culture 2007	54.165.000	44.529.000	57.572.000	49.550.000	57.572.000	45.700.000	0	0	-3.850.000	-7,77%
Youth in action	124.886.000	122.380.000	126.888.000	118.280.000	126.888.000	118.030.000	0	0	-250.000	-0,21%
Media 2007	102.078.500	93.500.000	110.035.000	101.210.000	109.810.000	100.985.000	-225.000	-0,20%	-225.000	-0,22%
Europe for citizens	32.505.000	23.365.000	28.530.000	21.700.000	28.500.000	21.670.000	-30.000	-0,11%	-30.000	-0,14%
Civial Protection Financial Instrument	18.450.000	12.450.000	18.350.000	18.350.000	16.250.000	12.250.000	-2.100.000	-11,44%	-6.100.000	-33,24
Press and communication actions	95.280.000	86.540.000	93.685.000	86.400.000	93.685.000	84.900.000	0	0	-1.500.000	-1,74%
European Solidarity Fund	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Decentralised agencies	125.296.000	116.557.000	125.103.000	125.305.000	123.618.000	125.305.000	-1.485.000	-1,19%	0
Other actions and programmes	42.049.500	96.766.500	32.304.000	44.334.000	36.304.000	45.084.000	4.000.000	12,38%	750.000	1,69%
4: The EU as a Global Player	8.141.006.470	7.787.695.183	8.613.529.377	7.601.763.867	8.519.789.377	7.010.864.867	-93.740.000	-1,09%	-590.899.000	-7,77%
8.430.000.000	Margin*		70.330.623		164.070.623
Instrument for Preaccession (IPA)	1.587.100.000	1.782.174.400	1.796.793.000	1.513.666.157	1.740.043.000	1.317.757.157	-56.750.000	-3,16%	-195.909.000	-12,94
Industrialised Countries Instrument (ICI)	23.740.000	17.063.000	25.121.000	20.100.000	24.121.000	14.100.000	-1.000.000	-3,98%	-6.000.000	-29,85
Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR)	164.198.200	157.974.000	163.113.000	148.673.000	162.113.000	117.673.000	-1.000.000	-0,61%	-31.000.000	-20,85
Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation (INSC)	70.452.882	61.800.000	75.813.000	71.268.300	75.813.000	71.268.300	0	0
Industrialised Countries Instrument (ICI+)	34.500.000	9.500.000	45.000.000	7.060.000	45.000.000	7.060.000	0	0
European Neighbourhood and Partnership	1.672.867.627	1.359.833.000	1.726.993.000	1.348.092.600	1.725.793.000	1.321.892.600	-1.200.000	-0,07%	-26.200.000	-1,94%
Instrument (ENPI)
Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI)	2.467.932.439	2.061.364.301	2.612.193.240	2.255.997.488	2.596.193.240	2.194.997.488	-16.000.000	-0,61%	-61.000.000	-2,70%
Instrument for Stability	219.559.000	191.405.160	290.188.000	207.088.000	288.988.000	161.888.000	-1.200.000	-0,41%	-45.200.000	-21,83
Humanitarian aid	800.518.000	800.518.000	824.693.000	824.693.000	824.193.000	824.193.000	-500.000	-0,06%	-500.000	-0,06%
Macroeconomic assistance	98.985.000	90.000.000	114.868.567	103.500.000	99.868.567	88.000.000	-15.000.000	-13,06%	-15.500.000	-14,98
Common and Foreign Security Policy (CFSP)	281.541.000	225.650.000		327.374.000	286.036.000	327.374.000	286.036.000	0	0
Ec guarantees for lending operations	93.810.000	93.810.000	138.880.000	138.880.000	138.880.000	138.880.000	0	0
Emergency aid reserve	248.882.000	248.882.000	253.860.000	203.000.000	253.860.000	0	0	0	-203.000.000	-100%
Decentralised agencies	18.282.000	18.282.000	19.850.000	19.850.000	19.760.000	19.760.000	-90.000	-0,45%	-90.000	-0,45%
Other actions and programmes	358.638.322	669.439.322	198.789.570	453.859.322	197.789.570	447.359.322	-1.000.000	-0,50%	-6.500.000	-1,43%
5: Administration	7.898.452.499	7.897.947.499	8.255.374.289	8.256.429.289	8.093.227.557	8.094.282.557	-162.146.732	-1,96%	-162.146.732	-1,96%
8.334.000.000	Margin*		160.625.711		322.772.443
Commission	3.604.622.000	3.604.117.000	3.709.015.360	3.710.070.360	3.629.405.560	3.630.460.560	-79.609.800	-2,15%	-79.609.800	-2,15%
Pensions (all institutions)	1.192.789.000	1.192.789.000	1.274.979.000	1.274.979.000	1.252.318.000	1.252.318.000	-22.661.000	-1,78%	-22.661.000	-1,78%
European Schools	154.212.044	154.212.044	173.514.000	173.514.000	160.611.000	160.611.000	-12.903.000	-7,44%	-12.903.000	-7,44%
European Parliament	1.616.760.399	1.616.760.399	1.706.547.354	1.706.547.354	1.706.547.354	1.706.547.354	0	0
Council	633.552.000	633.552.000	651.580.000	651.580.000	643.155.000	643.155.000	-8.425.000	-1,29%	-8.425.000	-1,29%
Court of Justice	329.300.000	329.300.000	345.293.000	345.293.000	334.388.440	334.388.440	-10.904.560	-3,16%	-10.904.560	-3,16%
Court of Auditors	147.945.731	147.945.731	146.879.500	146.879.500	144.265.731	144.265.731	-2.613.769	-1,78%	-2.613.769	-1,78%
Economic & Social Committee	123.173.749	123.173.749	139.220.719	139.220.719	124.845.420	124.845.420	-14.375.299	-10,33%	-14.375.299	-10,33
Committee of the Regions	79.660.950	79.660.950	91.067.355	91.067.355	80.842.683	80.842.683	-10.224.672	-11,23%	-10.224.672	-11,23
European Ombudsman	9.332.275	9.332.275	9.395.100	9.395.100	9.395.100	9.395.100	0	0
European Data Protection Officer	7.104.351	7.104.351	7.882.901	7.882.901	7.453.269	7.453.269	-429.632	-5,45%	-429.632	-5,45%
Total Budget	141.462.224.986	122.946.397.164	142.565.167.849	130.135.942.102	141.777.334.466	126.527.133.770	-787.833.383	-0,55%	-3.608.808.332	-2,77%
Global MFF Ceiling: 131.487.000.000	Global Margin		1.235.692.151		2.023.525.534

Council's draft declarations on payment appropriations

1.      Payment appropriations

"The Council asks the Commission to submit an amending budget if the appropriations entered in the 2011 budget are insufficient to cover expenditure under sub-heading 1a (Competitiveness for growth and employment), sub-heading 1b (Cohesion for growth and employment), heading 2 (Preservation and management of natural resources) and heading 4 (EU as a global player)."

2.        Specific procedure regarding payment appropriations under sub-heading 1b

"The Council urges the Commission to present by the end of September 2011 at the latest updated figures concerning the state of affairs and estimates regarding payment appropriations under sub-heading 1b (Cohesion for growth and employment) and, if necessary, to present a draft amending budget for this sole purpose.

The Council will take position on the draft amending budget as quickly as possible in order to avoid any shortfall in payment appropriations."

Conclusions adopted in trilogue on 30 June 2010 on dates and modalities

for the functioning of the Conciliation committee

Dates and modalities for the functioning of the Conciliation Committee in 2010

The European Parliament, the Council and the Commission recall their joint declaration of 30 November 2009 on transitional measures and in particular its point 7, in which they agreed to define principles and modalities for the organisation of the Conciliation Committee.

In this regard, they agree on the following key dates for 2010:

1.      A trilogue will be called on 11 October before the reading of the European Parliament;

2.      In agreement with the provisions of Article 314(4)(c) of the TFEU, the Conciliation Committee, if needed, will be convened on 26 October 2010, the 21 day-period foreseen in article 314 expiring on 15 November 2010 included, in accordance with the pragmatic calendar approved in the above-mentioned joint declaration;

3.      The Conciliation Committee will meet on 27 October afternoon hosted by the European Parliament and on 11 November hosted by Council; the sessions of the Conciliation Committee will be prepared by trilogues held on 27 October morning, 4 November and 8 November; additional trilogues could be called during the three-week conciliation period.

They also agree on the modalities attached in annex for the functioning of the Conciliation Committee.

Annex on the modalities for the functioning of the Conciliation Committee in 2010

1.      If the European Parliament votes amendments on the Council's position, the President of the Council would take note of differences between the two institutions in the plenary session after the vote. A letter by the President of the European Parliament convening the Conciliation Committee would then be sent in agreement with the President of the Council before the end of week 42. If the Council cannot agree on all the amendments voted by the European Parliament, it would be confirmed by a letter sent by the Council on 25 October 2010.

2.      A common set of documents (input documents) comparing the various steps of the budgetary procedure will be made available for the Conciliation Committee[37]. It would include "line by line" figures, totals by financial framework headings and a consolidated document with figures and remarks for all budget lines deemed technically "open". Without prejudice to the final decision of the Conciliation Committee, a specific document will list all the budget lines deemed technically closed[38]. These documents will be classified by budgetary nomenclature.

Other documents will also be attached to the input documents for the Conciliation Committee[39].

3.      The first meeting of the Conciliation Committee could define the scope of the negotiations and the issues to be addressed during trilogues. It could also endorse the list of the budget lines deemed technically closed, although agreement is conditional until everything is agreed.

Issues identified during the first Conciliation Committee meeting and other remaining outstanding points would be discussed during trilogues in view of reaching possible agreements at the final Conciliation Committee meeting.

Trilogues could be organised around thematic issues, including by headings of the multi-annual financial framework. Tentative conclusions will be drawn jointly during or immediately after each trilogue, simultaneously with the agenda of the following meeting. The draft conclusions will be finalised by the institution hosting the meeting and will be deemed approved after 24 hours without prejudice of the final decision of the Conciliation Committee.

The second meeting of the Conciliation Committee would have available conclusions of trilogues and a document with the budget lines for which an agreement has been tentatively reached during the trilogues for possible endorsement.

4.      The Conciliation Committee may approve conclusions and possible joint statements. It would also have to agree on the joint text that will include a legal introductory document and annexes[40].

The joint text will be translated in all languages (by the services of the European Parliament) and will be submitted to the approval of the two arms of the budgetary authority within 14 days.

The budget will be finalised after the adoption of the joint text by both arms of the budgetary authority by integrating the annexes of the joint text with the budget lines not modified during the conciliation process.

5.      The institution hosting the meeting (trilogue or conciliation) will provide interpretation facilities with a full linguistic regime applicable to the Conciliation Committee meetings and an ad hoc linguistic regime for the trilogues.

The institution hosting the meeting will ensure reproduction and distribution of room documents.

The services of the three institutions will cooperate for the encoding of the results of the negotiations in order to finalise the joint documents.

________________________

2011 budgetary procedure: indicative timing

as per 09 July 2010

Week	Activities
Week 26(28 June - 2 July)	- 30 June: Trilogue
Week 28 (15-16 July)	- 8 July: COREPER - 13 August: Council Budget
Week 36(6-10 September)	- 7 or 8 September: Presentation by the Minister of Council position in Plenary - 8 September (12:00 noon): DEADLINE to table amendments to Plenary by Committees and MEPs (40 signatures) - 8 September (12:00 noon): DEADLINE to table amendments to COBU by individual MEPs (with less than 40 signatures)
Week 37 (13-17 September)	- 15 September (12:00 noon) - DEADLINE for tabling amendments to Plenary by Political Groups
Week 40(4 - 8 October)	- 4, 5, 7 October: BUDG Committee meeting: end of vote on amendments & resolution
Week 41 (11-15 October)	- 11 October: Trilogue
Week 42 (18-22 October)	- 20 October: Vote by EP - Commission presents Amending Letter on Agricultural expenses - After the vote, possible declaration by the Minister in plenary "takes note of the differences between Council's and EP's positions"   - 22 October: EP President sends the letter to convene the Conciliation Committee
Week 43(25-29 October)	- 25 October: Transmission by Council of official letter of accept/not accept EPs amend   - 27 October am: - BUDG Committee - Possible Trilogue   - 27 October pm: Official opening of the Conciliation Committee (Art 314.4 TFUE) by the President of the European Parliament (EP premises) (exact time to be confirmed)
Week 44 (1-5 November)	(4 Nov?) Preparatory meetings (rapporteurs) - 4 November: Trilogue (format to be defined)
Week 45 (8-12 November)	- 8 November: Trilogue - 9 November : BUDG Committee - 11 November: Second Conciliation meeting (CSL premises)   End of the Conciliation
Week 46. (15-19 November)	- EP: preparation of Political Groups position on the Joint Text - 15 November: Trilogue (if needed)
Week 47(22-26 November)	- Approval of Joint text by the Parliament and by the Council

• [1]  The pragmatic calendar has been agreed over the years between the Institutions, conscious of the need to act ahead of the deadlines foreseen in the Treaties. For the 2011budgetary procedure, the pragmatic calendar is partially outlined in the Joint Declaration on transitional rules mentioned in the text.
• [2]  For instance, concerning the timing of Council's official transmission of a rejection decision, in order to ensure that a plenary session is programmed within the 14 days imposed on the EP by the TFEU in which it must proceed to a confirmation vote.
• [3]  Decision of the Conference of Presidents of 18.09.2008 on the second interim report of the Working Party on the Reform of the European Parliament.
• [4]  The format of the meetings should be defined according to the agenda: President of EP, Chairman and rapporteurs, specialised committees, conference of rapporteurs etc...
• [5]          Algeria, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Egypt, Georgia, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Moldova, Morocco, Palestinian Authority, Syria, Tunisia, Ukraine and Russia.
• [6]  in:European Contract Law, Material for a Common Frame of Reference, edited by Bénédicte Fauvarque-Cosson and Denis Mazeaud, Sellier, Munich 2008, p.421 ss
• [7]  Only countries will be involved with which an enforceable agreement on the protection of the data processed has been concluded.
• [8]  As identified in the Communication : “Agenda for a sustainable and competitive European tourism’ (COM(2007) 621 final)
• [9] () Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: a European Initiative for the development of micro-credit in support of growth and employment - COM (2007)708 final.
• [10]  2008 was the first year of the Preparatory Action MEDIA International, with a budget of 2 M€ for 18 projects (out of 33 proposals). For 2009, the EP voted a considerable budget increase, so that 40 projects (out of 95 proposals) could be selected for a total of 5 M€. All MEDIA International projects are based on partnerships between professionals from the EU and from third countries, aiming at achieving a maximum and sustainable international networking effect. The projects selected in 2008 and 2009 contributed to successfully structure international audiovisual markets and, indeed, created expectations among professionals who already massively invested in creating new partnerships and good quality projects in 2008 and 2009 paving the way for the launching of the new MEDIA Mundus Programme in 2011).
• [11]  Article 71 (2) of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006.
• [12]  Laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund.
• [13]  BUDG Committee's Monitoring group meeting on Cohesion policy, 17 March 2010
• [14]  
• [15]  ^As an example, MS can now start implementing large scale projects and even be reimbursed before a formal submission and adoption by the Commission of the given project.
• [16]  In this respect, some observers recommend that regulatory impact assessment be carried in order to ensure that national transposition does not add to complexity (cf. best practice in Latvia).
• [17]  This will also mechanically increase the gap between CA and PA, as well as the level of RAL which should have decreased following automatic decommitments. However, this is expected to be compensated by the higher pace of payments.
• [18]  Now integrated in the 'Joint Audit Strategy' for Structural Actions for 2009-2011
• [19]  Rather the Commission focused on monitoring financial implementation of the programmes through its participation in the monitoring committees, the annual implementation reports transmitted by the Managing Authorities, annual review meetings and the processing of the applications for interim payments made by national authorities.
• [20]  It also committed to raise awareness and ownership of EU 2020 objectives by national and regional authorities responsible for Cohesion Policy funds while facilitating a swift and efficient utilisation of Community aid in this field.
• [21]  Article 27 of Council Regulation (EC), No 1198/2006 on the European Fisheries Fund
• [22]  Commission implementation Report of 19 April 2010
• [23]  Commission implementation Report of 19 April 2010
• [24]  Commission's Working document on the DB 2011 (Part I)
• [25]  Commission's Working document on the DB 2011 (Part I)
• [26]  Commission implementation Report of 19 April 2010
• [27]  Commission implementation Report of 19 April 2010
• [28]  Commission implementation Report of 19 April 2010
• [29]  Except the People specific programme which is managed by the REA Executive Agency
• [30]  COM (2010)2020 of 3.03.2010
• [31]  European Parliament's resolution of 25 March 2010 on the priorities for the 2011 budget - Section III - Commission
• [32]  Cf. Commission's reply to outstanding questions following the EP's Monitoring group on Youth (4 May 2010)
• [33]  Of which EUR 50 million decrease in EGF payments
• [34]  Of which EUR 100 million decrease in People programme payments
• [35]  European Parliament resolution of 15 June 2010 on the mandate for the trilogue on the 2011 draft budget (A7-0183/2010)
• [36]  Presentation and quick consideration of a draft amending budget in case payment appropriations are not sufficient to cover the needs
• [37]          The various steps will include: 2010 budget (including adopted amending budgets); the initial draft budget; the Council's position on the draft budget; the European Parliament's amendments on the Council's position and the letters of amendment presented by the Commission (if not yet fully approved by all institutions).
• [38]          A budget line deemed technically closed is a line for which there is no disagreement between the Council and the European Parliament and for which no letter of amendment has been presented.
• [39]         Including a letter of executability of the Commission on the position of the Council and the amendments of the European Parliament; a letter of amendment for agriculture (and may be other areas); possibly, the autumn Budget Forecast Alert Note prepared by the Commission; and possible letter(s) from other Institutions on the position of the Council and the amendments of the European Parliament.
• [40]         The annexes to the joint text will include line by line figures for all budget items, summary figures by financial framework headings, a consolidated document (figures and final text of all the lines that have been modified during the conciliation), the list of the lines not modified compared to the draft budget or the Council's position.

OPINION of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (13.9.2010)

for the Committee on Budgets

on Parliament's position on the 2011 Draft Budget as modified by the Council – All sections
(2010/2001(BUD))

Rapporteur: José Ignacio Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Foreign Affairs calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:

1.  Reiterates that, in order to allow the EU to play an active role in the world, sufficient funds need to be provided in the EU budget; underlines that the allocation of additional administrative resources for the establishment of the European External Action Service (EEAS) must be reflected in an appropriate increase of the operational funding for EU external action, following clear political priorities, including conflict prevention; continues to be seriously concerned in this context by the sharp and persisting discrepancy between the very low budgetary margin available under heading 4 and the pressing need for action and engagement by the EU in the world, not least in the face of major natural calamities and political and humanitarian crises;

2.  Understands that, at times of economic difficulties and budgetary restraint, efforts need to be made to identify possible savings; insists however that savings must not be made at the cost of key EU foreign policy priorities, nor of the engagements already made, jeopardising stability and prosperity in the EU neighbourhood and beyond and also undermining the EU's credibility as a global actor;

3.  In order to preserve the EU's ability to act, urges the Council and the Commission to take all necessary steps to substantially increase, in the context of the revision of the Multiannual Financial Framework, the financial resources available under heading 4;

4.  Deplores in particular the proposed unrealistic cuts put forward by the Commission in financial assistance to Palestine, and insists that such assistance be increased so as to help cover the most vital needs of the Palestinian people and reinforce the institutional capacity of the Palestinian Authority; calls on the High Representative/Vice President to enhance in parallel the EU's political role in the Middle East peace process, in the context of the resumption of Israeli-Palestinian direct talks, thus contributing to tangible progress towards a two-state solution;

5.  Reaffirms its support for the enlargement process and strongly disagrees with the decreases in operational appropriations relating to the Instrument for Pre-Accession introduced by the Council, at a time when the credibility of the EU's commitment towards the European future of the region is essential for the implementation of further reforms in the candidate and potential candidate countries;

6.  Points out that the new budgetary procedure introduced by the Lisbon Treaty fully applies to the CFSP budget, and looks forward to cooperating with the High Representative/Vice President on increasing – in line with the commitment given by her vis-à-vis Parliament in the context of negotiations on the establishment of the EEAS – the transparency in this budget, including via the establishment of specific budget lines for major CSDP missions;

7.  Disagrees with the Council's proposal to delete all payment appropriations under the Emergency Aid Reserve, as this would be contrary to the spirit of this mechanism, which is to quickly provide funds in emergency situations;

8.  Regrets that the draft EEAS budget for 2011 has not yet been presented; calls on the High Representative/Vice President and the Commission to present a fully-fledged and realistic draft budget, aimed at avoiding duplications with the Commission and Council structures, creating synergies and therefore optimising the use of human resources – a crucial factor at a time of budgetary rigour.

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	6.9.2010
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	40 6 4
Members present for the final vote	Gabriele Albertini, Sir Robert Atkins, Dominique Baudis, Bastiaan Belder, Frieda Brepoels, Arnaud Danjean, Michael Gahler, Marietta Giannakou, Ana Gomes, Andrzej Grzyb, Takis Hadjigeorgiou, Heidi Hautala, Anneli Jäätteenmäki, Jelko Kacin, Ioannis Kasoulides, Tunne Kelam, Maria Eleni Koppa, Andrey Kovatchev, Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler, Sabine Lösing, Barry Madlener, Kyriakos Mavronikolas, Alexander Mirsky, Annemie Neyts-Uyttebroeck, Raimon Obiols, Kristiina Ojuland, Pier Antonio Panzeri, Alojz Peterle, Bernd Posselt, Hans-Gert Pöttering, Cristian Dan Preda, José Ignacio Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra, Jacek Saryusz-Wolski, Werner Schulz, Adrian Severin, Marek Siwiec, Hannes Swoboda, Charles Tannock, Geoffrey Van Orden, Graham Watson
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Emine Bozkurt, Reinhard Bütikofer, Lorenzo Fontana, Roberto Gualtieri, Baroness Sarah Ludford, Doris Pack, Judith Sargentini, György Schöpflin, Dominique Vlasto
Substitute(s) under Rule 187(2) present for the final vote	Filip Kaczmarek

OPINION of the Committee on Development (5.10.2010)

for the Committee on Budgets

on Parliament's position on the 2011 Draft Budget as modified by the Council - All sections
(2010/2001(BUD))

Rapporteur: Thijs Berman

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Development calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:

1.  Welcomes the ‘fast-start’ climate finance package for mitigation and adaptation to climate change, but demands assurances from the Commission that the EUR 65 million proposed for 2011 under line 21 04 01 is genuinely additional and does not come at the expense of existing development cooperation programmes, as well as a clear presentation of Member States' financial contributions to the fast-start mechanism;

2.  Firmly rejects any attempts to finance the programme for ACP banana-producing countries through redeployment of development appropriations within heading 4, in particular the proposal to redeploy for this purpose EUR 13 million from the Development Cooperation Instrument and EUR 5 million from the Civil Protection Financial Instrument (19 09 01, 19 10 01 01, 21 02 01, 21 03 01, 21 05 01 01, 21 06 02 & 23 03 06);

3.  Welcomes the Commission proposal to amend Council Regulation (EC) No 1934/2006 of 21 December 2006 establishing a financing instrument for cooperation with industrialised and other high-income countries and territories[1], but resolutely opposes its being financed with appropriations programmed for use under the Development Cooperation Instrument (19 09 01, 19 10 01 01, 19 09 03, 19 10 04 & 21 06 06);

4.  Draws attention to the shortage of funds for humanitarian aid in 2010 and calls for an increase in this funding (23 02 01) and insists that sufficient payment credits be available for the emergency aid reserve (40 02 42) to ensure a fast and effective EU response;

5.  Calls for increased appropriations under line 23 03 06 ‘Civil protection in third countries’, as the recent disaster in Haiti clearly showed the need to strengthen the Community mechanism for civil protection;

6.  Stresses that administrative spending budget lines under heading 4 are necessary for full and effective implementation of the multiannual programmes and insists, therefore, that the Commission's proposals be upheld (19 01 04 01, 19 01 04 07, 21 01 04 01 & 23 01 04 01).

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	5.10.2010
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	28 0 0
Members present for the final vote	Thijs Berman, Michael Cashman, Corina Creţu, Leonidas Donskis, Charles Goerens, Catherine Grèze, Enrique Guerrero Salom, András Gyürk, Eva Joly, Gay Mitchell, Norbert Neuser, Bill Newton Dunn, Maurice Ponga, David-Maria Sassoli, Birgit Schnieber-Jastram, Michèle Striffler, Alf Svensson, Eleni Theocharous, Ivo Vajgl, Anna Záborská, Gabriele Zimmer
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Kriton Arsenis, Santiago Fisas Ayxela, Isabella Lövin, Miguel Angel Martínez Martínez, Vincent Peillon, Bart Staes
Substitute(s) under Rule 187(2) present for the final vote	Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein

• [1]     

OPINION of the Committee on International Trade (1.9.2010)

for the Committee on Budgets

on Parliament's position on the 2011 Draft Budget as modified by the Council - Section III - Commission
(2010/2001(BUD))

Rapporteur: Peter Šťastný

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on International Trade calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:

1.   Stresses that Parliament has new powers in the field of international trade agreements; urges the Commission to fully respect Parliament's new prerogatives, particularly regarding transparency and flow of information; stresses that Parliament may use all means at its disposal if it is not satisfied with the way the Commission treats it in this respect;

2.   Stresses the need for Parliament to monitor the use of the EU budget to fulfil the Commission's commitments, inter alia regarding Macro-Financial Assistance (MFA), the Industrialised Countries Instrument (ICI) and Trade-related Assistance, in particular Aid for Trade;

3.   Calls on the Commission to clarify the way it finances Aid for Trade and to ensure that this is not done at the expense of the development funds;

4.   Welcomes the Commission proposal to amend Council Regulation (EC) No 1934/2006 of 21 December 2006 establishing a financing instrument for cooperation with industrialised and other high-income countries and territories[1] but resolutely opposes its being financed with appropriations programmed for use under the Development Cooperation Instrument; stresses that funds earmarked for development cooperation must target poverty alleviation; calls on the Commission to present, on a regular basis, detailed information on the budget lines which are used for financing the ICI; reiterates the need for a framework regulation on MFA, to be adopted in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure;

5.   Takes note of the proposed increase in the draft budget for 2011, as compared to the budget for 2010, against the MFA budget line (01 03 02); recalls that the mobilisation of this instrument for each third country falls under the ordinary legislative procedure and requests the Commission to provide further explanation on its proposed increase;

6.   Points out that the proper functioning of the external business centres (Beijing, four locations in India and ASEAN trade Centre in Thailand) financed under preparatory action must be secured to enable European businesses, SMEs in particular, to find partners with the necessary capacities to gain access to non-European markets, and to have full services at their disposal that will provide support for their export and internationalisation capacities, opening up new markets and enabling common marketing strategies to be established in third countries;

7.   Takes note of the Commission's Aid for Trade Monitoring Report covering the operations in 2010; regrets that that report does not contain more detailed information; calls for the Commission in future to submit an annual report detailing the exact sources of funding (through EU multiannual programmes and the European Development Fund), with a breakdown by country, region and aid category; requests that the report also contain specific information on the history of the measures financed, the involvement of the relevant partners, and the implementation of the pledges;

8.   Stresses the need to ensure the adequate financing of Banana Accompanying Measures (BAM) in order to enable banana-producing countries to ensure a long-term sustainable future for their production, with the worst affected countries being strictly prioritised; considers that additional funds are necessary to compensate new concessions made after the Geneva agreements to banana producers and exporters of the so-called 'dollar zone' during the negotiations of Free Trade Agreements with Andean and Central American countries;

9.   Reiterates its declared aim to accompany WTO negotiations with a parliamentary process; stresses that there will be a continual future need to finance this crucial activity; notes that in 2011 there will be at least an Annual Session of the Parliamentary Conference on the WTO, either in parallel with the WTO Ministerial Conference - if it is organised - or otherwise in Brussels or Geneva and that there will be two sessions of its Steering Committee in Geneva;

10.  Stresses the importance of the parliamentary dimension of the WTO, as embodied by the Parliamentary Conference on the WTO, with a view to strengthening the democratic legitimacy and transparency of the WTO negotiations; is determined to ensure sufficient appropriations including those for technical assistance as a contractual right for less developed countries enabling them to be involved in a significant manner in the multilateral trade system, as well as covering the defrayal of travel and subsistence expenses of six representatives of the ACP countries;

11.  Points out that, should a WTO Ministerial Conference be organised in 2011, Parliament would guarantee the reinforcement of budget line 3 0 4 4 in order to cover the costs connected with the organisation, in parallel, of a session of the Parliamentary Conference on the WTO;

12. Strongly insists that sufficient appropriations must be secured to enable Parliament to fulfil its obligations arising from the Treaty of Lisbon in respect of the Common Commercial Policy;

13. Points out that it is necessary to maintain funding for research and development in the field of poverty-related, tropical and neglected diseases; asks the Commission to make available the progress reports and the proposals for the follow-up of this action as soon as possible.

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	30.8.2010
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	19 0 1
Members present for the final vote	William (The Earl of) Dartmouth, Kader Arif, Daniel Caspary, Marielle De Sarnez, Christofer Fjellner, Yannick Jadot, Metin Kazak, Bernd Lange, David Martin, Emilio Menéndez del Valle, Vital Moreira, Niccolò Rinaldi, Tokia Saïfi, Helmut Scholz, Robert Sturdy, Keith Taylor, Iuliu Winkler, Pablo Zalba Bidegain
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	George Sabin Cutaş, Carl Schlyter, Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa
Substitute(s) under Rule 187(2) present for the final vote	Edit Bauer

• [1]  OJ L 405, 30.12.2006, p. 41.

OPINION of the Committee on Budgetary Control (29.9.2010)

for the Committee on Budgets

on Parliament's position on the 2011 Draft Budget as modified by the Council - Section III - Commission
(2010/2001(BUD))

Rapporteur: Bogusław Liberadzki

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

The rapporteur’s aim in this opinion has been to ensure that the budget takes into account the principles and recommendations adopted by Parliament on sound financial management and transparency in the management of EU funds, particularly as regards the cost‑effectiveness of the various EU policies.

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Budgetary Control calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:

1.   Calls on the Commission to organise an interinstitutional discussion involving, in an initial phase, at the highest level, representatives of Parliament, of the Council, of the Commission, and of the Court of Auditors, and in a second phase representatives from the Member States, of national parliaments and supreme audit institutions, with a view to embarking on a comprehensive debate on the current discharge procedure system[1];

2.   Proposes that the Commission allocate, during the forthcoming budgetary procedure, the financial resources needed to organise such debate[2];

3.   Proposes that consideration should be given to establishing the budget with a reduction of staff allocated to administrative support and coordination functions (overhead), with a redeployment of funds to core areas, such as policy making and supervision of the implementation of Union law. As the funds are redeployed, this proposal could be budget neutral;

4.   Considers freezing at the 2010 level the budget of the agencies that did not reach a satisfactory level (95%) of budget implementation;

5.   Proposes that the Management Board and the Director of the agency be sent an official warning letter in the event of an unsatisfactory level (below 95%) of budget implementation or in the event of deviations from the principle of sound financial management;

6.   Calls on the Commission to communicate to Parliament before the end of the year the state of play of the implementation of EU pre-accession funds in the area of justice systems and the fight against corruption in the public administration in the western Balkans, including an overview of the backlog in the judicial system;

7.   Sees the need to put part of the budget relating to the Commissioners' cabinets in reserve until the revised Code of Conduct for Commissioners is adopted;

8.   Calls, as regards mismanagement in Greece after the detection of severe problems in Greek funds financed through shared-management and of course the financial crisis, for constant monitoring and follow-up;

9.   Urges the Commission to establish and apply a comprehensive anti-corruption policy and create a clear mechanism for monitoring the situation in the Member States on a regular basis;

10. Proposes that the Commission provide all necessary resources to implement this monitoring mechanism and ensure that its conclusions and findings are followed up effectively;

11. Recalls its demands expressed in its abovementioned resolution of 5 May 2010 on Commission discharge for the financial year 2008, and reiterates that despite some improvement in recoveries, concerns remain about the problems which subsist regarding irregularly disbursed Community funds and the poor quality of the information supplied on the correction mechanism applied at Member State level, and therefore draws all the more attention to the urgent need for a 100% recovery rate in respect of funds that have been falsely used.

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	27.9.2010
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	25 1 1
Members present for the final vote	Marta Andreasen, Jean-Pierre Audy, Inés Ayala Sender, Zigmantas Balčytis, Andrea Češková, Jorgo Chatzimarkakis, Andrea Cozzolino, Ryszard Czarnecki, Luigi de Magistris, Tamás Deutsch, Martin Ehrenhauser, Jens Geier, Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, Ingeborg Gräßle, Ville Itälä, Cătălin Sorin Ivan, Iliana Ivanova, Jan Olbrycht, Crescenzio Rivellini, Christel Schaldemose, Theodoros Skylakakis, Bart Staes, Georgios Stavrakakis, Søren Bo Søndergaard
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Christofer Fjellner, Edit Herczog, Véronique Mathieu

• [1]  See paragraph 70 of the European Parliament resolution of 5 May 2010 with observations forming an integral part of its Decisions on discharge in respect of the implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2008, Section III - Commission and executive agencies (OJ L 252, 25.9.2010. p. 39).
• [2]  See paragraph 71 of the abovementioned resolution of 5 May 2010.

OPINION of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (7.9.2010)

for the Committee on Budgets

on Parliament's position on the 2011 Draft Budget as modified by the Council - Section III - Commission
(2010/2001(BUD))

Rapporteur: Andreas Schwab

JUSTIFICATION

This opinion takes as its reference point the Draft Budget for the financial year 2011 published by the Commission on 27 April 2010.

General remarks

The discussions on the Budget 2011 take place in the context of a fragile recovery, turmoil in the Eurozone and weak public finances in many Member States. In such a situation, an EU budget utilized wisely could be instrumental in stabilising the economy, stimulating short term recovery, promoting long-term growth, investments and jobs. The keys to success are the clear connections between these three perspectives as well as targeted efforts in the areas of competitiveness, entrepreneurship, employment, financial supervision, statistics, competition, Eurozone surveillance and the EU 2020 strategy.

Against this background, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs insists on putting enough resources in 2011 to tackle some of the factors that were at the origin of the present economic crisis. In particular, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs attaches great importance to ensuring the quality and accuracy of statistics including through the proper funding of Eurostat, on the one hand, and for the establishment of properly functioning EU financial supervision authorities, on the other hand.

A recent Parliament study has pointed to the fact that the EU budget only accounts for approximately 2% of the total public expenditure in the EU. The synergy between strategic EU policy objectives and budgetary policies is weak. National budgets have seldom referred to their contribution to achieving the objectives of the Lisbon or other EU strategies.

Member State authorities should agree to include an overview of their national budgets' contribution to the implementation of the EU objectives and strategies. Coherence would give European policies a greater impact and a true European added value while supporting the long-term policy objectives.

The fact that the EU budget can be a positive force for stimulating growth should be duly taken into consideration by the Council in the budget discussions. There is a convincing case for avoiding across-the-board cuts even if the situation for national public finances is extremely difficult.

ECON issues in the Draft Budget 2011

Under sub-heading 1 a, Competitiveness for Growth and Employment, an increase of 4.4 % in CA (to EUR 13 437 million), an increase of 7 % in PA (to EUR 11 035 million) and a margin of EUR 50.1 million is proposed. While the general increases are positive and important given the current economic situation, the margin is too tight, leaving limited room for manoeuvre in an area that is crucial to the post-crisis recovery effort.

In order to avoid weakening this effort, the existing programmes and actions should not be negatively affected by the new budget lines to be financed under this sub-heading (the financial supervision authorities, ITER,GMES and the Kozloduy programme).

It is essential that the budgetary implications of the EU 2020 strategy are clarified. The flagship initiatives under this heading should go beyond the mere re-labelling of already existing policies and should be adequately funded to get off to a good start.

Under sub-heading 1 b, Cohesion for Growth and Employment, an increase of 3.2% in CA (to EUR 50 970 million) and of 16.9% in PA (to EUR 42 541 million) is proposed. The sharp rise in PA is highly welcome. Spending increases may in some cases have positive effects by stimulating the economic recovery in some of Europe's regions.

- Title 1: Economic and Financial Affairs

The proposed decrease of 5,3 % in expenditures for the "Coordination and Surveillance of the Economic and Monetary Union" (01 02 02) (heading 5) does not make sense given the ongoing turbulence in the Eurozone and the large number of excessive deficit procedures. The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs has several times in the past underlined the need to allocate enough resources in that respect. The suggested cut is all the more surprising since the Commission itself proposes to reinforce the economic governance of the Eurozone, which will naturally require more means.

- Title 2: Enterprise

The development and implementation of business ideas and innovation is crucial in order for the SMEs to fully exploit the opportunities offered by the internal market. Giving future and newly established entrepreneurs the opportunity to build cross-border contacts with more experienced counterparts is an excellent way to make this happen. The preparatory action "Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs" (02 02 03 05) (sub-heading 1 a) is an important initiative that should get a substantially higher level of finance than foreseen in the Draft Budget.

The proposed decrease regarding payments for "Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme - Entrepreneurship and Innovation Programme" (01 04 04) (sub-heading 1 a) is a cause for concern, particularly given the key role that the SMEs have in driving the economic recovery. Although there are problems - correctly described by the Commission - in keeping payments at a high level in times of crisis, it should still be possible to avoid the drastic reduction in payments that has been proposed.

- Title 3: Competition

The proposed increase in administrative appropriations for competition policy - "Expenditure related to staff in active employment of 'Competition' area - (03 01 01) (heading 5) is highly welcome. Not only is competition crucial in times of crisis as a tool for crisis management. The high number of State aid investigations that will have to be dealt with during 2011 also justifies the increase of resources.

- Title 12: Internal Market

The new financial supervisory authorities - the European Banking Authority (EBA) (12 04 02 01 and 12 04 02 02) (sub-heading 1 a), the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) (12 04 03 01 and 12 04 03 02) (sub-heading 1 a) and the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) (12 04 04 01 and 12 04 04 02) (sub-heading 1 a)- will be instrumental for ensuring the financial stability in the EU. Well-functioning authorities will be a key to making legislative reforms in the European financial sector work during 2011 and beyond. It is therefore crucial that these authorities are adequately financed.

Should the legislator decide to entrust these with increased tasks compared to what was originally proposed by the Commission, the allocation of additional resources must be adapted accordingly.

- Title 14: Taxation and Customs Union

The proposed increase for the programme "Fiscalis 2013" (14 05 03) (sub-heading 1 a) is very welcome, as its objectives of enhancing the fight against tax fraud and improving administrative procedures and practices to the benefit of administrations and business within the EU should improve tax collection and therefore increase the Member State's revenues during the crisis.

For the same reason, it is also essential that "Good Governance in the Tax Area" (14 03 04) (heading 4) is promoted.

- Title 17: Health and consumer protection

Stable and transparent financial markets are a precondition for economic recovery and long-term growth. The training of consumer advisers is an appropriate measure in this context. Well-informed consumers will demand more openness and make sure that financial mismanagement is exposed and stopped. Consequently, the pilot project "Transparency and Stability in the Financial Markets" (17 02 04) (sub-heading 1 a) should be highly prioritised and get adequate funding.

- Title 24: Fight against Fraud

The trade in counterfeited products contributes to a decrease of the activities of undertakings producing the original goods and leads to job loss. Counterfeited goods are also often dangerous for the consumers, as their level of quality control is usually very low.

Given the strong increase in counterfeited products and the consequent job losses occurred, the proposed increase which does not compensate for the inflation rate for "Operational Programmes in the Fight against Fraud" (24 02 01) (sub-heading 1 a) is not acceptable. This appropriation is intended to cover actions or activities organised, namely, in the framework of the Hercules II programme to promote activities in the field of the protection of the Union’s financial interests, including in the field of the prevention of and the fight against cigarette smuggling and counterfeiting.

- Title 29: Statistics

The turbulence in the Eurozone has demonstrated the vital importance of having access to reliable data on financial markets and public finances. The proposed increase in "Expenditure related to staff in active employment of 'Statistics' policy area" (29 01 01) (heading 5) is a positive step, but more should be done in this area. The quality of European statistics needs to be taken to a higher level, including a greater role given to Eurostat, and additional resources will have to be allocated in order to make that happen. The Commission has clearly declared that the intention is to give high priority to the policy field of statistics. This intention should be better reflected in the Budget 2011.

In line with this, the very modest - again below the rate of inflation - increase in appropriations for the Programme for the "Modernisation of European Enterprise and Trade Statistics (MEETS)" (29 02 04) (sub-heading 1 a) is deemed to be too small. More resources are needed.

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:

1.   Considers that the ceiling of subheading 1a for the 2011 budget (as well as for 2012 and 2013) should be increased in order to create a sufficient margin for manoeuvre in a crucial policy area in times of crisis;

2.   Stresses that new needs to be financed under subheading 1a should not financially prejudice existing programmes and actions;

3.   Emphasises that the new financial supervisory authorities must be adequately financed and that additional tasks entrusted to them must be accompanied by the corresponding allocation of resources;

4.   Stresses that the quality of EU statistics has to be improved and that resources in excess of the proposed increases will have to be allocated to achieve this goal;

5.   Calls for the commitment and payment appropriations for the "Coordination and Surveillance of the Economic and Monetary Union" to be increased, not decreased;

6.   Favours an increase in resources to fight tax fraud and ensure good governance in the field of taxation;

7.   Welcomes the increase in staff resources for competition policy, particularly given the very high number of State aid investigations expected;

8.   Calls for two crucial initiatives - the preparatory action "Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs" and the pilot project "Transparency and Stability in the Financial Markets" - to be highly prioritised in the budget discussions;

9.   Stresses that the drastic reduction in payments proposed for "Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme - Entrepreneurship and Innovation Programme" should be reconsidered;

10. Stresses that the financing of the "Operational Programmes in the Fight against Fraud" must be prioritised in view of the current economic situation and when considering the considerable increase in these illegal activities;

11. Considers that, in the light of the fiscal constraints of many Member States, the Commission should provide a more detailed justification of proposed programmes and identifiable actions, especially where these require new budget lines.

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	6.9.2010
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	30 3 0
Members present for the final vote	Burkhard Balz, Sharon Bowles, Udo Bullmann, Pascal Canfin, Nikolaos Chountis, George Sabin Cutaş, Leonardo Domenici, Derk Jan Eppink, Diogo Feio, Elisa Ferreira, Jean-Paul Gauzès, Sylvie Goulard, Liem Hoang Ngoc, Othmar Karas, Jürgen Klute, Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou, Hans-Peter Martin, Ivari Padar, Alfredo Pallone, Antolín Sánchez Presedo, Olle Schmidt, Edward Scicluna, Peter Simon, Peter Skinner, Theodor Dumitru Stolojan, Kay Swinburne, Marianne Thyssen, Ramon Tremosa i Balcells
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Sophie Auconie, Sari Essayah, Philippe Lamberts, Olle Ludvigsson, Andreas Schwab

OPINION of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (14.9.2010)

for the Committee on Budgets

on the Parliament's position on the 2011 budget as modified by the Council - All sections
(2010/2001(BUD))

Rapporteur: Pervenche Berès

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Employment and Social Affairs calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:

A. whereas the aim of the Union’s 2011 budget is to build a future beyond the financial, economic, and social crisis,

B.  whereas the overall unemployment rate in the Union is 10% and the youth unemployment rate is 20%,

C.  whereas even before the crisis more than 84 million people, in other words 17% of the EU population, were faced with the risk of poverty,

1.  Notes that payments have been increased by 6.9% under sub-heading 1a and by 16.9% under sub-heading 1b in order to bolster competitiveness and cohesion with a view to promoting growth and employment in the Member States, thus benefiting job creation and social inclusion projects;

2.  Deplores the fact that only 1.4% of the appropriations under sub-heading 1a has been set aside to implement the agenda for a social policy designed to facilitate the transition to a post-crisis economy;

3.  Points out that the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund has an important role to play in the training of workers made redundant as a result of the crisis and hence in helping them to re-enter the labour market;

4.  Notes the increase in payment appropriations for the European Social Fund; sees this as the result of the recent reforms, but takes the view that further, more radical reforms are needed;

5.  Questions the substantial reduction in payment appropriations for the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training, a decision at odds with the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy, which lays emphasis on lifelong learning and on developing workers’ skills as the most effective way to tackle unemployment;

6.  Deplores, against the background of the large-scale restructuring of firms and mass redundancies, the failure to increase appropriations against the budget headings covering EURES (the European job mobility portal) and industrial relations and social dialogue; points to the need to boost the means of facilitating a return to work and to the important role that the social partners have to play in devising inclusive solutions;

7.  Welcomes the flagship initiative ‘Youth on the move’, which aims to enhance the performance of education systems and enable young people to enter the labour market more easily; points out that support for young people undergoing training or seeking a job is one of the priorities for the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs as regards the 2011 budget; considers promoting mobility to be an important aspect within the body of measures established under the Structural Funds and the PROGRESS programme with a view to lowering the youth unemployment rate, but points out that mobility cannot be the only solution to unemployment; supports the launch of a pilot project entitled ‘Your first EURES job’ as a means of providing young people with the funding they need to be mobile, thus increasing their chances of finding a job;

8.  Proposes that the margins should be used to increase funding for the PROGRESS programme, as agreed with the Council and Commission during the negotiations on the European Microfinance Facility;

9.  Points to the need to continue the studies and actions on the living conditions of posted workers, bearing in mind the current upward migration trend;

10. Proposes a pilot project to improve the health, well-being and safety at work of older workers and in that way respond to the challenges arising in the working lives of workers and employers on account of the population trend;

11. Proposes the continuation of the "pilot project to encourage conversion of precarious work into work with rights", this being crucial wherever such rights are at stake;

12. Proposes the continuation of the pilot projects within its area of responsibility adopted during the 2010 budget procedure.

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	13.9.2010
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	35 0 2
Members present for the final vote	Regina Bastos, Edit Bauer, Jean-Luc Bennahmias, Pervenche Berès, Milan Cabrnoch, David Casa, Alejandro Cercas, Ole Christensen, Marije Cornelissen, George Sabin Cutaş, Tadeusz Cymański, Frédéric Daerden, Proinsias De Rossa, Frank Engel, Sari Essayah, Richard Falbr, Ilda Figueiredo, Pascale Gruny, Marian Harkin, Nadja Hirsch, Liisa Jaakonsaari, Danuta Jazłowiecka, Martin Kastler, Jean Lambert, Olle Ludvigsson, Elisabeth Morin-Chartier, Csaba Őry, Siiri Oviir, Konstantinos Poupakis, Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska, Jutta Steinruck, Traian Ungureanu
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Georges Bach, Raffaele Baldassarre, Silvia Costa, Richard Howitt, Ria Oomen-Ruijten, Emilie Turunen

OPINION of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (22.9.2010)

for the Committee on Budgets

on Parliament's position on the 2011 Draft Budget as modified by the Council - Section III - Commission
(2010/2001(BUD))

Rapporteur: Jutta Haug

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:

1.  Notes that the fight against climate change and the efficient use of natural resources are two priorities set out in the Europe 2020 strategy, and notes that the priority on climate action was also translated into the creation of a specific Directorate General dedicated to climate policy, mitigation and adaptation; considers nevertheless the fight against climate change as a horizontal priority in EU policies; notes that mainstreaming of adaptation to climate change in the EU budget is now a pending priority and recommends that special attention should be paid to relevant pilot projects and preparatory actions;

2.  Takes note of the change in the heading of Title 07 to ‘Environment and climate action’; welcomes the creation of specific budget chapters for Climate Action (07 11, 07 12 and 07 13) and observes the increase in appropriations proposed for the implementation of EU policy and legislation on climate action;

3.  Welcomes the increase of the overall level of appropriations of the LIFE+ to EUR 333,5 million which represent an increase of 8,68% compared to 2010 budget levels and notes that this increase will finance an increase in the level of resources available for projects in all policy areas, including climate, an increase of 60 % of the resources available to support measures undertaken by the Commission in support of climate policy and legislation as well as a sustained level of support for policy measures on the environment;

4.  With regard to the ambitious objectives set out in the EU 2020 strategy related to climate change, there is a need for reinforced measures to be taken among which an increase in LIFE+ appropriations and in particular an emphasis on waste wood valorisation for the production of energy and on solar energy in order to preserve natural resources;

5.  Takes note that following the reorganisation of certain activities and services under the new Commission, the budget nomenclature also had to be adapted, in particular following the transfer of civil protection under the responsibility of DG ECHO;

6.  Stresses again the need to raise public awareness of the harmful effects of tobacco consumption, including passive smoking, and is concerned that the Community Tobacco Fund which grants financial support to information and education projects will come to an end in 2010; requests a new legal base to continue this successful awareness-raising instrument including a focus on the exposure of children to the harmful effects of tobacco consumption and calls on the Commission, i.e. DG AGRI and DG SANCO, to find a satisfactory solution to continue the campaign in the transitional period;

7.  Is convinced that the financial programming 2011-2013 for the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) is too optimistic and considers the self-financing of this agency in 2011 as very unrealistic; points out that the anticipated fee income in 2011 is based on assessments carried out in 2006; asks for the setting-up of precautionary measures which apply in the case of need;

8.  Is aware that in the field of biocides legislation additional funds must be made available to the ECHA if preparatory tasks are necessary for the future implementation of additional tasks within the scope of ECHA;

9.  Notes that the EU contribution to the European Medicines Agency (EMEA) has decreased over the years despite the fact that the EU legislator has been assigning additional public health issues to the agency that should be financed by EU subsidies; notes further that, as a consequence, more and more public health activities have to be cross-subsidised by fee income with the result that public health-related activities will need to be reduced as EMEA needs to cover its fee related activities as a priority; is therefore worried about the Commission's approach to include EMEA's assigned revenues again in the calculation of the draft budget foreseen for EMEA;

10. Reaffirms EMEA's legal obligation to process all medical applications that arrive within a given timeframe; notes that, as a consequence, more applications not only leads to more fees but also triggers the requirement to process these applications by more staff; supports therefore EMEA's request for 48 temporary agents as specialised scientific staff with professional experience with budgetary neutrality for the EU budget as the posts are solely financed by fees;

11. Expresses its concern about the planned decrease in commitment appropriations for public health, veterinary and phytosanitary measures to EUR 340 million, and stresses the need to remain vigilant with regard to animal disease eradication; emphasises the importance of measures to combat the proliferation of insect pests (such as the red palm weevil, the pine wood nematode, the citrus longhorn beetle and Diabrotica);

12. Notes the Commission's (DG SANCO) intended deadline to comply with Article 45 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council which called for a consultation paper on the feasibility and advisability of European legislation on fees for the European Food Safety Authority by March 2005; recalls in this context that an amount was put in reserve on the same issue in the 2010 budget.

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

General Background

The 2011 budgetary procedure is the first under the Lisbon Treaty and will be structured in a single reading to be closed with an agreement with the other branch of the budgetary authority during the conciliation procedure on all expenditure.

The total for the draft budget (DB) for 2011 is EUR 142 576.4 million in commitment appropriations (CA) and EUR 130 147.2 million in payment appropriations (PA), leaving therefore a margin of EUR 1 224.4 million in CA and EUR 4 417.8 billion in PA. Amounts which represent respectively 1.15% and 1.05% of the EU's forecast GNI for 2011.

Individual budgets under the competence of the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety - Environment

Climate Change

The fight against Climate change and the efficient use of natural resources are two of the main priorities of EU strategy for 2020. The priority on climate action was also translated into the creation of a specific Directorate General dedicated to climate policy (mitigation and adaptation) - DG Climate Action (hereafter ‘DG CLIMA’) in February 2010.

The high priority given to both Environment and Climate Action is also translated into the level of appropriations proposed under the LIFE + programme and corresponding budget lines.

From a level of appropriations of EUR 306,855 million Euros in 2010, the Commission is proposing to increase the overall level of appropriations of the LIFE + programme to EUR 333,500 million, i.e. an increase of 8,68 % compared to 2010 budget levels. This also represents an increase of 7,4 million Euros above initial financial programming of the programme, which the Commission is also proposing to reflect in 2012 and 2013 levels of appropriations.

This increase will in particular finance:

- An increase in the level of resources available for projects in all policy areas, including climate, under budget line 07 03 07 (from 240 million Euros in 2010 to 260,13 million Euros under 2011 DB) ;

- An increase of 60 % of the resources available to support measures undertaken by the Commission in support of Climate policy and legislation (increase of 7,2 million Euros between 2010 and 2011) ;

- A sustained level of support to NGOs and policy support measures to Environment, taking into account the increased requirements as regards administrative support to selection, monitoring & dissemination of project results in line with the recommendations of the Court of Auditors and the European Parliament in the context of the 2008 Discharge (promotion of project sustainability).

Taking into account these elements, the budget nomenclature adopted for the 2011 DB is based on the following as regards LIFE + :

- Support for projects and NGOs will remain under the management of DG ENV due to the requirements of the legal base (it is not possible to determine ‘a priori’ the amount of funding for climate change priorities); - budget lines 07 01 04 01 and 07 03 07 ;

- Measures undertaken by the Commission in support of Environmental policy / legislation development and implementation (including support to selection : monitoring : audit : evaluation of projects) also remain under Chapter 07 03 – budget lines 07 01 04 01 and 07 03 07 ;

- Specific budget lines created for support to measures undertaken by the Commission in support of Climate Action policy / legislation development and implementation (including awareness-raising, publications, and IT systems CITL and ODS) under specific budget lines – budget lines 07 01 04 05 and 07 12 01.

Life +

The Commission financing decision for expenditure under the 2010 budget was adopted in October 2009.

The call for proposals was published on 04 May 2010, covering a total amount of EUR 240.000.000. Project proposals should be sent to the relevant national authority no later than 01 September 2010. Thereafter, national authorities will send project proposals on to the European Commission by 04 October 2010, and the Commission will check the outline projects against the LIFE+ eligibility criteria and will assess proposals on the basis of the LIFE+ selection and award criteria. Final announcement of the projects chosen for funding is expected in July/August 2011, with projects starting at the earliest on 1 September 2011.

The call for proposals is covered by a global commitment made in accordance with article 76 FR / 92 IR for the corresponding amount, thus allowing the grant agreements with beneficiaries to be signed by the end of 2011.

Available 2010 commitment appropriations will therefore be used in full.

The level of payment appropriations (167 million) is expected to be used in full.

European Environment Agency

An increase of 2 % (basically the annual deflator) is proposed for the European Environment Agency subsidy, with :

- The increase of the establishment plan by one post to support the Agency’s role in the GMES ;

- A re-balancing of the subsidy towards the subsidy to Titles 1&2 to support the Agency’s mid-term strategy of building strong in-house expertise.

As the 2009 budgetary outturn of the EEA shows a surplus of EUR 851.673 which has been used as assigned revenue by the European Commission to establish the Draft Budget for the EEA as it was requested by the Budgetary Authority for non-fee financed agencies.

The amount of appropriations requested under the 2011 DB is therefore EUR 35.105.327, and the total amount of EU subsidy taking into account assigned revenue recovered from 2009 surplus EUR 35.957.000.

Global environmental affairs

Since 2007, external action in the area of environment is covered by external actions instruments under policy area 21 (Development), and in particular through the ENRTP (Thematic programme on environment and sustainable management of natural resources including energy, Chapter 21 04 of the DB).

The only appropriations remaining under Title 07 are those dedicated to obligatory contributions to Multilateral Environmental Agreements to which the Community is a party, such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change & Kyoto Protocol, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), etc… The proposed budgetary allocation for 2011 remains unchanged from 2010 levels (EUR 3.000.000). In terms of budget nomenclature, it is split between Chapters 07 02 (Global Environmental Affairs) and a new Chapter 07 11 (Global Climate Action Affairs), the latter covering obligatory subscriptions to international Agreements in the area of Climate and Ozone Depleting substances (UNFCCC & Kyoto protocol, Vienna Convention & Montreal Protocol).

It should be noted that, following the Copenhagen Accord, the Commission is proposing a substantial increase in the resources of the Thematic programme on environment and sustainable management of natural resources including energy (budget line 21 04 01), covering in particular :

- In line with the pledge made under the Copenhagen accord, an amount of EUR 50 million to cover mitigation and adaptation actions in developing countries ;

- An additional 15 million Euros to support the Global Climate Change Alliance with least developed countries.

Individual budgets under the competence of the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety - Public Health and Food Safety

Public Health

The Health Programme (17 03 06) with EUR 45.7 million in commitment appropriations in 2010 and EUR 47.06 million proposed for 2011 aims to complement national policies, and to encourage co-operation between Member States, accession countries and international organisations.

Its three main objectives are to improve citizens' health security, to improve health, and to generate and disseminate health information and knowledge. The slight increase is in line with the Financial Programming.

The overall amount foreseen for Public Health (17 03) of EUR 205.11 million represents a decrease of EUR 15.77 million compared to Budget 2010. The decrease is mainly related to the end of the Regulation foreseeing the financing of the Tobacco Fund -the information campaign against smoking, by the tobacco producers.

European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control

The budget of ECDC was decreased by EUR 3.49 million, a consequence for not using all its credits during the previous years. Those unused credits have been utilized as assigned revenue by the European Commission to establish the Draft Budget for the Agency.

European Medicines Agency

EMA's EU contribution amounts to EUR 38.42 million of which EUR 5.477 million are assigned revenues. Again, Commission defies Parliament's vote regarding the handling of assigned revenues of fee depending agencies.

Further, it needs to be noted that additional appropriations might be necessary in 2011 for the Pharmaceutical Package currently discussed in the European Parliament and Council.

Food and Feed Safety and Veterinary measures

In accordance with the “stable-to-table” approach to food and feed safety this action aims at bringing improvements all along the food chain. This sector is completely harmonised at EU level. However, EUR 340.3 million are proposed in Chapter 17 04 (Food and Feed Safety) in 2011compared to EUR 354.9 million in 2010.

This decrease is mainly related to the animal diseases eradication measures (EUR 15 million) and to the emergency  fund measures (EUR 10 million). Concerning the animal diseases eradication measures, this is due to the slow down of the vaccination and other measures against the blue tongue disease. The decrease of the credits for the emergency funds measures is a result of the uncertainty of the execution, as it depends on diseases outbreaks. Should there be a sudden increased need because of an outbreak, credits would be rapidly made available. 

An increase of 4 M€ has been proposed for the new measures in the area of Feed and Food control to finance the changes in the activities of the EU Reference Laboratories and a possible creation of an additional laboratory for bee health.

Concerning Plant health measures a slight increase has been proposed (EUR 0.45 million). The additional resources are necessary to allow the Commission to fulfil the new tasks and obligations assigned to it by the coming into effect of the new Regulation 1107/2009 on Plant Protection Products. These new tasks and obligations complement the continuing plant health administrative activities which have been funded from this line in previous years.

European Food Safety Agency

The planned delivery date of EFSA’s Final Seat is in March 2011 and the move of EFSA staff to the new location should therefore presumably take place before the end of the year. Whereas the cost of occupying the building are covered by budget allocations already in place, the actual costs to fit the premises, to manage the transition, to cover double renting during a three months transition period, to relocate, to set up common facilities and some additional equipments an additional amount of EUR 3.29 million has been proposed to EFSA's budget.

Other budget lines in the remit of ENVI

European Chemicals Agency (ECHA)

Following the proposal of the Commission for a Regulation concerning the placing on the market and use of biocidal products (COM(2009)267) which foresees a number of tasks relating to active substance evaluation and authorisation from 2013 and 2014 onwards, the Commission is proposing the creation of the necessary budget lines for the payment of a subsidy as soon as the Regulation is adopted (budget lines 07 03 60 01 and 07 03 60 02). However, no appropriations are foreseen, in order to allow the Agency to carry out the necessary preparation of its new tasks throughout the end of 2011 and 2012.

Pilot Projects and Preparatory Actions

Under the 2011 Draft Budget the Commission is proposing:

- The creation of a new preparatory action ‘mainstreaming Climate Action and Adaptation’ (budget line 07 03 13) ;

- The prolongation of the preparatory action ‘Environmental monitoring of the Black Sea Basin and a Common European framework programme for development of the Black Sea region (budget line 07 02 04).

9 pilot projects and preparatory actions were voted in the 2010 budget, of which 8 are implemented by DG ENV and 1 by DG SANCO.

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	6.9.2010
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	58 1 0
Members present for the final vote	János Áder, Kriton Arsenis, Paolo Bartolozzi, Sandrine Bélier, Sergio Berlato, Milan Cabrnoch, Nessa Childers, Chris Davies, Bairbre de Brún, Anne Delvaux, Bas Eickhout, Edite Estrela, Karl-Heinz Florenz, Elisabetta Gardini, Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, Françoise Grossetête, Satu Hassi, Jolanta Emilia Hibner, Dan Jørgensen, Karin Kadenbach, Holger Krahmer, Jo Leinen, Corinne Lepage, Peter Liese, Kartika Tamara Liotard, Linda McAvan, Radvilė Morkūnaitė-Mikulėnienė, Miroslav Ouzký, Antonyia Parvanova, Andres Perello Rodriguez, Sirpa Pietikäinen, Mario Pirillo, Pavel Poc, Vittorio Prodi, Oreste Rossi, Daciana Octavia Sârbu, Richard Seeber, Theodoros Skylakakis, Catherine Soullie, Salvatore Tatarella, Anja Weisgerber, Glenis Willmott, Sabine Wils, Marina Yannakoudakis
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Margrete Auken, Christofer Fjellner, Matthias Groote, Lucas Hartong, Jutta Haug, Romana Jordan Cizelj, Judith A. Merkies, Rovana Plumb, Giancarlo Scottà, Bart Staes, Struan Stevenson, Giommaria Uggias, Thomas Ulmer, Marita Ulvskog, Peter van Dalen

OPINION of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (2.9.2010)

for the Committee on Budgets

on Parliament's position on the 2011 Draft Budget as modified by the Council - All sections
(2010/2001(BUD))

Rapporteur: Heide Rühle

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:

1.  Notes that the responsibility of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection in the budget procedure covers budget lines in titles 2 (Enterprise), 12 (Internal market), 14 (Taxation and customs union) and 17 (Health and consumer protection);

2.  Points out the importance of the budgetary allocation in chapter 02 03 of the Commission's draft budget, believing that a better functioning internal market can be achieved by improvements in the fields of notification and certification; is furthermore of the opinion that the budgetary allocation in the fields of standardisation and approximation of legislation is justified, as these measures will facilitate the operation and competitiveness of enterprises, while providing European consumers with safer products and services;

3.  Welcomes the slight increase for budget line 12 02 01 in the Commission's draft budget, which it deems necessary due to the benefits of the single market for the EU economy as a whole, in particular in times of economic downturn; calls on the Commission, therefore, to bring forward proposals on how to complete the single market based on sound market knowledge, economic analysis and the choice of appropriate instruments; emphasises in this context the importance of the services sector for the European economy and therefore considers the implementation of the Services Directive[1] a key priority; asks the Commission in addition to cooperate closely with the Member States and to develop an administrative culture of simpler regulation and effective problem solving; underlines the importance of training activities to assist officials and judges in correctly transposing, applying and enforcing single market rules;

4.   Deplores the non-allocation of money to budget line 12 02 02; considers the SOLVIT network an effective free-of-charge out-of-court dispute settlement mechanism which should be supported by the Commission's training and promotion activities in all Member States; asks the Member States to increase the human and financial resources allocated to this network; furthermore, supports the concept of Single Market Assistance Services through the creation of a single-entry webpage providing information and advice;

5.  Asks for the financing of a pilot project entitled 'Single Market Forum', an annual event which should take place once a year in the Member State holding the Council Presidency bringing together representatives of citizens, businesses and consumer organisations as well as representatives of the Member States and the EU institutions in order to establish a clear commitment to transposition, application and enforcement of single market legislation; considers that the aim of this event should be to tackle incorrect transposition, misapplication and lack of enforcement of single market legislation by improving coordination and better governance of the single market; considers that this event should become an important platform for exchanging best practices between stakeholders and for informing citizens of their rights in the single market; moreover, calls for the "top 20" concerns, challenges and opportunities for citizens and businesses, identified by the Commission, to be taken into consideration at this event; deems the creation of a working group necessary, to be composed of Members of the European Parliament and representatives of the Commission and the Council Presidency in office at the event, which should work out the details of the event;

6.  Considers the slight increase in the amount allocated to budget line 14 04 02 to the Customs 2013 Programme to be justified and appropriate in order to achieve the goals in this policy area, such as reinforcing security and protection of the external borders, supporting the fight against illicit trafficking and fraud and improving the efficiency of customs systems; supports the achievement of the Programme's goals by improving coordination and cooperation between Member States, promoting the exchange of best practices and know-how and monitoring the correct application of Union legislation; underlines the importance of training programmes for national customs officers;

7.  Deems the amount allocated to budget line 17 02 02 in the field of consumer policy to be justified and appropriate in order to achieve an internal market with safe products and services, as well as equal rights for all consumers; emphasises the importance of close cooperation between the Union, Member States and third countries, including the United States, China and India on more effective enforcement mechanisms in order to attain greater consumer confidence; urges the Commission to develop a knowledge base and training programmes in the area of market surveillance; furthermore considers common efforts in the area of consumer education, in particular regarding financial literacy, a priority; calls also on the Commission to support the functioning of the Consumer Protection Cooperation (CPC) Network in order to enable a more efficient use of the CPC cooperation mechanisms by the enforcement authorities in the field of consumer protection in the Member States; recalls that the European Consumer Centres Network needs appropriate funding in order to promote consumer confidence in the single market; points out the important role of consumer organisations for awareness-raising in the Union and advocates the financing of their projects; accordingly, calls for a prolongation of the TRACE Programme which empowers consumer organisations through training activities to build up strong and efficient organisations and networks;

8.  Underlines the importance of monitoring consumer markets through the consolidation of a scoreboard and related market studies based on the collection of data on consumer behaviour and the functioning of those markets; calls therefore for a further preparatory action entitled 'Monitoring measures in the field of consumer policy', which would allow for the continuation of existing surveys and studies and the financing of further market studies.

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	2.9.2010
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	26 0 2
Members present for the final vote	Pablo Arias Echeverría, Cristian Silviu Buşoi, Lara Comi, António Fernando Correia De Campos, Jürgen Creutzmann, Evelyne Gebhardt, Louis Grech, Małgorzata Handzlik, Malcolm Harbour, Eija-Riitta Korhola, Hans-Peter Mayer, Gianni Pittella, Mitro Repo, Robert Rochefort, Zuzana Roithová, Heide Rühle, Matteo Salvini, Christel Schaldemose, Andreas Schwab, Laurence J.A.J. Stassen, Catherine Stihler, Kyriacos Triantaphyllides, Bernadette Vergnaud, Barbara Weiler
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Sylvana Rapti, Catherine Soullie, Rafał Trzaskowski, Wim van de Camp

• [1]  Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market (OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 36).

OPINION of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (3.9.2010)

for the Committee on Budgets

on Parliament's position on the 2011 draft budget as modified by the Council: Section III - Commission
(2010/2001(BUD))

Rapporteur: Dominique Riquet

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Transport and Tourism calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:

1.  Points out that transport is of essential importance to the European economy, in that it ensures the cross-border mobility of persons, goods and knowledge; stresses that transport fosters equality and social mobility, in particular for young people, since it opens up opportunities for exchanges, in particular in the field of knowledge and training;

2.  Emphasises that financing transport should contribute to better integration of this sector leading to a more efficient society as far as the economy, safety, social interests and the environment are concerned;

3.  Regrets that the commitment appropriations proposed by the Commission in the draft budget constitute the minimum necessary to sustain momentum in the implementation of European Union policy and law in the fields of transport and tourism; takes the view that, with the Eyjafjallajökull volcano crisis having brought Europe to a complete standstill, the need is more pressing than ever to review the funding of the European transport sector, ensuring it has the resources needed to establish an alternative, complementary network that would prevent a repeat of such a situation, which jeopardises competitiveness and economic growth;

4.  Given the new budget procedure and the economic situation, acknowledges the need to identify political priorities; emphasises, nevertheless, the importance of avoiding a shortfall in payment appropriations and the need to adopt an amending budget if necessary;

5.  Recalls that, with a view to securing economic recovery in Europe, investment in transport, in particular the TEN-Ts, has a crucial role to play in driving forward growth and employment as well as in advancing Europe's economic and environmental interests; believes, accordingly, that, with a view to enabling the largest possible number of projects to be implemented, all possible funding mechanisms should be considered, including the creation of a European fund for transport, which should be integrated in the multi-annual financial framework;

6.  Attaches great importance to investment geared to ensuring that all modes of transport are safe;

7.  Stresses that there is great potential in the transport sector for action to combat climate change, and calls on the Commission to give priority to decarbonisation measures for all transport modes, based on the objectives of the Climate and Energy package, especially by encouraging co-modality between all modes of transport and by using more ITS technology;

8.  Takes the view that the EU budget contribution to the transport-related agencies should be commensurate with their additional responsibilities and with the political priority given to enhancing rail and air safety and to combating marine pollution following the serious incidents which have occurred recently;

9.  Points out the importance of ensuring equivalent and transparent rights for all passengers in all modes of transport; insists on the necessity of a single information and booking interface for all modes of transport, providing clear information on the journey and on passenger rights in order to facilitate freedom of movement;

10. Welcomes the fact that the Lisbon Treaty makes it possible for a multiannual tourism programme to be established; considers that, pending the establishment of such a programme, the existing preparatory actions should be continued and stepped up.

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

Introduction

2011 is the fifth financial year in the period covered by the 2007-2013 multiannual financial framework, the procedure for the mid-term review of which has still not got under way. For this financial year, a margin of EUR 50.1 million is available under heading 1a (Competitiveness for growth and employment) of the financial framework, which covers transport and tourism.

It is a financial year that is marked the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, against a background of economic crisis and budgetary rigour. The new Treaty substantially modifies the budget procedure, which now involves only one, possible followed by conciliation, and places Parliament on the same footing as the Council. Furthermore, tourism now comes fully within the EU sphere of competence, and this provides a legal basis for its funding.

The transport and tourism industries, which have been particularly hard hit by the economic crisis and account for more than 10% of GDP and over 20% of the EU's total carbon emissions, merit special attention during this budget procedure.

I. Transport budget

Title 6 (Mobility and transport)[1] of the Commission's budget contains all the budget lines relating to EU transport policy. The draft budget (DB) for the 2011 financial year drawn up by the Commission proposes a 10.5% increase in commitment appropriations (up from EUR 1 407.5 million in 2010 to EUR 1 555.4 million in 2011). However, it also provides for a 1.7% cut in payment appropriations, which fall from EUR 1 224.2 million in 2010 to EUR 1 203.1 million in 2011.

1) Administrative expenditure (line 06 01)

The Commission has made an effort to cut its administrative expenditure by EUR 2.4 million in order to be able to increase funding for the agencies[2].

The level of funding that is set for the TEN-T Agency in the DB would appear appropriate.

2) Agencies

The Commission stresses that, following the cuts made to heading 1a of the 2007-2013 multiannual financial framework in order to be able to provide funding for the Galileo programme, the three transport-related agencies are likely to face a large funding shortfall (put at EUR 20 million) in 2011, 2012 and 2013, despite the fact that their remit has been expanded over recent years.

– European Aviation Safety Agency (line 06 02 01)

The DB provides for an overall EU contribution of EUR 34.4 million in 2011. The EASA maintains that its own resources, which are put at a little more than EUR 92 million in 2011, will stabilise over the coming years.

The agency takes the view that the total EU contribution in 2011 should stand at EUR 37.7 million in order to fund the preparation and operational implementation in 2012‑2013 of the aviation packages adopted in 2008 and 2009[3].

– European Maritime Safety Agency (line 06 02 02)

The DB provides for an overall EU contribution of EUR 54.9 million in 2011. The agency considers that it needs EUR 56.6 million in commitment appropriations and EUR 57.6 million in payment appropriations in order to be able to meet the cost of scaling up the databases that it will be required to administer in 2011 (SafeSeaNet, THETIS, EQUASIS, etc.).

– European Railway Agency (line 06 02 08)

The DB provides for an overall EU contribution of EUR 25.3 million in 2011, while the agency considers that it requires EUR 27 million. Proper funding of the agency is essential to the development of major European programmes such as Safety, Interop and ERTMS and, thereby, to advances in interoperability and safety.

3) Marco Polo programme (lines 06 02 06 and 06 02 07)

The DB figures for the Marco Polo II programme – an increase of EUR 1.9 million in commitment appropriations and the same level of payment appropriations as in the previous year – would appear to be in line with current requirements. Although the programme has undergone a sharp slowdown as a result of the economic crisis, the take-up of appropriations should improve starting in 2010. However, a very close eye needs to be kept on how the programme develops.

4) Trans-European networks (line 06 03)

Although the DB keeps payment appropriations at the same level as in 2010, at EUR 900 million, a major effort is made as regards commitment appropriations (up 17.1% to EUR 1 228.2 million, as against EUR 1 048.8 million in 2010).

The priorities networks and, in particular, border crossings, are underfunded. Thought should be given to concerted action, above and beyond the specific TNT-T funding, to increase funding capacities in this area.

5) Support activities to the European transport policy and passenger rights (06 02 03)

The 2011 DB sets funding for these activities at much the same level as in 2010.

6) SESAR (lines 06 03 05 and 06 06 02 03)

Title 6 contains two separate lines for SESAR, with the two sources of funding being the framework research programme and the TEN-T programme.

The DB figures appear satisfactory. The funding is intended mainly to cover research into and development and validation of new ATM (air traffic management) systems.

7) Research related to transport (line 06 06)

The cut in commitment and payment appropriations provided for in the DB stems from the transfer of Galileo-related research expenditure to Title 2 (Enterprise) of the Commission's budget.

8) Pilot projects and preparatory actions

As pointed out by Vice-President Kallas and illustrated by the recent volcanic eruption, it would be useful to look into the introduction of an integrated European information and reservation system covering all passenger transport modes. The first step should be to set up a dedicated pilot project.

II. Tourism budget

Although it was brought fully within the EU sphere of competence by the Lisbon Treaty, tourism does not have its own budget in the DB. The Commission merely takes over the preparatory actions already existing in this area, which are set out in Title 2 (Enterprise) of the Commission's budget.

With a view to stepping up EU action in the tourism sector, the 'Social tourism' and 'Sustainable tourism' preparatory actions should be continued, and possibly stepped up, in 2011. Furthermore, the introduction of two new pilot projects – 'Industrial tourism' and 'European tourism and cultural heritage routes' – would provide a genuine boost to efforts to promote the cultural heritage of Europe's regions.

Concluding remarks

The above remarks are based on the content of the 2011 draft budget. We now await the Council's position, which will be adopted in mid-July. The rapporteur's main amendments will be made to that position. In particular, the rapporteur reserves the right to table amendments in any cases where the Council makes across-the-board, indiscriminate cuts which fail to take account of the requirements, the situation on the ground and Parliament's priorities for action in respect of individual budget lines.

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	2.9.2010
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	31 4 1
Members present for the final vote	Inés Ayala Sender, Georges Bach, Izaskun Bilbao Barandica, Antonio Cancian, Michael Cramer, Luis de Grandes Pascual, Christine De Veyrac, Saïd El Khadraoui, Carlo Fidanza, Knut Fleckenstein, Jacqueline Foster, Ville Itälä, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch, Georgios Koumoutsakos, Werner Kuhn, Bogusław Liberadzki, Eva Lichtenberger, Gesine Meissner, Olga Sehnalová, Brian Simpson, Dirk Sterckx, Keith Taylor, Silvia-Adriana Ţicău, Dominique Vlasto, Artur Zasada
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Philip Bradbourn, Anne E. Jensen, Bogdan Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz, Jan Mulder, Dominique Riquet, Anna Rosbach, Laurence J.A.J. Stassen, Nuno Teixeira, Oldřich Vlasák, Sabine Wils, Janusz Władysław Zemke

• [1]  In 2011, Title 6 covers transport alone, while in previous financial years it also covered energy.
• [2]  Where a figure is quoted without making a distinction between commitment and payment appropriations, it means that the appropriations are non-differentiated and for the same amount.
• [3]  Parliament and Council Regulations 216/2008 and 1108/2009, which extend the agency's remit to cover aviation safety at airports, air traffic management and air navigation services. The new tasks include regulation and standardisation inspections.

OPINION of the Committee on Regional Development (9.9.2010)

for the Committee on Budgets

on Parliament's position on the 2011 Draft Budget as modified by the Council - Section III - Commission
(2010/2001(BUD))

Rapporteur: László Surján

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

Opening remarks:

In face of the financial crisis and the ongoing economic downturn, the Commission, with Parliament's support, took measures to accelerate regional development spending in the context of the Union's strategy for effective economic recovery. This is reflected in the Draft Budget for 2011 which sees commitment appropriations increase by 3.2% and payment appropriations increase by 16,9 %, to EUR 42 540,8 million. In this context the Commission tells us that the hoped for acceleration in spending have resulted in execution on this line reaching 57% in 2010. This coupled with the fact that programmes on the ground have now reached cruising speed, may be seen to be a success.

Reinstating the Draft Budget:

In making its budgetary provisions therefore, the European Commission has assessed budgetary needs taking into account the decisions of the European Council of 2005, the provisions of the financial perspective 2007-2013 and the IAA, the amounts due under projects closing down under the 2000-2006 programming period, the likely calls for advance payment for the current period. Your rapporteur holds the view that the only institution which has the available information to have an overview of the budgetary needs of all European Regions is the Commission. Consequently he proposes that any reductions proposed by the Council be cancelled and that the sums initially proposed by the Commission in the Draft budget, be reinstated.

Share-out of resources between funds:

The share-out between the different funds is as follows:

€ ERDF 25.6 billion, Cohesion fund € 7.7 billion and €9 billion for ESF. Your rapporteur would take this opportunity of stressing the importance of the ESF in the context of regional economic recovery representing as it does more than 20% of available resources. The fund is and must remain a central tool to be used by both business and local and regional authorities to manage the dynamic changes to economic activity inherent in a modern economy. Thus it must be used to establish a fair balance between the need for flexibility for the business community and the need for job security and career development and training of the employee. It is, in your rapporteur's view, and indispensible element in all place based economic strategies.

European Economic recovery and progress towards a cleaner more sustainable economy:

The European economic recovery plan is not a string of panic measures taken in face of an unprecedented global financial crisis. It is closely related to the Union's proposed new economic strategy with its avowed aims of building a smart, sustainable and inclusive economy delivering high levels of employment, productivity and social cohesion. This we can see € 1billion to finance on the ground implementation of energy projects agreed in 2009 and 2010 in the area of carbon capture and storage, offshore wind energy and energy infrastructure as well as € 500 million to fund IT broadband projects in rural areas.

Progress on RAL

The European Commission tells us that over the year 2009-10 RAL increased by 16.8% to reach € 14.2 billion. The most significant increase was for the ERDF which saw RAL increase to € 9.8billion and the highest relative increase to Cross border cooperation (67.6%).

In multi-annual financial programming, the existence of outstanding commitments which remain to be paid once the conditions for payments have been fulfilled is a normal occurrence. However the 67.6% increase in RAL related to Cross border cooperation raises concern and consequently your rapporteur asks the Commission to clarify the reasons for this large increase.

Main policy out puts for 2011:

In the list of expected policy outputs published by the European Commission of particular importance is the alignment of the policy with the Europe 2020 vision in terms of promoting smart, cleaner and competitive growth of regional economies. In this respect the Commission's aim to raise awareness and ownership of the EU 2020 objectives by national and regional authorities is particularly significant. Of equal importance is the accent the Commission puts on our policy's central role in the Union's crisis exit strategy.

Over the 2009-2010 period, the Commission with Parliament's enthusiastic support has developed the concept of macro-regions. Of particular importance in 2011 will be the development of these macro-regions emphasis being put on the Baltic Sea strategy in all its aspects including the pilot project to facilitate association with Russia and the proper implementation of the Danube strategy.

Pilot projects:

This year committee Members have tabled a large number of potential pilot projects (16 a number of which deal with specific needs of the Danube Macro-region including one which I am presenting in this opinion. and which I hope the committee will support.

The title of the pilot project I wish to submit is:

Towards a common regional identity and reconciliation of nations in the Danube macro-region and it proposes that:

Training programs, seminars for youth shall be organized with the aim of emphasizing the common regional identity of the nations living in the Danube macro-region that programs via civic education and opportunities of cultural exchange will contribute to a progressive, sustainable European future oriented dimension of coexistence. The pilot project thus shall promote social and economic stability in the regions concerned, including notably actions to promote cohesion between communities and highlight the added value of transnational cooperation.

The eligible area shall be the Danube macro-region and the neighbouring countries in line with the European neighbourhood policy. The programs eligible for funds shall involve participants from at least 3 Member States from the region.

Conclusion:

In the present unparalleled global economic conditions the resources made available to the policy area which contributes the most to the real economy will be decisive as to its efficacy and its ability to stimulate innovation and assist both national and local economies to succeed in their transformation into clean sustainable knowledge based inclusive economies. In these conditions it is normal that we should wish to influence progress with a number of new ideas which are the subject of all the proposed Pilot projects. Your rapporteur therefore request that the Commission implement all the pilot projects the committee decides to support.

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Regional Development calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:

1.   Takes the view that the amounts for regional policy entered in the Draft budget (DB) correspond to the needs of the Union in its efforts to reduce regional disparities and therefore calls for all budget lines of subheading 1b to be maintained or, where necessary, restored;

2.   Takes note of the modification of the financial programming carried out for the years 2011 to 2013 in order to take account of point 17 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management[1] (IIA);

3.   Welcomes the increase in commitment appropriations by 3,2 % to EUR 50 970 100 000, leaving a margin of EUR 16,9 million and the increase in payment appropriations by 16,9 %, to EUR 42 540 800 000, and expects that these will effectively contribute to economic recovery in Europe and the smooth transformation of the economy in line with the objectives of the EU 2020 Strategy. Regrets, however, the low level of the margin in subheading 1b of EUR 16,9 million;

4.   Expresses concern at the low take-up rate of Structural Funds and calls on the Commission to analyze in depth the reasons, country by country and region by region, for this; considers that achieving an optimum take-up of funds should be a political priority, particularly in the run-up to the next budget planning period;

5.   Calls on the Commission to support and implement all the pilot projects proposed by the Committee on Regional Development;

6.   Calls for further simplification and clarification of regional policy practices and administration, so that all the appropriations set aside for regional development can be used more effectively and in a more result-oriented way, in order to achieve the EU 2020 objectives;

7.   Calls on the Commission to undertake a pilot project aiming at promoting a common regional identity and reconciliation of nations, e.g. in the Danube macro-region, and drawing lessons from these experiences that can be taken into account in other potential macro-regions; considers that these pilot projects should consist of training programmes, seminars organised for young people with a view to fostering opportunities for cultural exchange and contributing to a progressive, sustainable, European, future-oriented dimension of coexistence; considers that this would promote social and economic stability in the regions concerned.

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	6.9.2010
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	34 1 4
Members present for the final vote	François Alfonsi, Charalampos Angourakis, Sophie Auconie, Catherine Bearder, Victor Boştinaru, Zuzana Brzobohatá, John Bufton, Alain Cadec, Salvatore Caronna, Tamás Deutsch, Rosa Estaràs Ferragut, Danuta Maria Hübner, Filiz Hakaeva Hyusmenova, Seán Kelly, Constanze Angela Krehl, Ramona Nicole Mănescu, Riikka Manner, Iosif Matula, Erminia Mazzoni, Lambert van Nistelrooij, Franz Obermayr, Jan Olbrycht, Wojciech Michał Olejniczak, Markus Pieper, Tomasz Piotr Poręba, Georgios Stavrakakis, Csanád Szegedi, Nuno Teixeira, Oldřich Vlasák, Kerstin Westphal
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Karima Delli, Pat the Cope Gallagher, Ivars Godmanis, Catherine Grèze, Lena Kolarska-Bobińska, Veronica Lope Fontagné, Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid, Elisabeth Schroedter, Evžen Tošenovský

• [1]  OJ C 139, 14.6.2006, p. 1.

OPINION of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (29.9.2010)

for the Committee on Budgets

on Parliament's position on the 2011 Draft Budget as modified by the Council - All sections
(2010/2001(BUD))

Rapporteur: Mairead McGuinness

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:

1.  Rejects the Council's amendments to the 2011 Draft budget; considers that the Commission's estimates of budgetary needs are more realistic than the Council's proposals, especially with regard to accounting clearance of previous years; insists therefore on reinstating the figures of the 2011 Draft budget;

2.  Expresses concern in relation to the Commission's optimistic assumptions regarding developments in agricultural markets in 2011; recalls the severe volatility in dairy markets in 2009; stresses the need for uncomplicated access to funding should the markets experience similar volatility in the course of 2011; proposes therefore to allocate funds to reserves within heading 2; considers that such 'ring-fencing' of funds is essential to ensure a rapid response to any market difficulties in the main agricultural commodity markets;

3.  Recognises that the School Fruit Scheme and the School Milk Scheme are important programmes in terms of encouraging healthy diets amongst children; welcomes the Commission's proposed increase in funding for the School Fruit Scheme; proposes adding an additional EUR 10 000 000 to that budget line; proposes an increase in funding for the School Milk Scheme of EUR 10 000 000;

4.  Stresses the need for a permanent approach for dealing with price volatility within agricultural markets; recognises the benefit of the EUR 300 000 000 in exceptional funding for the dairy sector that was provided for in the 2010 EU budget; stresses that this was a 'one-off' measure; proposes therefore to create a new budget line to act as a 'milk fund' in order to provide support for modernisation, diversification and restructuring, to improve marketing and support producer organisations;

5.  Stresses the need for improved channels of communication between the institutions with regard to the budget procedure; expresses disappointment at the lack of sufficient communication from the Council with regard to its proposed amendments to the 2011 Draft budget; regrets the fact that Members of the European Parliament first learned of those proposed amendments from the press; calls for a more effective system of communication in future budget procedures.

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	29.9.2010
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	28 1 0
Members present for the final vote	John Stuart Agnew, Richard Ashworth, Liam Aylward, Christophe Béchu, Luis Manuel Capoulas Santos, Michel Dantin, Paolo De Castro, Albert Deß, Herbert Dorfmann, Lorenzo Fontana, Iratxe García Pérez, Béla Glattfelder, Martin Häusling, Esther Herranz García, Peter Jahr, Elisabeth Jeggle, George Lyon, Mairead McGuinness, James Nicholson, Georgios Papastamkos, Marit Paulsen, Alfreds Rubiks, Czesław Adam Siekierski, Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris, Alyn Smith, Csaba Sándor Tabajdi, Marc Tarabella
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Marian Harkin, Christa Klaß

OPINION of the Committee on Fisheries (2.9.2010)

for the Committee on Budgets

on Parliament's position on the 2011 draft budget as modified by the Council - Section III - Commission
(2010/2001(BUD))

Rapporteur for the opinion: Ulrike Rodust

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

In 2011, Parliament's work will focus on discussing the forthcoming proposals for reform of the common fisheries policy (CFP), including reform of the European Fisheries Fund (EFF). Bringing funding allocation into line with the likely shifts in emphasis as a result of the reform seems appropriate; it must also be factored in to discussions on the next multiannual financial framework. Expiry of the preparatory action on maritime policy means that a fresh legal basis must be found in order to fund this new policy. At the same time, action must be taken to prevent the CFP from suffering as a result.

The 2011 budget is characterised by continuity and by the constraints arising under the multiannual financial framework. For the EFF, commitment and payment appropriations of EUR 658 million and EUR 488 million respectively are earmarked (2.2% and 1.5% more, respectively, than for 2010). Appropriations earmarked for the CFP have been cut by some EUR 15 million (i.e. 5.5%). This is primarily accounted for by the lower appropriation in connection with international fisheries agreements. The higher appropriation for the Community Fisheries Control Agency (CFCA) is most welcome.

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Fisheries calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:

On the European Commission draft budget

1.   Endorses the Commission's fisheries and maritime policy proposals in the 2011 draft budget despite the fact that the 2007-2013 multiannual financial framework does not take adequate account of the political importance of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), in particular as regards the political expectations from greater EU involvement in fisheries control, in fisheries research, in modernisation of the fleet to save energy and improve safety, and in cushioning the social effects of what is a necessary reduction in capacity;

2.   Welcomes the proposed increase in commitment and payment appropriations for the European Fisheries Fund (EFF);

3.   Deplores the proposed cut in commitment appropriations for support for the management of fish resources (improvement of scientific advice) proposed by the European Commission, since expanding fisheries research is an essential prerequisite for a successful fisheries policy, particularly in establishing fishing opportunities on an annual basis and guaranteeing the sustainable management of resources and a socio-economically viable fisheries sector; notes that, in the medium and long term, a significant increase in expenditure on fisheries research is essential for successful reform of the CFP;

4.   Welcomes the fact that the proposed budget appropriations for the Community Fisheries Control Agency are to be increased, since this Agency carries out important work and should thus be given sufficient support to cope with its increasing workload; considers that such increases should be sufficient to extend the work of the agency to cover the policing of International Partnership Agreements;

5.   Considers that, in order for the Union to be able to fulfil its international fisheries control responsibilities, the operational budget of the Community Fisheries Control Agency should be enhanced so as to allow it to charter the patrol vessels when necessary;

6.   Points out that, as in the case of the CFP, the funds proposed for the development of an Integrated Maritime Policy (IMP) are not sufficient to cover the most important aspects of the launch of this new policy; calls for specific budget headings to be created for the Union's new IMP, which must be endowed with sufficient appropriations so that the IMP does not develop at the expense of the CFP;

7.   Notes the markedly reduced payment appropriations for international fisheries agreements; regards as positive, in this connection, the announcement by the Commission that in future, with regard to the use of appropriations, it will make a transparent distinction between payments to obtain fishing rights and payments intended to assist the development of the third country concerned;

8.   Deplores the lack of funding for a number of areas in which coordinated action at EU level is imperative, in particular for the dissemination of knowledge already gained about selective fishing gear and for the coordination of, and support for, applied fisheries research; stresses the need for R&D funding to build up expertise on all stocks and establish the average sustainable yield under the CFP;

On the proposed Council amendments

9.   Rejects forcefully the severe cuts in the fisheries chapter in the Council's position on the 2011 budget; deplores the Council's willingness to reduce drastically the Union's already inadequate contribution to this sector; considers that any further cuts in EU funding are not conducive to sustainable development in the fisheries sector;

10. Strongly deplores the Council's proposals to cut commitment and payment appropriations in the area of fisheries control, both as regards EU involvement in the tasks carried out by the Member States in this field and with respect to the Union's own control activities; points out that the Commission is already only able to provide funds for 20 inspectors, which is no more than a drop in the ocean as regards the urgent need to further expand the EU control network, given the scale of fishing activity and the expanse of EU waters;

11. Deplores also the Council proposal to cut the appropriations for the Community Fisheries Control Agency in Vigo in comparison with the Commission's proposal; points out that this Agency provides significant value added in that it helps coordinate EU-wide fisheries control;

12. Deplores the Council's proposal to make massive cuts in the resources to support Member States in the collection of scientific data; reminds the Council in this context that the database for fisheries policies decisions is currently highly unsatisfactory; also reminds the Council that European Commission support is all the more valuable since Member States are not always diligent in fulfilling their obligations to collect and transmit fisheries data;

13. Calls on the Council to review its position on the level of payments under the EFF, as ex post redeployment otherwise seems inevitable; condemns the Council's call to cut the budgetary resources intended to monitor the proper use of EFF resources.

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	30.8.2010
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	18 0 2
Members present for the final vote	Josefa Andrés Barea, Kriton Arsenis, João Ferreira, Carmen Fraga Estévez, Marek Józef Gróbarczyk, Carl Haglund, Iliana Malinova Iotova, Isabella Lövin, Gabriel Mato Adrover, Guido Milana, Maria do Céu Patrão Neves, Britta Reimers, Crescenzio Rivellini, Ulrike Rodust, Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Jean-Paul Besset, Ole Christensen, Chris Davies, Diane Dodds, Antolín Sánchez Presedo
Substitute(s) under Rule 187(2) present for the final vote	Constance Le Grip

OPINION of the Committee on Culture and Education (6.9.2010)

for the Committee on Budgets

on Parliament's position on the 2011 Draft Budget as modified by the Council - All sections
(2010/2001(BUD))

Rapporteur: Morten Løkkegaard

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Culture and Education calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:

1.   Finds the cuts in the area of education and culture proposed by the Council unacceptable for both political and technical reasons; expresses shock in particular at the cuts to the education programmes, given that this is completely at odds with the Council's own statements concerning the importance of education in the context of the EU 2020 strategy and with the mobility objectives set as part of the Lisbon process; is committed to restoring the figures in the Commission's Draft budget; takes the view that restricting funding in the areas of culture, education, sport and youth policies sets a bad example to those drawing up national budgets in the Member States, as it sends a message that savings need to be made in these areas, which are fundamental to the implementation of the flagship initiatives of the Europe 2020 strategy;

2.   Deplores the lack of ambition in the Commission's Draft budget for funding measures to achieve the headline targets of the Europe 2020 strategy adopted by the European Council; regrets in particular that no additional funds, beyond the financial programming, have been allocated to the areas of education, training and culture, despite their importance for the Europe 2020 strategy and their very high levels of implementation; therefore calls for an increase in appropriations for the Lifelong Learning programme to help the Union meet its headline targets;

3.   Welcomes the Commission's initiative "Youth on the Move" as a policy initiative; stresses however that no new budget line should be created since its implementation should be realised through the existing programmes;

4.   Emphasises that the Erasmus, Leonardo da Vinci and People programmes for the mobility of students, professors and researchers in Europe and for the modernisation of Europe's universities should see a substantial increase in their budgets; urges Member States to support and promote the exchange of professors and assist higher education institutions in addressing shortcomings in the recognition of qualifications acquired through student exchange, in particular in the context of the Erasmus programme, as these shortcomings may lower interest amongst students; is also concerned about the social inequalities observed in terms of access to these programmes; recommends increasing their funding, without simply increasing the number of grants, in order to give more people access to them, and asks the Commission to establish a better communication policy vis-à-vis education institutions involved in EU exchange programmes; calls on the Commission to allocate more funding to the professional training of youth in order to facilitate their reorientation towards those areas of the economy that are functional and more viable in these times of economic crisis;

5.   Emphasises the need to allocate sufficient financial support to elaborate the new competence for sport under Article 165 TFEU, which requires that more resources than before be made available with a view to supporting measures in this area, such as promoting sport and assisting associations, and to gaining experience in preparation for the implementation of a fully-fledged sport programme as of 2012; emphasises the particularly important role sport plays in shaping a sense of European identity and developing further the concept of Union citizenship; emphasises, moreover, the power sport has to integrate people into society; points out that the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty offers no justification for cutting appropriations in the 2011 budget, but that instead the Union has an obligation to continue implementing the preparatory action with undiminished commitment with a view to fulfilling its new tasks in this area;

6.   Expresses deep surprise and concern at the Council's proposals to cut payment appropriations substantially against a number of budget headings, given that this will prevent funding which has already been pledged from being paid out in good time, with the result that these cuts will lead to late payments and result in additional payments of interest rates and thereby in higher costs in 2012;

7.   Requests moving the Media Mundus programme from subheading 3b back to heading 4, where the Preparatory Action was located, as this action has a strong international dimension, making it an element of the Union's foreign policy;

8.   Finds that ICT education and training is vital to ensure that Europe develops new skills for new jobs and takes full advantage of the potentials of an ever more digital society; therefore suggests that EU programmes should contribute more to developing these skills, along with skills associated with the green economy and sustainable development; recommends that protection of personal data form an integral part of ICT-related programmes;

9.   Is concerned about the low level of appropriations for communication and the significant reductions, especially as regards training seminars for journalists; urges appropriations to be increased in order to improve the coordination of the Europe Direct Information Centres and to facilitate the opening of new European Public Spaces;

10.  Considers it strategically important to make a greater financial commitment to promoting the Union’s cultural heritage (both tangible and intangible), including in synergy with the Union’s newly acquired competence for tourism.

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	2.9.2010
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	26 2 0
Members present for the final vote	Maria Badia i Cutchet, Lothar Bisky, Piotr Borys, Jean-Marie Cavada, Silvia Costa, Santiago Fisas Ayxela, Ildikó Gáll-Pelcz, Mary Honeyball, Cătălin Sorin Ivan, Morten Løkkegaard, Marek Henryk Migalski, Doris Pack, Chrysoula Paliadeli, Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid, Marietje Schaake, Marco Scurria, Timo Soini, Emil Stoyanov, Hannu Takkula, Helga Trüpel, Gianni Vattimo, Marie-Christine Vergiat, Sabine Verheyen
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Ivo Belet, Luigi Berlinguer, Timothy Kirkhope, Iosif Matula, Francisco José Millán Mon, Georgios Papanikolaou, Alyn Smith

OPINION of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (3.9.2010)

for the Committee on Budgets

on Parliament's position on the 2011 Draft Budget as modified by the Council - All sections
(2010/2001(BUD))

Rapporteur: Juan Fernando López Aguilar

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:

1.   Welcomes the fact that, in the draft budget as proposed by the Commission, the budget for subheading 3a has been increased significantly compared to 2010, by 12.8% in commitment appropriations and by 15.4% in payment appropriations; underlines that this increase is the consequence of the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, which has made the Charter of Fundamental Rights binding and abolished the pillar structure in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice, as well as of the actions foreseen in the Stockholm Programme for the next five years; is disappointed that the same does not apply to ‘Fundamental Rights and Justice’, the budget increase for which is very slight despite the recent entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the forthcoming accession of the EU to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR); consequently deplores the cuts proposed by the Council in an area which is of extreme importance for EU citizens and the Member States; finds it particularly regrettable that the payment appropriations for urgent measures in connection with mass arrivals of refugees have been cut;

2.   Insists, however, that the projects must have reasonable and objectively justifiable funding at times of economic crisis and budgetary constraints, and must be focused on the priorities already identified in the Stockholm Programme; recalls that effective budgetary programming presupposes an efficient use of the funds already available;

3.   Insists that the agencies of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice must, in dealing with issues concerning fundamental rights and civil liberties, have appropriate,( reasonable and objectively justifiable funding to enable them to carry out their activities, especially those agencies with new tasks as identified in the Stockholm Programme and the Lisbon Treaty; underlines in this context that it will be necessary to increase the 2011 Europol budget in order for Europol to fulfil its function of verifying US requests for information as described in the TFTP agreement between the European Union and the United States of America; calls on the Commission to ensure that the European Asylum Support Office commences its operations in good time before 2011 and that sufficient financial resources are made available for the Office to start to perform its mandate; deplores the fact that the agencies' budgets are not commensurate with the Union's new competences in the relevant areas, in particular those of migration, asylum, justice and fundamental rights;

4.   Considers that the imminent review of the mandate of the Frontex agency will include decisions which in due course will involve significant financial considerations, such as those concerning the ability of the agency to purchase or hire its own assets and equipment, and as a result emphasises the need to ensure that the agency has sufficient financial resources to be able to perform its mandate;

5.   Reminds the Commission and the Council that the revision of the Europol Decision[1] in light of the Lisbon Treaty is a priority for Parliament, that it should be considered as a matter of urgency and that Parliament should be constantly and fully informed and involved;

6.   Considers that the education and development of skills of the staff of the agencies in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice, as regards their knowledge of, and monitoring of compliance with, Union law and international law, must be a priority through increasing the appropriations;

7.   Recalls and reiterates its position on the necessity for Parliament to be informed in a reliable, precise, detailed and timely manner of the budget and execution of the budget throughout the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice, and notably of the implementation of large-scale IT information systems, such as the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II), the Visa Information System (VIS) and the agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice, as well as other projects touching upon human rights and fundamental freedoms;

8.    Calls for a review of the Funds of the 'Solidarity and Management of Migration Flows' General Programme so as to better take into account the situation of Member States that suffer greater migratory pressure.

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	2.9.2010
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	38 2 1
Members present for the final vote	Jan Philipp Albrecht, Roberta Angelilli, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Rita Borsellino, Simon Busuttil, Philip Claeys, Rosario Crocetta, Cornelia Ernst, Tanja Fajon, Hélène Flautre, Kinga Göncz, Sylvie Guillaume, Anna Hedh, Salvatore Iacolino, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Timothy Kirkhope, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monica Luisa Macovei, Véronique Mathieu, Nuno Melo, Louis Michel, Claude Moraes, Jan Mulder, Georgios Papanikolaou, Carmen Romero López, Judith Sargentini, Birgit Sippel, Rui Tavares, Daniël van der Stoep, Axel Voss, Renate Weber
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Alexander Alvaro, Edit Bauer, Ioan Enciu, Ana Gomes, Nadja Hirsch, Monika Hohlmeier, Stanimir Ilchev, Franziska Keller, Michèle Striffler, Marie-Christine Vergiat

• [1]  Council Decision 2009/371/JHA of 6 April 2009 establishing the European Police Office (Europol) (OJ L 121, 15.5.2009, p. 37).

OPINION of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (7.9.2010)

for the Committee on Budgets

on Parliament's position on the 2011 Draft Budget as modified by the Council – All sections
(2010/2001(BUD))

Rapporteur: Algirdas Saudargas

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Constitutional Affairs calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:

A.  whereas the current economic and Euro crisis facing the European Union has not only highlighted the need for a more united Europe and greater cooperation between Member States, which requires deep support and trust in the European institutions from the European citizens, but has also made clear the added value of concerted European action amounting to more than a totalling of national budgets,

B.   whereas the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty on 1 December 2009 has brought about institutional changes favouring a more democratic Union, such as strengthened powers for the European Parliament and national parliaments and the creation of the citizens' initiative, which will require a comprehensive communication policy towards the citizens, as well as optimal operating conditions, so that they can make proper use of this new power,

C.  whereas Parliament, in its resolution of 15 June 2010 on the Mandate for the trilogue on the 2011 draft budget[1], was "concerned by the low level of appropriations – which have even decreased in some cases compared to 2010 – dedicated to programmes promoting European citizenship, communication and information for the media" and "believe[d] these programmes to constitute an essential element in the shaping of a European identity and in communicating the European project to EU citizens",

D.  whereas the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, in its opinion of 2 September 2009 on the draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2010, Section III - Commission[2], expressed its concern about the decrease in appropriations under subheading 3.2 (Citizenship) compared to 2009,

1.   Points out that the emergence of European economic governance and all the recent steps taken by the Member states in response to the Euro crisis have to be accompanied by a proper communication policy so as to gain the support of the citizens, who have to be shown the advantages that lie in a more collective Europe;

2.   Believes moreover that the new institutional provisions of the Lisbon treaty, notably the setting-up of the European External Action Service which should have a significant impact in the long term on the way the European Union and Member States deal with foreign policy, have to be fully explained to the citizens;

3.   Regrets that at the moment when there is a need for a stronger financial support in favour of a communication policy aiming at both promoting the goals and benefits of the Union and at the same time allowing for a better understanding of its structures and of the possibilities for the citizens to influence its policies, with a view to strengthening their sense of European identity, the amounts proposed by the Commission in its draft budget for 2011 are either low, or even lower than in 2010; believes that discussion of this crucial challenge for European democracy must not be shirked in the debate on the multiannual financial framework;

4.   Welcomes, on the other hand, the level of increase foreseen in the Estimates of revenue and expenditure for 2011 for the Parliament in the funding of European political parties and foundations; recalls the importance of European political parties and foundations for the awareness of citizens on European policies and European integration.

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	6.9.2010
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	18 2 0
Members present for the final vote	Andrew Henry William Brons, Carlo Casini, Andrew Duff, Matthias Groote, Roberto Gualtieri, Zita Gurmai, Gerald Häfner, Stanimir Ilchev, Ramón Jáuregui Atondo, Constance Le Grip, David Martin, Paulo Rangel, Algirdas Saudargas, György Schöpflin, József Szájer, Søren Bo Søndergaard, Indrek Tarand, Rafał Trzaskowski, Guy Verhofstadt
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Enrique Guerrero Salom, Sylvie Guillaume, Íñigo Méndez de Vigo, Vital Moreira, Helmut Scholz

• [1]  Texts Adopted, P7_TA(2010)0205.
• [2]  Annexed to the report of the Committee on Budgets of 13 October 2009 (A7-0038/2009).

OPINION of the Committee on Petitions (16.7.2010)

for the Committee on Budgets

on the estimates of the European Ombudsman’s budget for the financial year 2011
(2010/2001(BUD))

Rapporteur: Adina-Ioana Vălean

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

The Committee on Petitions has taken note of the European Ombudsman’s estimates concerning his budgetary requirements for the financial year 2011, which he submitted to the budgetary authority in accordance with Article 31 of the Financial Regulation.

The European Ombudsman’s mission is to seek fair outcomes to complaints against European Union institutions. He also encourages transparency and promotes an administrative culture of service. The Ombudsman works closely together with other EU institutions and bodies and with the European network of national and regional ombudsmen.

The Ombudsman’s budget is made up of three main parts: expenditure relating to personnel, expenditure on buildings, furniture, equipment, etc., and expenditure resulting from general functions carried out by the institution.

In order to be able to perform all his tasks the European Ombudsman in his budget estimates for the financial year 2011 requests a total amount of EUR 9 395 100. This represents an increase of 0.67% (EUR 62 825) compared to his budget for 2010. In the preceding years the budget increases were markedly higher with + 5.95% in 2009 and + 7.14% in 2010.

In the light of the current financial and economic crisis and to show solidarity with national and regional colleagues who are experiencing hard times for their budgets, the Ombudsman has tried to limit budget increases as much as possible.

On the other hand there are certain new responsibilities for the Ombudsman. Under the Lisbon Treaty the Ombudsman’s mandate has been broadened from ‘Community institutions and bodies’ to the ‘Union institutions, bodies, offices or agencies’. This will no doubt have an effect on his workload in the future.

The estimates for 2011 do not take specific account of these new tasks and the Ombudsman indicates that he cannot give guarantees with regard to the sustainability of the current level of restraint. He also indicates that he will request additional resources should he be compelled to do so by the additional ‘Lisbon’ workload. At this stage this remains hypothetical and it is not immediately apparent what the impact might be in practice.

As was done for previous estimates the Ombudsman’s services have scrutinised all budget lines to identify and generate savings and/or redeploy funds. This exercise has resulted in total savings for 2011 of EUR 273 500. The amount saved covers more than 80% of the total increase in other budget lines resulting, inter alia, from increased translation costs due to a new pricing policy of the Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union (CDT) and increased IT spending in order to improve an outdated videoconference system used for the communication between the Ombudsman’s offices in Strasbourg and Brussels.

The Ombudsman states that the results achieved in 2009 were very positive. Inquiries were completed more rapidly without negative effects on quality. This is explained partly by the additional staff that the Ombudsman was able to employ since the 2009 budget and partly by using innovative inquiry methods. In 2009 on average cases were closed after an inquiry period of 9 months and almost 60% of inquiries resulted in a satisfactory solution to the complaint.

As regards staff, the Ombudsman's establishment plan in the 2010 budget included 63 posts: 16 officials and 47 temporary agents (35 AD and 28 AST posts). For the 2011 budget the Ombudsman requests 1 additional AST post as well as twelve upgradings (6 AST and 6 AD) in accordance with Article 6(2) of the Staff Regulations. In addition he requests the transformation of one AD14 post from a temporary into a permanent post.

With regard to his institution’s training policy the Ombudsman proposes to increase the funds for training in 2011 from EUR 37 000 to EUR 45 000. If these funds were available the institution could implement its new training policy that was already foreseen in the 2010 estimates and will be put into effect in the second part of 2010.

Your rapporteur endorses the Ombudsman’s requests and is of the opinion that the total amount of budgetary resources as requested in the estimates will enable him to meet his obligations under his Statute and allow him to perform his duties effectively.

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Petitions calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:

1.  Considers that the appropriations requested by the European Ombudsman will ensure that he will be able to meet the obligations under his Statute and will allow his institution to perform its tasks effectively;

2.  Notes that compared to 2009 (+ 5.95%) and 2010 (+ 7.14%) the increase in budget resources requested by the Ombudsman for 2011 is limited to a modest 0.67% (EUR 62 825); recommends, however, at this time of economic and social crisis, that the Ombudsman comply with Parliament’s wish to restrict the European institutions’ spending as far as possible in the next few years;

3.  Notes positively the Ombudsman’s expression of solidarity with his national and regional colleagues who in the current financial and economic crisis are confronted with difficult situations in terms of their budgets;

4.  Notes that the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty has broadened the Ombudsman’s mandate from the ‘Community institutions and bodies’ to the ‘Union institutions, bodies, offices or agencies’, which entails new responsibilities in particular in relation to the European Council and the Common Foreign and Security Policy;

5.  Is aware that in view of the Ombudsman’s additional responsibilities under the Lisbon Treaty the current limited budget growth may not be sustainable; encourages the Ombudsman to continue to present realistic, cost-based estimates that take full account of the need to manage scarce resources in an optimal way;

6.  Is pleased to learn that 2009 has been a very positive year in which inquiries were completed more rapidly without compromising quality; notes that this was the result of both additional human resources and the introduction of innovative inquiry methods; encourages the Ombudsman to continue to work towards perpetuating these excellent results;

7.  Notes that, as in previous years, the Ombudsman has scrutinised all budget lines in order to generate savings and redeploy funds; is pleased to find that this exercise has resulted in total savings of EUR 273 500, which covers more than 80% of the total increase of the 2011 budget (EUR 336 325) and explains its very limited increase (EUR 62 825);

8.  Supports the Ombudsman’s request for 1 additional AST post, twelve upgradings (6 AD and 6 AST) and one (AD 14) transformation from a temporary into a permanent post; endorses the Ombudsman's proposal to increase the appropriations for training and to implement a quality management review in 2011.

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	15.7.2010
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	18 0 0
Members present for the final vote	Margrete Auken, Elena Băsescu, Victor Boştinaru, Simon Busuttil, Giles Chichester, Bairbre de Brún, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Iliana Malinova Iotova, Carlos José Iturgaiz Angulo, Peter Jahr, Lena Kolarska-Bobińska, Erminia Mazzoni, Willy Meyer, Mariya Nedelcheva, Chrysoula Paliadeli, Diana Wallis, Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa, Angelika Werthmann, Tatjana Ždanoka
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Marta Andreasen, Gerald Häfner, Constance Le Grip
Substitute(s) under Rule 187(2) present for the final vote	Andrew Duff, Radvilė Morkūnaitė-Mikulėnienė, Norica Nicolai

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	7.10.2010
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	36 2 4
Members present for the final vote	Damien Abad, Alexander Alvaro, Marta Andreasen, Reimer Böge, Jean-Luc Dehaene, Isabelle Durant, James Elles, Göran Färm, José Manuel Fernandes, Eider Gardiazábal Rubial, Salvador Garriga Polledo, Jens Geier, Ivars Godmanis, Ingeborg Gräßle, Estelle Grelier, Carl Haglund, Lucas Hartong, Jutta Haug, Jiří Havel, Sidonia Elżbieta Jędrzejewska, Jan Kozłowski, Alain Lamassoure, Giovanni La Via, Vladimír Maňka, Barbara Matera, Nadezhda Neynsky, Miguel Portas, Vladimír Remek, Dominique Riquet, László Surján, Helga Trüpel, Angelika Werthmann, Jacek Włosowicz
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	François Alfonsi, Richard Ashworth, Maria Da Graça Carvalho, Frédéric Daerden, Roberto Gualtieri, Paul Rübig, Peter Šťastný, Georgios Stavrakakis
Substitute(s) under Rule 187(2) present for the final vote	Charles Goerens, Jan Mulder