Ivars IJABS

What Ivars IJABS has said (15)

• 2024-10-31 “P-002367/2024 Answer given by Ms Ivanova on behalf of the European Commission Pre-financing is provided for in Article 115(1), point (b)(i) of the Financial Regulation 1 . It is paid by default in all signed Horizon Europe grants. The standard approach is to have one prefinancing. By default, it covers 160% of the average EU funding per reporting period, so beneficiaries have sufficient cash to work until the first payment against reported costs. Exceptions apply where the grant agreement includes multiple pre-financing payments 2 , or via an amendment of the grant agreement, usually after an increase of the maximum grant amount in the cases of: - ‘hop-on’ grant amendments, adding a new participant from a widening country to an existing consortium: currently about 25 projects 3 ; - some large grants (e.g. ‘co-fund grants’ to consortia of Member State national funders or Knowledge and Innovation Communities under the European Institute of Technology (EIT-KICs 4 )) with multiple pre-financings as defined in the grant agreement: currently 16 projects; - ‘top-up’ amendments in ‘co-fund’ grants, where additional budget from budget years beyond the original commitment is assigned to existing ‘co-fund grants: currently 3 projects; - European Innovation Council (EIC) Accelerator 5 grants with multiple pre-financings: about 600 projects. In addition, a few cases exist where an additional pre-financing is given, taking account of the particular circumstances of the grant. Also in Horizon 2020, the standard approach was to have one pre-financing. Multiple prefinancing was used in particular in ERA (European Research Area)-NET grants 6 (predecessor of the co-fund grants of Horizon Europe). 1 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2024 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (recast), OJ L, 2024/2509, 26.9.2024. 2 Additional pre-financing subject to conditions for the consumption of the first pre-financing. 3 https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/opportunities/topic-details/HORIZONWIDERA-2023-ACCESS-0601?order=DESC&pageNumber=1&pageSize=50&sortBy=relevance&keywords=HORIZON-WIDERA-2023ACCESS%020601&isExactMatch=true&status=31094501,31094502,31094503&frameworkProgramme=43108390 and https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/opportunities/topic-details/HORIZONWIDERA-2022-ACCESS-0701?order=DESC&pageNumber=1&pageSize=50&sortBy=startDate&keywords=HORIZON-WIDERA-2022ACCESS-07-01&isExactMatch=true&status=31094501,31094502,31094503&frameworkProgramme=43108390 4 https://eit.europa.eu/news-events/news/eit-knowledge-and-innovation-communities-kics-receive-positivereviews 5 https://eic.ec.europa.eu/eic-funding-opportunities/eic-accelerator_en 6 https://www.era-learn.eu/”
  EU research funding
• “Thank you. Chair. Dear Mr. Commissioner, it's clear that the single market is the greatest achievement and the greatest economic resource of the union, and if we used it correctly, it would be a good basis for our future welfare, for better jobs and for our social model and also for the competitiveness. But I would like to talk about something else, about the single market in defence materials and in defence procurement. We know that since the full scale Russian invasion, we have significantly increased our spending on defense billions in 2020, 130 billion investment in defense. But only 18% of all of this we procure in a joint manner. And the result is quite poor. We have long since promised to do more of joint procurement. We have Adib and other programs in action, but we still see countries buying weapons separately using different military systems. We are doubling our expenses and as a result, we lose the potential that we could gain from the economies of scale, from the single market as the foundation of our economy. Thank you.”
  Defence spending
• “Thank you very much, president. Mr. Buchanan, I'm delighted that the title of our debate today mentions defence and competitiveness in first place. That fuels some optimism with regard to the Rearm Europe Fund. What it means is that bit by bit, Europe is coming to see that defence is a core task. There are two key aspects here. Firstly, will the changing of budgetary rules be sufficient to prompt member states to invest more in defense. A common fund of €150 billion. Will that be enough or do we need to find other resources? The second aspect how will the European Union strengthen its borders to the east? We've heard many times that Russia and Belarus represent a threat, but it's time to act for actions, not words. Thank you.”
  Defence spending
• “Yes. Thank you chair. And thank you all for presenters, for your insightful presentations as well as for the first issue, meaning the autonomy of CRC. This should be really, to my mind, as an important issue in the Parliament's position to to keep it, because this is really an important issue and the ERC is a crown jewel of the whole framework. Program a historically has been and also must be in the future. As for the other issues, the involvement of universities, for example, the involvement of universities all across Europe is, to my mind really an important thing because they are huge contributors. The question is, well, the European university alliances that already exist, although outside of the framework programmes. The question is whether you see any ways to integrate them more with the framework programme, especially in terms of simplification, to create some kind of an interface between these two European funds, both of whom are really successful. The second question is, of course, about the already mentioned widening issue. I am completely in the line with the statement that this programme is about the excellence and not about the cohesion, but at the same time, of course, I think that everyone would benefit if the European money would help to bring out the brightest minds everywhere in Europe and not producing this kind of brain drain which we are experiencing right now. And this is a question to Professor Hayter, because you have been working quite intensively on evaluating and reviewing the existing policies. To what extent does the current proposal really contributed to this? Well, bridging of the innovation gap, which is, to my mind, really an important issue for us to take into mind. And what would be your suggestions also in terms of having those conditionalities? Having this current proposals proposal, proposed idea of well, having two tiers of widening countries. How do you see that taking into account your previous work and your expertise in the field? Thank you very much.”
  EU research funding
• “(09:07:34 – 09:10:38): Yes. Thank you very much, Maria Agnes. Thank you very much, mister Butka. Let me begin by expressing my sincere gratitude to all the shadow reporters and to my core reporter from the SADA committee. You engaged with this file seriously. You submitted, amendments of a real substance. And, crucially, we are all respecting the tight timeline that, Tanina Picula and I put on the table for this file. That kind of discipline and political will is not something to take for granted, and I want you to know that it really made a difference. Now on the substance. Now the agile regulation is built on a simple but very urgent premise, namely Europe has defense innovators who are ready, and we must stop being the obstacle between their ideas and the battlefield. That means 3 things. First of all, the speed. We are not here to design another multiyear programs that produces, reports while threats evolve. The whole architecture of agile is about moving fast. Fast calls, fast decisions, and fast deployment. The ultra fast procedure we apply to this very file is not just a procedural quirk. It is a statement of intent. The second, money that actually reaches recipients. We have worked hard to ensure lump sum financing, not because we want less accountability, but because compliance burdens have for too long been an invisible walls that keeps the most innovative, most agile companies out of the EU programs. A start up does not have a grants management department. Lump sum does. That changes who can participate and who benefits. The third, integrity of the European defense technological and industrial base. Let me be direct. Entities that are established in or effectively controlled from countries whose actions are incompatible with the union's foreign and security policy objectives will not be eligible. This is not protectionism. This is basic strategic hygiene. We are building European capability, and that means we must know hose cans we are strengthening. To European companies, and in particular to SMEs, startups, scale ups, I say this, be ready. The window will open, and it will open quickly. Do not wait for a second call. Prepare your consortia. Identify your readiness gaps. Understand the eligibility requirements. This program is designed for you. And to innovative companies from outside the union who share our values and our commitment to a stable rules based international order, Europe is a place of innovation, and we want we want disruptive technologies that can protect not just this continent, but a much broader community of nations that depends on security, on stability. If you bring genuine capability, there is”
  Defence spending
• “Madam president. Madam Commissioner, first of all, I want to congratulate Anna with an excellent report. Well, to me, of course, the key part of that report is the resilience. We can't work on single market for energy and electricity. We cannot decrease prices for our citizens if we do not think about the security of our networks. I think that two elements are equally important and they are covered in the report. This is cyber and physical infrastructure. Number of cyber attacks has increased and that is why implementation of EU directive Cybersecurity Act are really vitally important. And as for the physical infrastructure defense of our strategic infrastructure, especially undersea cables. For in this age of growing offshore wind is crucial. Security measures like sonar, like undersea drones, like sensors. The world is not secure anymore, and our energy systems are targeted by unfriendly forces. Let's be aware of this and act accordingly. Thank you very much.”
  Cybersecurity investments for critical infrastructure
• “Yes. Thank you very much, Maria Agnes. Thank you very much, mister Butka. Let me begin by expressing my sincere gratitude to all the shadow reporters and to my core reporter from the SADA committee. You engaged with this file seriously. You submitted, amendments of a real substance. And, crucially, we are all respecting the tight timeline that, Tanina Picula and I put on the table for this file. That kind of discipline and political will is not something to take for granted, and I want you to know that it really made a difference. Now on the substance. Now the agile regulation is built on a simple but very urgent premise, namely Europe has defense innovators who are ready, and we must stop being the obstacle between their ideas and the battlefield. That means 3 things. First of all, the speed. We are not here to design another multiyear programs that produces, reports while threats evolve. The whole architecture of agile is about moving fast. Fast calls, fast decisions, and fast deployment. The ultra fast procedure we apply to this very file is not just a procedural quirk. It is a statement of intent. The second, money that actually reaches recipients. We have worked hard to ensure lump sum financing, not because we want less accountability, but because compliance burdens have for too long been an invisible walls that keeps the most innovative, most agile companies out of the EU programs. A start up does not have a grants management department. Lump sum does. That changes who can participate and who benefits. The third, integrity of the European defense technological and industrial base. Let me be direct. Entities that are established in or effectively controlled from countries whose actions are incompatible with the union's foreign and security policy objectives will not be eligible. This is not protectionism. This is basic strategic hygiene. We are building European capability, and that means we must know hose cans we are strengthening. To European companies, and in particular to SMEs, startups, scale ups, I say this, be ready. The window will open, and it will open quickly. Do not wait for a second call. Prepare your consortia. Identify your readiness gaps. Understand the eligibility requirements. This program is designed for you. And to innovative companies from outside the union who share our values and our commitment to a stable rules based international order, Europe is a place of innovation, and we want we want disruptive technologies that can protect not just this continent, but a much broader community of nations that depends on security, on stability. If you bring genuine capability, there is”
  Defence spending
• “Thank you. Madam president, the Commissioner, the rapporteurs. Today marks an important and necessary step forward for the European Union. Phasing out Russian gas is not only a response to Russian aggression and changing geopolitical reality, it is also a statement of our values and our priorities. By reducing our dependence on this external supplier, we strengthen our own security, resilience and unity. In Parliament, we have chosen cooperation over coercion, sustainability over vulnerability, and long term stability over our short term convenience. It will take serious work to implement this regulation properly, but this transition is also an opportunity. It accelerates investment in renewable energy, energy efficiency and what is more important, diversified supply routes. It creates jobs, drives innovation and moves us closer to climate neutrality. Most importantly, it ensures that Europe's energy future is shaped by democratic choices, not political pressure. Thank you very much.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “a place for you here. Chair, include with I conclude with the confidence. Both committees have moved at a pace that the council did not expect from us, actually. We will adopt this report before the summer recess. And when agile program enters into force, it will do what its name promises. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. And now I will pass the floor back to co chair Boris Buttgaard for the q and a with Seed and Eidrich Shadow Arbiters. So Boris.”
  EU political integration
• “(09:41:38 – 09:44:41): Yes. Thank you very much, and thank you very much, dear colleagues, for your input. Without prejudging the results of our still go ongoing negotiations, let me just comment on some of sensitive issues that have been raised, and I'm really looking forward to to reach a compromise on many of them. I think that, of course, the speed is crucial. This program is basically for the year 2027. And that means that our capacity to learn from mistakes when simultaneously working at the same time on the EDF and the European Competitiveness Fund is rather limited in a sense. But, nevertheless, I would fully support the idea that was proposed that the commission could produce a report, about the lessons learned from this, project and this program, it being a pilot project. As for the lump sums, this is, really an important issue, and we, of course, we have to maintain, it as a default option, but at the same time, having the deviations possible for those, cases where this is not possible. And this is, to my mind, really, an important point. The same applies also to what was commented by our APP colleagues about the inducement, interventions and capping of them. I think that we will reach a compromise, on this 1 as well. And, well, as far as the larger defense companies not being sidelined or not being excluded, yes, but at the same time, of course, keeping in mind that this is really primarily a program for the SMEs. And and, in in that sense, I think that we are also moving towards a compromise, which would also allow to keep larger defense companies in the loop when it's needed for the security of supply, but at the same time, having that focus on, the SMEs. And as far as the involvement of the member states, yes, this is a fair point. But, again, we have to balance on the 1 hand involvement of member states in terms of comitology and so on and so forth. On the other hand, of course, having this agile nature of the very project just to move forward fastly, because, the time is basically, rather high, because this is, just as I said, primarily a program for the year 2027. I thank you very much for your input, and I'm really looking forward to have a swift and a very constructing constructive debate on the conclusion of the negotiations negotiations and and and the final compromises and the vote in the ITRA and SADA committees. Thank you very much.”
  Defence spending
• “Yes. Thank you very much. Chair. And distinguished members. Dear rapporteur, the proposed amendments to the regulation on the Safety and Sustainability of Space Activities focus on three critical pillars protecting our internal market, supporting small scale operators, and reducing our dependence. Uh, and first, we must ensure that national security measures taken by member states remain strictly necessary and proportionate, preventing market fragmentation. Second, we renew advocate for authorisation procedures and technical standards that are truly accessible to start ups and SMEs, which was already mentioned. Our regulatory framework must account for the diversity of mission sizes to avoid imposing excessive burdens on the union's most innovative players. And finally, we propose a regime change for third country launch services. Derogations should be granted only in exceptional cases, where no operational alternative exists within the union, and a compelling public interest is at stake. And well, I look forward very much to work on the further compromises, and I'm looking forward also to swift adoption of this opinion. Thank you very much.”
  EU competences on space policy
• “Yes. Uh, thank you, chair, I have, first of all, thank you for coming here and and reporting on on what has been done in the framework of the EDF. I have a few following questions. One of the first slides we saw, the map, uh, regarding, uh, I think I couldn't read, uh, it was a little too far, but I suppose that this is a number of participations of countries. Well, we all see that the East from Germany, the map is very bright. As for. Well. And would you please comment on this one? The second is about the finance and this has been already mentioned. We all know that, for example, the programme which is currently under negotiations. Well, it's actually taking the money from the EDF. And the question is, well, how do you see your future in terms of synergies with that, uh, project, which is of course, well, we all wanted, of course, to increase the budget for defence industrial programme, but nevertheless there is there are certain limitations. And would you please comment also on the issue of involving Ukrainian startups, which are known to be very good and innovative in the framework? Is there some kind of structural framework where it can be done or it's being done just on an ad hoc case by case basis? Thank you very much.”
  Defence spending
• “Yes. Thank you chair. And thank you all for presenters, for your insightful presentations as well as for the first issue, meaning the autonomy of CRC. This should be really, to my mind, as an important issue in the Parliament's position to to keep it, because this is really an important issue and the ERC is a crown jewel of the whole framework. Program a historically has been and also must be in the future. As for the other issues, the involvement of universities, for example, the involvement of universities all across Europe is, to my mind really an important thing because they are huge contributors. The question is, well, the European university alliances that already exist, although outside of the framework programmes. The question is whether you see any ways to integrate them more with the framework programme, especially in terms of simplification, to create some kind of an interface between these two European funds, both of whom are really successful. The second question is, of course, about the already mentioned widening issue. I am completely in the line with the statement that this programme is about the excellence and not about the cohesion, but at the same time, of course, I think that everyone would benefit if the European money would help to bring out the brightest minds everywhere in Europe and not producing this kind of brain drain which we are experiencing right now. And this is a question to Professor Hayter, because you have been working quite intensively on evaluating and reviewing the existing policies. To what extent does the current proposal really contributed to this? Well, bridging of the innovation gap, which is, to my mind, really an important issue for us to take into mind. And what would be your suggestions also in terms of having those conditionalities? Having this current proposals proposal, proposed idea of well, having two tiers of widening countries. How do you see that taking into account your previous work and your expertise in the field? Thank you very much.”
  Governance of academic priorities within the EU
• “Mr. Commissioner, this initiative is really good. But of course, long overdue. Russia generated 242 billion in fossil revenue in 2024 24 alone. This is more than it has spent on the whole war in Ukraine. And in that sense, I think we have to really stop financing Putin. I think those steps that have been proposed by the plan are really good. I mean, the ban on new contracts and existing support contracts by the end of 2025, complete phase out of long term gas contracts by end of 2027, and dealing with the shadow fleet, of course. But there is one important point I want to mention. This is what we really need. And these are those national phase out plans to enhance transparency and traceability of who is buying what and consuming what. If we do not do this, some member states can still go on supporting Ukraine in wars, but helping to finance Putin's war machine. Indeed. Thank you very much.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “Yes. Thank you very much, and thank you very much, dear colleagues, for your input. Without prejudging the results of our still go ongoing negotiations, let me just comment on some of sensitive issues that have been raised, and I'm really looking forward to to reach a compromise on many of them. I think that, of course, the speed is crucial. This program is basically for the year 2027. And that means that our capacity to learn from mistakes when simultaneously working at the same time on the EDF and the European Competitiveness Fund is rather limited in a sense. But, nevertheless, I would fully support the idea that was proposed that the commission could produce a report, about the lessons learned from this, project and this program, it being a pilot project. As for the lump sums, this is, really an important issue, and we, of course, we have to maintain, it as a default option, but at the same time, having the deviations possible for those, cases where this is not possible. And this is, to my mind, really an important point. The same applies also to what was commented by our APP colleagues about the inducement, interventions and capping of them. I think that we will reach a compromise, on this 1 as well. And, well, as far as the larger defense companies not being sidelined or not being excluded, yes, but at the same time, of course, keeping in mind that this is really primarily a program for the SMEs. And and, in in that sense, I think that we are also moving towards a compromise, which would also allow to keep larger defense companies in the loop when it's needed for the security of supply, but at the same time, having that focus on, the SMEs. And as far as the involvement of the member states, yes, this is a fair point. But, again, we have to balance on the 1 hand involvement of member states in terms of comitology and so on and so forth. On the other hand, of course, having this agile nature of the very project just to move forward fastly, because, the time is basically, rather high, because this is, just as I said, primarily a program for the year 2027. I thank you very much for your input, and I'm really looking forward to have a swift and a very constructing constructive debate on the conclusion of the negotiations negotiations and and and the final compromises and the vote in the ITRA and SADA committees. Thank you very much.”
  Defence spending