report parliamentary committee draft, 13 March 2026
On the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Horizon Europe, the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, for the period 2028-2034 laying down its rules for participation and dissemination, and repealing Regulation (EU) 2021/695
Document ITRE-PR-785237 · (COM(2025)0543 – C100164/2025 – 2025/0543(COD))
Committee on Industry, Research and Energy · Rapporteur: Christian Ehler
Full text
Jump to an amendment (179)
- Amendment 1
- Amendment 2
- Amendment 3
- Amendment 4
- Amendment 5
- Amendment 6
- Amendment 7
- Amendment 8
- Amendment 9
- Amendment 10
- Amendment 11
- Amendment 12
- Amendment 13
- Amendment 14
- Amendment 15
- Amendment 16
- Amendment 17
- Amendment 18
- Amendment 19
- Amendment 20
- Amendment 21
- Amendment 22
- Amendment 23
- Amendment 24
- Amendment 25
- Amendment 26
- Amendment 27
- Amendment 28
- Amendment 29
- Amendment 30
- Amendment 31
- Amendment 32
- Amendment 33
- Amendment 34
- Amendment 35
- Amendment 36
- Amendment 37
- Amendment 38
- Amendment 39
- Amendment 40
- Amendment 41
- Amendment 42
- Amendment 43
- Amendment 44
- Amendment 45
- Amendment 46
- Amendment 47
- Amendment 48
- Amendment 49
- Amendment 50
- Amendment 51
- Amendment 52
- Amendment 53
- Amendment 54
- Amendment 55
- Amendment 56
- Amendment 57
- Amendment 58
- Amendment 59
- Amendment 60
- Amendment 61
- Amendment 62
- Amendment 63
- Amendment 64
- Amendment 65
- Amendment 66
- Amendment 67
- Amendment 68
- Amendment 69
- Amendment 70
- Amendment 71
- Amendment 72
- Amendment 73
- Amendment 74
- Amendment 75
- Amendment 76
- Amendment 77
- Amendment 78
- Amendment 79
- Amendment 80
- Amendment 81
- Amendment 82
- Amendment 83
- Amendment 84
- Amendment 85
- Amendment 86
- Amendment 87
- Amendment 88
- Amendment 89
- Amendment 90
- Amendment 91
- Amendment 92
- Amendment 93
- Amendment 94
- Amendment 95
- Amendment 96
- Amendment 97
- Amendment 98
- Amendment 99
- Amendment 100
- Amendment 101
- Amendment 102
- Amendment 103
- Amendment 104
- Amendment 105
- Amendment 106
- Amendment 107
- Amendment 108
- Amendment 109
- Amendment 110
- Amendment 111
- Amendment 112
- Amendment 113
- Amendment 114
- Amendment 115
- Amendment 116
- Amendment 117
- Amendment 118
- Amendment 119
- Amendment 120
- Amendment 121
- Amendment 122
- Amendment 123
- Amendment 124
- Amendment 125
- Amendment 126
- Amendment 127
- Amendment 128
- Amendment 129
- Amendment 130
- Amendment 131
- Amendment 132
- Amendment 133
- Amendment 134
- Amendment 135
- Amendment 136
- Amendment 137
- Amendment 138
- Amendment 139
- Amendment 140
- Amendment 141
- Amendment 142
- Amendment 143
- Amendment 144
- Amendment 145
- Amendment 146
- Amendment 147
- Amendment 148
- Amendment 149
- Amendment 150
- Amendment 151
- Amendment 152
- Amendment 153
- Amendment 154
- Amendment 155
- Amendment 156
- Amendment 157
- Amendment 158
- Amendment 159
- Amendment 160
- Amendment 161
- Amendment 162
- Amendment 163
- Amendment 164
- Amendment 165
- Amendment 166
- Amendment 167
- Amendment 168
- Amendment 169
- Amendment 170
- Amendment 171
- Amendment 172
- Amendment 173
- Amendment 174
- Amendment 175
- Amendment 176
- Amendment 177
- Amendment 178
- Amendment 179
Draft european parliament legislative resolution 1,238 paragraphs
(COM(2025)0543 – C100164/2025 – 2025/0543(COD))
(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)
The European Parliament,
–having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2025)0543),
–having regard to Article 294(2) and Articles 173(3), 182(1), 183, 188, second subparagraph and Article 322(1), point (a) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C100164/2025),
–having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
–having regard to the budgetary assessment by the Committee on Budgets,
–having regard to the opinion of the European Court of Auditors of 11 December 2025,
–having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 22 January 2026,
–having regard to Rules 60 and 58 of its Rules of Procedure,
–having regard to the opinions of the Committee on Security and Defence, the Committee on Budgetary Control, the Committee on Regional Development, the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development and the Committee on Culture and Education,
–having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A100000/2026),
Read the rest (1,226 paragraphs)
1.Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;
2.Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;
3.Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.
Amendment 1
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 b (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (2b) Academic freedom and the freedom of scientific research are fundamental values of the Union and codified in Article 13 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Existence of these freedoms throughout all countries benefiting from the Programme is an essential precondition for the future of the Union. Where the protection and promotion of academic freedom fails, the European project of democracy, freedom and human rights is threatened. The Russian aggression against democratic European nations should be a reminder that the authoritarian forces of the twentieth century are still present in Europe and that a fundamental value like academic freedom requires strong legal and institutionalised protection and promotion. The Programme should contribute to this protection and promotion, including through a European Scheme for the Support of Researchers at Risk that offers a sustainable response to recurring crisis-driven displacement and persecution of academic talent. |
Or. en
Justification
Besides the fact that the Union should defend and promote its fundamental values, academic freedom and the freedom of scientific research are essential ingredients for the success of Horizon Europe. The Heitor Report calls on policy makers to "rely on Europe’s commitment to academic freedom" in order to make Horizon Europe a success.
Amendment 2
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (3) The Programme should be tightly connected with Regulation (EU) [XXX]* of the European Parliament and of the Council [European Competitiveness Fund]3 by placing research and innovation at the heart of the Union’s economy and investment strategy. | (3) The Programme is tightly connected to Regulation (EU) [XXX]* of the European Parliament and of the Council [European Competitiveness Fund]3 by placing research and innovation at the heart of the Union’s economy and investment strategy. The European Competitiveness Fund will strengthen the Union's innovative capacity by providing support to the roll-out of the most successful and needed outcomes of projects funded by the Programme, or its predecessors. This also requires that all comitology related to Work Programmes under this Regulation have to be set up under this Regulation exclusively, while joint meetings of comitology committee configurations from the Programme and European Competitiveness Fund working on similar topics should take place regularly to ensure appropriate coordination. |
| 3 OJ C […], […], p. […] | 3 OJ C […], […], p. […] |
Or. en
Justification
To prevent incumbency bias - which the Nobel Prize winning work of Prof. Aghion et al. identified as a risk for sustainable growth - Horizon Europe should be a fully self-standing programme with its own independent programming. However, strong coordination between the two programmes remains essential for effective spending of Union funds. Without strong coordination, it will be less likely that ECF can support the deployment of Horizon results.
Amendment 3
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (5) In a rapidly changing economic, social and geopolitical environment, recent experience has shown the need for a more flexible multiannual financial framework and its Union spending programmes. To that effect, and in line with the objectives of the Programme, the funding should duly consider the evolving policy needs and Union’s priorities as identified in relevant documents published by the Commission, European Parliament resolutions and in Council conclusions, while ensuring sufficient predictability for the budget implementation. | (5) In a rapidly changing economic, social and geopolitical environment, recent experience has shown the need for a more agile Programme. To that effect, and in line with the objectives of the Programme, the funding allocation should be designed to be expert-driven and with shorter turnover than in previous Framework Programmes. |
Or. en
Justification
The Draghi Report called for a Framework Programme that is managed by people with a proven track record in innovation. The Heitor report called for "agile project funding that accepts responsible risk".
Amendment 4
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (6) The rules for participation and dissemination of the Programme are designed to further simplify access, enhance openness, and maximize the impact of Union funding. | (6) The rules for participation and dissemination of the Programme are designed to further simplify access, enhance openness, legal certainty and maximize the impact of Union funding. |
Or. en
Justification
According to Heitor, Horizon Europe should be come more applicant-friendly. Under the current programme one of the main concerns of applicants was a lack of information that led to legal uncertainty.
Amendment 5
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (7a) The governance of the Programme's collaborative research and innovation activities should be guided by Councils composed of prominent experts from science, innovation, industry and civil society, and implemented by expert teams empowered to design calls for proposals within the general thematic priorities; the general thematic priorities, including the budget available to each priority, will be set out in the Work Programmes adopted by Commission under examination procedure. The Work Programmes will cover three years, with each last year overlapping with the first year of the next Work Programme. This gives the expert teams enough time to work and offers predictability to applicants, while maintaining the needed flexibility over time. The observatory on emerging technologies established under the European Competitiveness Fund should play an important role in preparing the Work Programmes. This approach reflects the recommendation from the Draghi report to leave the management of the Programme to people with a proven track record at the frontier of innovation and is in line with the recommendation from the Report of Commission Expert Group on the interim evaluation of Horizon Europe of 6 December 2024 (the ‘Heitor report’) to establish dedicated Councils to guide collaborative research and innovation. The interplay between the Commission, the Councils, the expert teams and the Programme Committees creates a system that allows public authorities to retain full control over funding allocation while enabling experts to deliver an frontier and agile Programme. In order to fulfil their role effectively, lead experts and their expert teams should be engaged on a full-time basis, ensuring the depth of commitment and continuity of expertise required to design high-quality calls and to engage meaningfully with the broader research and innovation ecosystem. Expert teams should proactively engage with relevant actors from industry, academia, civil society and the investment community in order to gather strategic intelligence on emerging needs, technological developments and market dynamics, so that calls reflect real-world opportunities and challenges. Furthermore, expert teams should accompany the projects selected under the calls for which they are responsible throughout the project lifecycle, providing support, facilitating access to relevant networks and fostering connections between projects where there is common interest or where closer coordination would generate added value for the Union. |
Or. en
Amendment 6
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (9) It should be possible to implement parts of the budget through European Partnerships together with other public and private entities, where this is the most effective implementation form to achieve the policy objectives. European Partnerships should be established where a close involvement of the Union is required and should ensure appropriate voting rights for the Union as well as sufficient co-investment by other partners to leverage Union funding. In view of fostering synergies and efficiencies, it is necessary to ensure harmonised rules. Therefore, a strategic and coherent portfolio of a limited number of European Partnerships should be established. | (9) It should be possible to implement parts of the budget through European Partnerships together with other public and private entities, where there is sufficient EU added value demonstrated by a willingness to invest, preferably by both the Union and Member States, dedicated legal vehicles should be set up - including those under TFEU Articles 185 and 187. It should be possible to endow these legal vehicles with a significant budget to create a critical mass across the Union to achieve its objectives, as well as with sufficient operational autonomy to pursue the objectives in a fast-changing world. Where relevant these vehicles could implement budgets from other Union Programmes. In particular, these vehicles could be the instruments used where priorities of the European Competitiveness Fund require the implementation of a joint research and deployment agenda for a particular ecosystem which requires funding from both the Programme and the European Competitiveness Fund. When they are empowered to implement parts of the European Competitiveness Fund this must be duly justified, for example by the structure of the global market. Decisions on the creation of Partnerships, including these legal vehicles, will take place case-by-case and in the context of the relevant policy procedures, including legislative procedures. |
Or. en
Justification
In order to improve the tight connection between Horizon Europe and the ECF, Joint Undertakings should be used to simplify the coordinated use of Horizon and ECF funding for a specific purpose. However, in order to avoid incumbency bias, this cannot be the default implementation mode of Horizon Europe - it has to be an exception to a programme that is otherwise driven by bottom-up research and innovation excellence instead of top-down sectoral agendas. The design is in line with Draghi's call for better coordination of public R&I across Member States.
Amendment 7
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (10) The European Partnerships, including in the form of Joint Undertakings, as an essential tool to deliver on industrial involvement and investment in collaborative research and innovation, should contribute to the specific policy objectives of the policy windows of the European Competitiveness Fund, and be supported through it, where necessary, to complete these objectives. | deleted |
Or. en
Justification
This is covered in the amendment to recital 9.
Amendment 8
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (12a) The Programme can partly be implemented through European moonshots. Moonshots are not funding instruments, but rather a policy approach that combines policy, legislative and funding instruments to achieve a specific, medium-term objective. This objective should be defined in accordance with the SMART-methodology. It should be rooted in research and innovation but should lead to impact beyond the outcomes of research and innovation activities. A moonshot can therefore only be established by a Commission Communication with the commitment across Commission services and with support of Member States. |
Or. en
Justification
To clarify what moonshots should be.
Amendment 9
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (13) The European Research Council (ERC) should provide attractive and flexible funding, thereby enabling talented and creative individual researchers—with a deliberate emphasis on nurturing early-stage researchers—to pursue the most promising avenues at the frontier of science. This commitment to investigator-driven research, selected through Union-wide competition based solely on the criterion of excellence and open to talent regardless of nationality or origin, is fundamental to attracting the world's brightest minds and further establishing Europe as a world-leading centre for research and innovation. | (13) The European Research Council (ERC) should provide attractive and flexible funding, thereby enabling talented and creative individual researchers—including nurturing early-career researchers—to pursue the most promising avenues at the frontier of science across all fields. This commitment to bottom-up, investigator-driven research, selected through Union-wide competition based solely on the criterion of excellence and open to talent regardless of nationality or origin, is fundamental to attracting the world's brightest minds and further strengthening Europe as a world-leading centre for research and innovation. |
Or. en
Justification
Clarifying the role of the ERC in line with its current role.
Amendment 10
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (15) The European Innovation Council (EIC) should stimulate deep tech market-creating innovation. It should identify, develop and deploy these deep tech innovations through its instruments. Through coherent and streamlined support, the EIC should fill the vacuum in public support and private investment for breakthrough technologies and deep tech innovation. The EIC should aim to bridge, integrate and accelerate through its instruments the innovator’s journey from research to market and enable the Union to have leading companies in emerging areas of technology to meet its social and economic objectives and avoid dependencies on other regions. The EIC should support high risk, high-potential innovations and companies presenting such technological, scientific, financial, management or market risks that they are not yet considered to be fully bankable and therefore cannot raise the necessary level of investments to be globally competitive from the market. This should incorporate both an ‘open’ (bottom-up) and a ‘challenge’ driven approach, in close coordination and synergy with the European Competitiveness Fund and its policy windows. It should include a ‘DARPA’-like approach dedicated to supporting defence and dual use startups and their scaling up operating in full complementarity with the ECF InvestEU Instrument and the EU Defence Innovation Scheme (EUDIS) and CASSINI (Space entrepreneurship initiative) activities. The implementation should be done in close synergy and coordination with the European Competitiveness Fund. | (15) The European Innovation Council (EIC) should stimulate deep tech market-creating innovation. It should identify, develop and deploy these deep tech innovations through its instruments. Through coherent and streamlined support, the EIC should fill the vacuum in public support and private investment for breakthrough technologies and deep tech innovation. The EIC should aim to bridge, integrate and accelerate through its instruments the innovator’s journey from research to market and enable the Union to have leading companies in emerging areas of technology to meet its social and economic objectives and avoid dependencies on other regions. The EIC should support high risk, high-potential innovations and companies presenting such technological, scientific, financial, management or market risks that they are not yet considered to be fully bankable and therefore cannot raise the necessary level of investments to be globally competitive from the market. This should incorporate both an ‘open’ (bottom-up) and a ‘challenge’ driven approach. It should include an ‘ARPA’-like approach implemented by Programme Managers, who should be empowered to take risks, pro-actively shape their portfolio and engage with relevant actors outside the Programme. In order to fulfil this role, EIC Programme Managers should have an autonomous but senior position within the organisational structure of the Commission to ensure their freedom of operation. |
Or. en
Justification
Draghi called for the EIC to be an 'ARPA'-type agency and for the Programme Managers to have more autonomy.
Amendment 11
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (16) Deep-tech scale-up financing under the Scaleup Europe Fund announced in the Startup Scaleup Strategy, existing at the time of the entry into force of the present Regulation, should be carried out under the terms agreed in the MFF 2021-2027. All scaleup financing under the MFF 2028-2034 should take place under the ECF. | (16) Deep-tech scale-up financing under the Scaleup Europe Fund announced in the Startup Scaleup Strategy, existing at the time of the entry into force of the present Regulation, should continue to provide scaleup financing under the MFF 2028-2034 as part of the European Innovation Council. |
Or. en
Justification
This fund was successfully launched under the current Programme with significant commitment from institutional investors. For its effective implementation, a longer term perspective needs to be offered to the institutional investors and given that the need for these investments are not disappearing, the Union needs all tools it can find at its disposal to fill the gap.
Amendment 12
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (22) To reinforce the Union’s strategic autonomy and ensure long-term sustainable economic growth, it is essential to bolster its global competitiveness while safeguarding its strategic assets and interests as outlined in the European Economic Security Strategy6 . Article 136 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 as complemented by Article 10 of Regulation (EU) XXX [European Competitiveness Fund] promote the competitiveness of the Union and protect its economic security. The application of these provisions for the purpose of the Programme should provide an appropriate legal framework to allow, where necessary, for the establishment of specific conditions regarding award procedures that promote research-driven competitiveness and protect the interests and strategic autonomy of the Union, including measures aimed at restricting participation or protecting results and ensuring coherence and consistency with specific rules under the European Competitiveness Fund windows. Where necessary, a risk-based approach should be applied to ensure that risks related to research and innovation are identified, assessed, and addressed through proportionate and effective measures7 . In accordance with Article 136 of the Financial Regulation, eligibility restrictions should apply to high-risk suppliers, for security reasons. | (22) To reinforce the Union’s strategic autonomy and ensure long-term sustainable economic growth, it is essential to bolster its global competitiveness while safeguarding its strategic assets and interests as outlined in the European Economic Security Strategy6 . Article 136 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 as complemented by Article 10 of Regulation (EU) XXX [European Competitiveness Fund] promote the competitiveness of the Union and protect its economic security. The application of these provisions for the purpose of the Programme should provide an appropriate legal framework to allow, where necessary, for the establishment of specific conditions regarding award procedures that promote research-driven competitiveness and protect the interests and strategic autonomy of the Union, including measures aimed at restricting participation or protecting results. Where necessary, a risk-based approach should be applied to ensure that risks related to research and innovation are identified, assessed, and addressed through proportionate and effective measures7 . In accordance with Article 136 of the Financial Regulation, eligibility restrictions should apply to high-risk suppliers, for security reasons. |
| 6 Joint Communication to the European Parliament, the European Council and the Council on “European Economic Security Strategy, JOIN(2023) 20 final, Brussels, 20.06.2023. | 6 Joint Communication to the European Parliament, the European Council and the Council on “European Economic Security Strategy, JOIN(2023) 20 final, Brussels, 20.06.2023. |
| 7 Council Recommendation of 23 May 2024 on enhancing research security, C/2024/3510. | 7 Council Recommendation of 23 May 2024 on enhancing research security, C/2024/3510. |
Or. en
Justification
The specific rules under the ECF Windows are not tailored for research projects nor are they applicable to Horizon Europe, so this reference is not productive and creates confusion about the legal framework applicable to Horizon Europe projects.
Amendment 13
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (22a) The Programme recognises the importance of standardisation activities for ensuring that European companies can effectively capitalise on the competitive advantage from research and innovation. Considering the central role of standardisation in driving innovation, enhancing competitiveness, and ensuring impactful, market-ready solutions, the Programme will reimburse costs associated with standardisation activities, promote participants to take part in European and international standardisation activities, as well as offer technical support to researchers in their standardisation activities. |
Or. en
Justification
Standardisation efforts can be labour intensive and therefore costly, but are essential to ensure valorisation of research results and for Europe's competitiveness.
Amendment 14
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (25) The Programme acknowledges climate change as one of the biggest global and societal challenge and climate action as a driver for industrial competitiveness. Activities should reflect the importance of tackling climate change in line with the Union’s commitments to implement the Paris Agreement. | (25) The Programme acknowledges climate change as one of the biggest global and societal challenge and climate action as an enabler for industrial competitiveness insofar as it reduces the cost of doing business in Europe as well as improves the security of supply of energy and raw materials. Activities should reflect the importance of tackling climate change in line with the Union’s commitments to implement the Paris Agreement. |
Or. en
Justification
Given that competitiveness refers to our ability to compete on the global market and that the global market is not (yet) structured to reflect the costs of externalities related to the climate, climate action does not drive competitiveness. Our climate action could enable competitiveness by improving our comparative position on the global market by reducing costs for production in Europe. This does not take away the facts that climate action is needed to address climate change, that climate change should be recognised as one of the major challenges of our time, and that climate-neutrality by 2050 remains the Union's objective.
Amendment 15
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (26) Simplification in the Programme’s implementation is essential to ensure its accessibility and efficiency, particularly by reducing the administrative burden on beneficiaries and minimising the risk of errors. To this end, the Programme should primarily rely on lump sums as the default form of Union funding. Advancing efforts over the previous Framework Programmes to streamline funding rules and minimise errors, the reimbursement of personnel costs should also be further simplified by using personnel unit costs, which reduces complexity for participants and facilitates reporting. | (26) Simplification is essential to ensure its accessibility and efficiency, and should be designed with a view to reducing the administrative burden for beneficiaries related to the application for and management of projects. Simplified applications ensure that the Programme remains open, including for newcomers. Therefore, information which is not absolutely necessary for a good qualitative evaluation of the scientific or innovative quality of a proposal should not be required in proposals nor included as an optional element in the proposal templates or calls. Lump sum based funding has proven to simplify participation for some beneficiaries while complexities remain for others. Further development of this system, and of the use of other simplified cost options, to ensure it leads to genuine simplification for beneficiaries will be required. Application of these options will be targeted and justified. Simplification for beneficiaries also requires legal certainty for applicants. This requires that the Commission makes all relevant information related to the implementation of the Programme, including its rules for participation, available to applicants at the latest when calls for proposals open. The Model Grant Agreement as well as the Annotated Model Grant Agreement, in which the Commission specifies its detailed interpretation of the rules for participation set out in this Regulation, are two documents that provide essential information to applicants and which should therefore be available from the start of the Programme. |
Or. en
Justification
According to Heitor, Horizon Europe should become more applicant-friendly. Under the current programme one of the main concerns of applicants was a lack of information - in particular the absence of the Annotated Model Grant Agreement - that led to legal uncertainty. While lump sums are recognised as a simplification for some applicants and projects, it will not lead to simplification for all. Therefore, a differentiated use of lump sums is needed.
Amendment 16
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (28) In view of strengthening the Union's competitiveness and maximising the uptake and deployment of the results in general, beneficiaries owning results should manage their results in accordance with their obligations established under this Regulation regarding valorisation and dissemination. Those obligations may be adjusted in the work programme, call conditions or grant agreement where appropriate based on policy considerations, including related to economic security, but should encompass requirements to protect, give access, valorise results and make them public as appropriate and justified, including through open science practices. To facilitate and accelerate the valorisation process, support instruments and tools should be put in place in line with the Commission’s valorisation strategy as developed under the European Competitiveness Fund and any such support and services provided for in its Chapter III. | (28) In view of strengthening the Union's competitiveness and maximising the uptake and deployment of the results in general, beneficiaries owning results should manage their results in accordance with their obligations established under this Regulation regarding valorisation and dissemination. Those obligations may be adjusted in the call conditions where appropriate based on policy considerations, including related to economic security, but should encompass requirements to protect, give access, valorise results and make them public as appropriate and justified, including through open science practices. To facilitate and accelerate the valorisation process, support instruments and tools should be put in place in line with the Commission’s valorisation strategy as developed under the European Competitiveness Fund and any such support and services provided for in its Chapter III. |
Or. en
Justification
Text adjustment taking into account the changing role of Work Programmes under Pillar 2.
Amendment 17
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (29a) The European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT) has brought forward several generations of Knowledge and Innovation Communities (KICs), leveraging the strength of collaboration in the knowledge triangle. This Programme will continue to support the work of the KICs as well as the efforts by the EIT to support KICs by sharing best practices, supporting the administration of public funds and creating cross-KIC added value. |
Or. en
Justification
According to the Heitor report, a radical reform of the EIT is needed and even the elimination of FP funding should be considered. However, unless the radical decision to eliminate FP funding is taken, the EIT and its role in the Programme needs to be reflected in the FP.
Amendment 18
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29 b (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (29b) The Council Recommendation of 23 May 2024, on Enhancing Research Security, emphasises the need to safeguard the Union’s research and innovation ecosystem from malign influence, undesirable knowledge transfer, and threats to academic freedom and research integrity, while preserving openness and international cooperation. It also underscores the importance of a proportionate, risk-based approach to research security, ensuring that the Union’s strategic autonomy, values, and fundamental rights are upheld. To achieve these objectives, it is essential to integrate the principles and actions set out in that Recommendation into the Programme. This will ensure that research and innovation activities funded under the Programme are conducted in a secure, transparent, and ethically responsible manner, while fostering global collaboration in line with the Union’s interests and priorities. |
Or. en
Justification
The Niinistö report recognised the Council Recommendation as an important first step, but also called for the Union and its Member States to work on a "shared level of awareness". The FP has to make its contribution to this.
Amendment 19
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (31a) Industrial ecosystems that are identified as priority areas in Union law, including Net-Zero Acceleration Valleys, established pursuant to Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1735 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a will be proactively supported by the Programme. Proposals for research and innovation activities in the scope of this Regulation, which are initiated for the implementation of such priority areas should receive a favourable regime in the proposal evaluation process. | |
| 1a Regulation (EU) 2024/1735 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 on establishing a framework of measures for strengthening Europe’s net-zero technology manufacturing ecosystem and amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1724 (OJ L, 2024/1735, 28.6.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1735/oj). |
Or. en
Justification
If the Union wants to foster directional, competitiveness-driving R&I, the Programme should support the key initiatives that the Union has identified as strategic developments.
Amendment 20
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (36) The Programme is to be implemented in accordance with Regulation (EU) XXX of the European Parliament and of the Council [Performance Regulation] which establishes the rules for the expenditure tracking and the performance framework for the budget, including rules for ensuring a uniform application of the principles of ‘do no significant harm’ and gender equality referred to in Article 33(2), points (d) and (f), as well as the provisions on accessibility for persons with disabilities reflected in Articles 17.3, 20.4 and 21.1 of Annex I, of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 respectively and in line with the accessibility requirements of Annex I and III of directive 2019/882, rules for monitoring and reporting on the performance of Union programmes and activities, rules for establishing a Union funding portal, rules for the evaluation of the programmes, as well as other horizontal provisions applicable to all Union programmes such as those on information, communication and visibility. | (36) The Programme is to be implemented in accordance with Regulation (EU) XXX of the European Parliament and of the Council [Performance Regulation] where it relates to the rules for the expenditure tracking and the provisions on accessibility for persons with disabilities reflected in Articles 17.3, 20.4 and 21.1 of Annex I, of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 respectively and in line with the accessibility requirements of Annex I and III of directive 2019/882, as well as rules for establishing a Union funding portal. |
Or. en
Justification
The Financial Regulation requires that the application of the DNSH principle and gender equality to be 'where feasible and appropriate in accordance with the relevant sector-specific rules'. This language was introduced by the Parliament in the Financial Regulation to ensure that the application of the principles was effective and not just window dressing. Therefore it is important to set out the application of these principles in this Regulation.
Amendment 21
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (36a) Article 33(2), point (e) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 provides that all Union Programmes, where feasible and appropriate as set out in the basic acts of those programmes, are to respect working and employment conditions under applicable national law, Union law, ILO conventions and collective agreements. Given the intense global competition for research talent the employment conditions in entities capable of winning competitive selection procedures under this Programme are at extremely low risk of non-compliance with this requirement. It is therefore appropriate to consider all the activities under this Programme by default compliant with the requirement. |
Or. en
Justification
The Financial Regulation requires that the application of the standards for working and employment conditions to be 'where feasible and appropriate in accordance with the relevant sector-specific rules'. This language was introduced by the Parliament in the Financial Regulation to ensure that the application of the principles was effective and not just window dressing. Therefore it is important to set out the application of these standards in this Regulation taking into account the particular setting of this sector - including the specific dynamic regarding research careers where other matters than typical labour condition concerns play a prominent role. As will be clear from the amendments to the relevant Articles, considering compliance by default does not mean that there is no oversight on compliance.
Amendment 22
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (37a) In order to ensure deliberate and up-to-date decisions, commonly agreed by the Union institutions, on funding priorities and strategic considerations with regard to international cooperation, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the TFEU should be delegated to the Commission in respect of the adoption of the work programmes and the implementation under this Regulation of Articles 10(2), 10(3) and 20 of Regulation (EU) XXX [European Competitiveness Fund]. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making1a. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. | |
| 1a OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/agree_interinstit/2016/512/oj." |
Or. en
Justification
Standard recital on delegated acts
Amendment 23
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (a) the Specific Programme established by Council Decision XX including the collaborative research activities of the policy windows as set out in the European Competitive Fund Regulation. | (a) the Specific Programme established by Council Decision XX. |
Or. en
Justification
As part of the improved tight connection between Horizon Europe and the ECF - which takes in consideration the importance of the risk of incumbency bias as described by Prof Aghion et al. -, Horizon programming is moved back from the ECF to Horizon.
Amendment 24
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (1) ‘research infrastructures’ are facilities that provide resources and services to conduct research and foster innovation in their fields; | (1) ‘research infrastructures’ are facilities, equipment, capabilities, collections, archives, scientific data infrastructures and resources that provide services to conduct research and foster innovation in their fields, with the primary purpose of pursuing scientific excellence; |
Or. en
Justification
Definition aligned with commonly used definitions. Clarification on primary purpose clarifies the distinction between research infrastructures and technology infrastructures.
Amendment 25
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (2) ‘technology infrastructures’ are facilities, equipment, capabilities and resources required to develop, test, upscale and validate technology - from pre-competitive applied research services up to demonstration and validation; | (2) ‘technology infrastructures’ are facilities, equipment, capabilities and resources, including test beds, pilot lines, pilot plants, demonstration facilities, cleanrooms and living labs, that enable developing, testing, scaling up and validating technology - from pre-competitive applied research services up to demonstration and validation - with the primary purposes of accelerating towards market and/or societal adoption and strengthening industrial competitiveness; |
Or. en
Justification
Definition aligned with commonly used definitions. Clarification on primary purpose clarifies the distinction between research infrastructures and technology infrastructures.
Amendment 26
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (7) ‘open access’ means online access to results, provided free to the end user; | (7) ‘open access’ means online access to results, provided free of charge for anyone to reuse with minimal restrictions, to scientific publications and corresponding research data resulting from actions under the Programme; |
Or. en
Justification
Definition aligned with commonly used definitions.
Amendment 27
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (11) ‘background' means any data, knowledge or know how whatever its form or nature, tangible or intangible, including any rights such as intellectual property rights, that is held prior to the accession to a given action; | (11) ‘background' means any data, knowledge or know how whatever its form or nature, tangible or intangible, including any rights such as intellectual property rights, that is: |
| (a) held by beneficiaries prior to the accession to a given action and | |
| (b) identified by the beneficiaries in a written agreement as needed for implementing the action or for exploiting its results; |
Or. en
Justification
Definition aligned with commonly used definitions. Particularly point (b) is important for the legal certainty for beneficiaries.
Amendment 28
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (11a) 'fair and reasonable conditions' means appropriate conditions, including possible financial terms, taking into account the specific circumstances of the request for access, for example, the cost for its protection, the actual or potential value of the results or background to which access is requested and/or the scope, duration or other characteristics of the exploitation envisaged; |
Or. en
Justification
Introducing a commonly used definition for legal clarity.
Amendment 29
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 12
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (12) ‘valorisation’ means the use of results in further activities other than those covered by the action concerned, including commercial deployment; | (12) 'valorisation’ means the process of creating social and economic value from results, including through standardisation, by transforming data, know-how and results into new products, services, solutions and science-informed public policies, and fostering commercial deployment; |
Or. en
Justification
Broadening the definition to many different ways in which value is created from scientific knowledge.
Amendment 30
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 12 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (12a) 'dissemination' means the public disclosure of the results by appropriate means, other than resulting from protecting or exploiting the results, including by scientific publications in any medium; |
Or. en
Justification
Clarifies that regardless of the value creation through 'valorisation', researchers should disseminate their knowledge. This is a fundamental part of academic freedom.
Amendment 31
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 20 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (20a) ‘research action’ means a collaborative action primarily consisting of basic research activities aiming to push the frontier of science and technology; |
Or. en
Justification
The Commission's proposal omitted any form of definition of the kinds of actions that can be funded as part of the collaborative parts of the Programme. These definitions are important to ensure that Horizon funds are spend on R&I. Furthermore, without these definitions, the calls would not be able to target - if needed - certain parts of the research value chain.
Amendment 32
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 20 b (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (20b) 'research and innovation action' means a collaborative action primarily consisting of activities aiming to establish new knowledge and, where applicable, to explore the feasibility of a new or improved technology, product, process, service or solution. Aimed mainly at early stages of the research and innovation continuum. This may include basic and applied research, technology development and integration, testing, demonstration and validation on a small-scale prototype in a laboratory or simulated environment; |
Or. en
Justification
The Commission's proposal omitted any form of definition of the kinds of actions that can be funded as part of the collaborative parts of the Programme. These definitions are important to ensure that Horizon funds are spend on R&I. Furthermore, without these definitions, the calls would not be able to target - if needed - certain parts of the research value chain.
Amendment 33
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 20 c (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (20c) ‘innovation action’ means a collaborative action primarily consisting of activities directly aiming to produce plans and arrangements or designs for new, altered or improved products, processes or services, possibly including prototyping, testing and demonstrating their performance in relevant environments. |
Or. en
Justification
The Commission's proposal omitted any form of definition of the kinds of actions that can be funded as part of the collaborative parts of the Programme. These definitions are important to ensure that Horizon funds are spend on R&I. Furthermore, without these definitions, the calls would not be able to target - if needed - certain parts of the research value chain.
Amendment 34
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 21
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (21) ‘indirect actions’ means R&I related activities to which the Union provides financial support and which are undertaken by participants; | (21) ‘indirect actions’ means actions to which the Union provides financial support under this Regulation and which are undertaken by participants; |
Or. en
Justification
Clarifying that funds under this Programme are to be spend on R&I through actions allowed under this Regulation.
Amendment 35
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 23
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (23) ‘innovation ecosystem’ means an ecosystem which brings together at Union level organisations whose functional goal is to enable technology development and innovation and which encompasses relations between material resources (such as funds, equipment, and facilities, including research and technology infrastructures), institutional entities (such as higher education institutions and support services, research and technology organisations, companies, investors - including venture capitalists - and financial intermediaries) and national, regional and local policy-making and funding entities. | (23) ‘innovation ecosystem’ means an ecosystem which brings together at Union level organisations whose functional goal is to enable technology development and innovation and which encompasses relations between material resources (such as funds, equipment, and facilities, including research and technology infrastructures), institutional entities (such as higher education institutions and support services, research and technology organisations, standardisation organisations, companies, investors - including venture capitalists - and financial intermediaries) and national, regional and local policy-making and funding entities. |
Or. en
Amendment 36
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 24
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (24) ‘knowledge triangle’ means the creation of networks between education institutions, research organisations and business with the aim to create innovation ecosystems that cater for the creation of an innovation pipeline from the inception of innovation through entrepreneurial education to the creation of startups and the growth of scale-ups. | (24) ‘knowledge triangle’ means networks between education institutions, research organisations and business with the aim to create innovation ecosystems that cater for the creation of an innovation pipeline from the inception of innovation through entrepreneurial education to the creation of startups and the growth of scale-ups. |
Or. en
Justification
Clarifying that the networks often already exist and that support should not only go to new networks but also to existing networks that need support.
Amendment 37
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. In line with the general and specific objectives of the European Competitiveness Fund, the Programme shall strengthen the EU’s competitiveness, scientific technological base, and address global challenges based on excellent research and innovation. | 1. The Programme shall strengthen the EU’s scientific and technological bases, through excellent research and innovation based on open competition, thereby supporting prosperity, competitiveness, and addressing global challenges. |
Or. en
Justification
As part of the improved tight connection, and in line with preventing incumbency bias as an risk identified by Aghion et al., this amendment removes the subjugation of the Horizon objectives to ECF objectives. It also bring the language of the objectives more in line with Treaty language.
Amendment 38
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – indent -1 (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – Develop, promote and advance scientific and technological excellence to support the creation and diffusion of high-quality knowledge, skills, technologies and solutions. |
Or. en
Justification
This has been the leading Specific Objective for Horizon Europe. The focus on excellence has been the bedrock of the success of the Framework Programmes and should be recognised as such.
Amendment 39
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – indent 2
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – Increase EU-wide and international collaborative research, knowledge sharing and valorisation. | – Increase EU-wide and international collaborative research, innovation, knowledge sharing and valorisation. |
Or. en
Justification
As Draghi wrote, "Europe must profoundly refocus its collective efforts on closing the innovation gap with the US and China, especially in advanced technologies". Therefore, innovation cannot be omitted here.
Amendment 40
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – indent 5
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – Improve the Union’s position in innovation, with a specific focus on strategic technologies and disruptive innovation, facilitate the diffusion of innovative solutions through standardisation activities to foster competitiveness and address key societal challenges. | – Improve the Union’s position in research and innovation, with a specific focus on strategic technologies and disruptive innovation, and facilitate the diffusion of innovative solutions in line with the general and specific objectives of the European Competitiveness Fund. |
Or. en
Justification
While standardisation is important, this is not the appropriate place to make this reference. Furthermore, as part of the improved tight connection between Horizon and ECF, it is important to establish that a link between this Specific Objective of Horizon and the objectives of ECF.
Amendment 41
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – indent 7
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – Contribute to increasing public and private investment in research and innovation in Member States, thereby contributing to reach an overall expenditure of at least 3% of Union Gross Domestic Product (‘GDP’) in research and development. | deleted |
Or. en
Justification
The 3% objective is important, but rather than having the contribution as an objective, it should be a horizontal implementation principle.
Amendment 42
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. For the purposes of the Specific Programme referred to in Article 1(2), the Programme shall be structured in parts as follows, which contribute to the general and specific objectives set out in Article 3 and the policy windows of Regulation (EU) XXX [European Competitiveness Fund]: | 1. For the purposes of the Specific Programme referred to in Article 1(2) point a, the Programme shall be structured in pillars as follows, which contribute to the general and specific objectives set out in Article 3: |
Or. en
Justification
As part of the improved tight connection between ECF and Horizon, Horizon will continue to mirror the structure of the ECF but it will have its own objectives.
Amendment 43
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (a) Part I ‘Excellent Science’, with the following components, in particular: | (a) Pillar I ‘Excellent Science’, with the following components: |
Or. en
Justification
For the sake of continuity, the Parts will be called Pillars.
Amendment 44
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ii a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (iia) Fast Track to Excellence |
Or. en
Justification
This is a new instrument to support bottom-up, open collaborative research through a continuously open call - without any directionality - for small projects implemented by small consortia in a short time.
Amendment 45
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory part
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (b) Part II ‘Competitiveness and Society’, with the following components, in particular: | (b) Pillar II ‘Competitiveness and Society’, with the following components: |
Or. en
Justification
For the sake of continuity, the Parts will be called Pillars.
Amendment 46
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point i – introductory part
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| i) ‘Competitiveness’, including research and innovation activities in support of policies under the European Competitiveness Fund, such as: | i) Competitiveness Window I "Energy Infrastructure; Decarbonisation & Clean Technology" |
Or. en
Justification
Given the improved tight connection between ECF and Horizon, Pillar 2 no longer needs to be divided in two separate parts but can be established simply as a Pillar with five Windows - where the Competitiveness Windows mirror the ECF structure.
Amendment 47
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point i – point 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (1) collaborative research and innovation activities under Chapter IV ‘Clean Transition and Industrial Decarbonisation’ of the European Competitiveness Fund; | deleted |
Or. en
Justification
Given the improved tight connection between ECF and Horizon, Pillar 2 no longer needs to be divided in two separate parts but can be established simply as a Pillar with five Windows - where the Competitiveness Windows mirror the ECF structure.
Amendment 48
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point i – point 2
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (2) collaborative research and innovation activities under Chapter V ‘Health, Biotech, Agriculture and Bioeconomy’ of the European Competitiveness Fund; | deleted |
Or. en
Justification
Given the improved tight connection between ECF and Horizon, Pillar 2 no longer needs to be divided in two separate parts but can be established simply as a Pillar with five Windows - where the Competitiveness Windows mirror the ECF structure.
Amendment 49
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point i – point 3
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (3) collaborative research and innovation activities under Chapter VI ‘Digital Leadership’ of the European Competitiveness Fund; | deleted |
Or. en
Justification
Given the improved tight connection between ECF and Horizon, Pillar 2 no longer needs to be divided in two separate parts but can be established simply as a Pillar with five Windows - where the Competitiveness Windows mirror the ECF structure.
Amendment 50
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point i – point 4
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (4) collaborative research and innovation activities under Chapter VII ‘Resilience and Security, Defence Industry and Space’ of the European Competitiveness Fund. | deleted |
Or. en
Justification
Given the improved tight connection between ECF and Horizon, Pillar 2 no longer needs to be divided in two separate parts but can be established simply as a Pillar with five Windows - where the Competitiveness Windows mirror the ECF structure.
Amendment 51
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point i a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| ia) Competitiveness Window II "Biotechnology, Health, and Sustainable Prosperity" |
Or. en
Justification
Given the improved tight connection between ECF and Horizon, Pillar 2 no longer needs to be divided in two separate parts but can be established simply as a Pillar with five Windows - where the Competitiveness Windows mirror the ECF structure.
Amendment 52
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point i b (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| ib) Competitiveness Window III "Digital Leadership and Infrastructure" |
Or. en
Justification
Given the improved tight connection between ECF and Horizon, Pillar 2 no longer needs to be divided in two separate parts but can be established simply as a Pillar with five Windows - where the Competitiveness Windows mirror the ECF structure.
Amendment 53
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point i c (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| ic) Competitiveness Window IV "Space, Critical Raw Materials, Security" |
Or. en
Justification
Given the improved tight connection between ECF and Horizon, Pillar 2 no longer needs to be divided in two separate parts but can be established simply as a Pillar with five Windows - where the Competitiveness Windows mirror the ECF structure.This Competitiveness Window follows the ECF structure but not exactly the title, because defence research is not funded under this Window but under ECF. Therefore, keeping "defence" in the title of the Window would create confusion.
Amendment 54
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii – introductory part
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| ii) ‘Society’, including research and innovation activities, such as: | ii) Global Societal Challenges Window, including the New European Bauhaus Facility |
Or. en
Justification
Given the improved tight connection between ECF and Horizon, Pillar 2 no longer needs to be divided in two separate parts but can be established simply as a Pillar with five Windows - where the Competitiveness Windows mirror the ECF structure. The title of this Window now can also be clarified and no longer needs subdivision (as this is also not available under the other Windows). Furthermore, now that the Competitiveness Windows are no longer subject to the scope definition of ECF, they may fund R&I activities under the European Missions and therefore the Missions do not require a mention here.
Amendment 55
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii – point 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (1) global societal challenges; | deleted |
Or. en
Justification
Given the improved tight connection between ECF and Horizon, Pillar 2 no longer needs to be divided in two separate parts but can be established simply as a Pillar with five Windows - where the Competitiveness Windows mirror the ECF structure. The title of this Window now can also be clarified and no longer needs subdivision (as this is also not available under the other Windows). Furthermore, now that the Competitiveness Windows are no longer subject to the scope definition of ECF, they may fund R&I activities under the European Missions and therefore the Missions do not require a mention here.
Amendment 56
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii – point 2
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (2) EU Missions; | deleted |
Or. en
Justification
Given the improved tight connection between ECF and Horizon, Pillar 2 no longer needs to be divided in two separate parts but can be established simply as a Pillar with five Windows - where the Competitiveness Windows mirror the ECF structure. The title of this Window now can also be clarified and no longer needs subdivision (as this is also not available under the other Windows). Furthermore, now that the Competitiveness Windows are no longer subject to the scope definition of ECF, they may fund R&I activities under the European Missions and therefore the Missions do not require a mention here.
Amendment 57
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii – point 3
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (3) the New European Bauhaus Facility; | deleted |
Or. en
Justification
Given the improved tight connection between ECF and Horizon, Pillar 2 no longer needs to be divided in two separate parts but can be established simply as a Pillar with five Windows - where the Competitiveness Windows mirror the ECF structure. The title of this Window now can also be clarified and no longer needs subdivision (as this is also not available under the other Windows). Furthermore, now that the Competitiveness Windows are no longer subject to the scope definition of ECF, they may fund R&I activities under the European Missions and therefore the Missions do not require a mention here.
Amendment 58
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| iia) Fast Track to Innovation |
Or. en
Justification
This is a new instrument to support bottom-up, open collaborative applied research through a continuously open call for small projects implemented by small consortia in a short time.
Amendment 59
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii b (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| iib) European Demonstrator Scheme |
Or. en
Justification
This is a new instrument to support bottom-up ideas for large scale, pan-European demonstrator projects through a continuously open call for big projects implemented by a large consortium from across the Union with demonstration sites in several Member States.
Amendment 60
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c – introductory part
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (c) Part III ‘Innovation’, with the following components, in particular: | (c) Pillar III ‘Innovation’, with the following components: |
Or. en
Justification
For the sake of continuity, the Parts will be called Pillars.
Amendment 61
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d – introductory part
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (d) Part IV ‘European Research Area’, with the following components, in particular: | (d) Pillar IV ‘European Research Area’, with the following components: |
Or. en
Justification
For the sake of continuity, the Parts will be called Pillars.
Amendment 62
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d – point i a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (ia) European support for Researchers at Risk |
Or. en
Justification
This is a new instrument to fund support to Researchers At Risk that need a safe place in the Union to continue their research work. This new instrument will strengthen Europe's position as a safehaven for academic freedom and the freedom of scientific research.
Amendment 63
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. The broad lines of activities of the Programme are set out in Annex I of this Regulation. |
Or. en
Justification
The Treaties require that this Regulation sets out the broad lines of the activities to be funded under the Programme. The Horizon 2021-2027 Regulation has an annex as way to fulfil that requirement, this amendment proposes to do the same for the this Regulation.
Amendment 64
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (a) ensure a multidisciplinary approach, where appropriate, and provide for the integration of social sciences and humanities (SSH) across all components under the Programme, including specific calls for proposals on SSH related topics. | (a) ensure a multidisciplinary approach, where appropriate, and provide for the integration of social sciences, humanities and the arts (SSHA) across all components under the Programme, including specific calls for proposals on SSHA related topics, topics dedicated to the cultural and creative industries. |
Or. en
Amendment 65
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (b) advance scientific knowledge and contribute to the creation of informed, effective, and responsive public policies across the Union and beyond. The Programme shall actively promote the use of the results of publicly funded research and of scientific evidence in policy-making processes at all levels, fostering stronger links between research, innovation, and the development of evidence-informed public policies. This shall include encouraging collaborative mechanisms, R&I initiatives and science-for-policy interfaces connecting policy makers with the scientific community, as well as facilitating the use of research outcomes in shaping future legislative and regulatory frameworks at all levels. Special emphasis shall be placed on ensuring that scientific insights are accessible and relevant to decision makers and citizens, with instruments for the effective use of research results, policy briefs, and recommendations. | (b) advance scientific knowledge and contribute to the creation of informed, effective, and responsive public policies across the Union and beyond. The Programme shall actively promote the use of the results of publicly funded research and of scientific evidence in policy-making processes at all levels, fostering stronger links between research, innovation, and the development of evidence-informed public policies and standards. This shall include encouraging collaborative mechanisms, R&I initiatives and science-for-policy interfaces connecting policy makers with the scientific community, as well as facilitating the use of research outcomes in shaping future legislative and regulatory frameworks at all levels. Special emphasis shall be placed on ensuring that scientific insights are accessible and relevant to decision makers and citizens, with instruments for the effective use of research results, policy briefs, and recommendations. |
Or. en
Amendment 66
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| The Programme shall | |
| (a) be implemented with the objective of simplification the administrative work related to the application for and management of its projects. In this regard, the Commission or the relevant funding body shall ensure that sufficient guidance and information is made available to all potential participants at the time of publication of the call for proposals, in particular the applicable model grant agreement. In the same regard, no information which is not absolutely necessary for a good qualitative evaluation of the scientific or innovative quality of a proposal shall be required in a proposal. |
Or. en
Justification
The requirement to provide sufficient guidance and information is enshrined in the Horizon 2021-2027 Regulation, and yet the full Annotated Model Grant Agreement was available nearly 4 years too late. This underlines to maintain this requirement if real simplification for beneficiaries is the objective.
Amendment 67
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 b (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (b) contribute to increasing public and private investment in research and innovation in Member States, thereby contributing to reach an overall expenditure of at least 3% of Union Gross Domestic Product (‘GDP’) in research and development. Wherever possible, the instruments under the Programme shall aim to leverage national investments. |
Or. en
Justification
The 3% objective is important, but rather than having the contribution as an objective, it should be a horizontal implementation principle.
Amendment 68
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. The indicative financial envelope of the Programme for the period 1 January 2028 to 31 December 2034 shall be EUR 175 002 000 000 in current prices. | 1. The indicative financial envelope of the Programme for the period 1 January 2028 to 31 December 2034 shall be EUR 220 000 000 000 in current prices. |
Or. en
Justification
Draghi called for the doubling of the budget of Horizon Europe. Heitor called for 220 billion.
Amendment 69
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (a) EUR 44 079 000 000 for Part I ‘Excellent Science’, of which EUR 2 600 000 000 for non-nuclear direct actions of Joint Research Centre (JRC). | (a) EUR 55 413 000 000 for Pillar I ‘Excellent Science’. |
Or. en
Justification
Proportionate increase as consequence of increase of overall budget to 220 billion euros. Each Pillar should get a dedicated Chapter in the nomenclature of the annual budget.
Amendment 70
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| i. EUR XX XXX XXX XXX for the European Research Council (ERC) |
Or. en
Justification
Each part of a Pillar needs an indicative financial envelop as well as at least one budget line in the nomenclature of the annual budget.
Amendment 71
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a – point ii (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| ii. EUR XX XXX XXX XXX for Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions |
Or. en
Justification
Each part of a Pillar needs an indicative financial envelop as well as at least one budget line in the nomenclature of the annual budget.
Amendment 72
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a – point iii (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| iii. EUR XX XXX XXX XXX for ‘Fast Track to Excellence’ |
Or. en
Justification
Each part of a Pillar needs an indicative financial envelop as well as at least one budget line in the nomenclature of the annual budget.
Amendment 73
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a – point iv (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| iv. EUR X XXX XXX XXX for non-nuclear direct actions of Joint Research Centre (JRC). |
Or. en
Justification
Each part of a Pillar needs an indicative financial envelop as well as at least one budget line in the nomenclature of the annual budget.
Amendment 74
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b – introductory part
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (b) EUR 75 876 000 000 for Part II ‘Competitiveness and Society’, of which: | (b) EUR 95 386 000 000 for Pillar II ‘Competitiveness and Society’, of which: |
Or. en
Justification
Proportionate increase as consequence of increase of overall budget to 220 billion euros. Each Pillar should get a dedicated Chapter in the nomenclature of the annual budget.
Amendment 75
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b – point i – introductory part
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| i. EUR 68 270 000 000 for ‘Competitiveness’ of which: | i. EUR XX XXX XXX XXX for Competitiveness Window I "Energy Infrastructure; Decarbonisation & Clean Technology" |
Or. en
Justification
Each part of a Pillar needs an indicative financial envelop as well as at least one budget line in the nomenclature of the annual budget.
Amendment 76
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b – point i – paragraph 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| EUR 25 331 000 000 for collaborative research and innovation activities under Chapter IV ‘Clean Transition and Industrial Decarbonisation’ of the European Competitiveness Fund; | deleted |
Or. en
Amendment 77
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b – point i – paragraph 2
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| EUR 19 650 000 000 for collaborative research and innovation activities under Chapter V ‘Health, Biotech, Agriculture and Bioeconomy’ of the European Competitiveness Fund; | deleted |
Or. en
Amendment 78
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b – point i – paragraph 3
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| EUR 16 854 000 000 for collaborative research and innovation activities under Chapter VI ‘Digital Leadership’ of the European Competitiveness Fund; | deleted |
Or. en
Amendment 79
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b – point i – paragraph 4
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| EUR 6 435 000 000 for collaborative research and innovation activities under Chapter VII ‘Resilience and Security, Defence Industry and Space’ of the European Competitiveness Fund. | deleted |
Or. en
Amendment 80
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b – point i a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| i a. EUR XX XXX XXX XXX for Competitiveness Window II "Biotechnology, Health, and Sustainable Prosperity" |
Or. en
Justification
Each part of a Pillar needs an indicative financial envelop as well as at least one budget line in the nomenclature of the annual budget.
Amendment 81
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b – point i b (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| i b. EUR XX XXX XXX XXX for Competitiveness Window III "Digital Leadership and Infrastructure" |
Or. en
Justification
Each part of a Pillar needs an indicative financial envelop as well as at least one budget line in the nomenclature of the annual budget.
Amendment 82
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b – point i c (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| i c. EUR XX XXX XXX XXX for Competitiveness Window IV "Space, Critical Raw Materials, Security" |
Or. en
Justification
Each part of a Pillar needs an indicative financial envelop as well as at least one budget line in the nomenclature of the annual budget.
Amendment 83
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b – point i d (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| i d. EUR XX XXX XXX XXX for Global Societal Challenges Window, of which at least EUR XX XXX XXX XXX for the New European Bauhaus Facility. |
Or. en
Justification
Each part of a Pillar needs an indicative financial envelop as well as a at least one budget line in the nomenclature of the annual budget. In this case there should be at least two budget lines so that spending on the New European Bauhaus is reflected in the annual budget.
Amendment 84
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b – point i e (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| i e. EUR XX XXX XXX XXX for ‘European Demonstrator Scheme’ |
Or. en
Justification
Each part of a Pillar needs an indicative financial envelop as well as a at least one budget line in the nomenclature of the annual budget.
Amendment 85
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b – point i f (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| i f. EUR XX XXX XXX XXX for ‘Fast Track to Innovation’ |
Or. en
Justification
Each part of a Pillar needs an indicative financial envelop as well as a at least one budget line in the nomenclature of the annual budget.
Amendment 86
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b – point ii
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| ii. EUR 7 606 000 000 for ‘Society. | deleted |
Or. en
Amendment 87
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (c) EUR 38 785 000 000 for Part III ‘Innovation’. | (c) EUR 48 757 000 000 for Pillar III ‘Innovation’, of which: |
Or. en
Justification
Proportionate increase as consequence of increase of overall budget to 220 billion euros. Each Pillar should get a dedicated Chapter in the nomenclature of the annual budget.
Amendment 88
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c – point i (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| i. EUR XX XXX XXX XXX for the European Innovation Council (EIC); |
Or. en
Justification
Each part of a Pillar needs an indicative financial envelop as well as a at least one budget line in the nomenclature of the annual budget.
Amendment 89
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c – point ii (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| ii. EUR X XXX XXX XXX for European Innovation Ecosystems; |
Or. en
Justification
Each part of a Pillar needs an indicative financial envelop as well as a at least one budget line in the nomenclature of the annual budget.
Amendment 90
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point d
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (d) EUR 16 262 000 000 for Part IV ‘European Research Area’, of which EUR 5 387 000 000 for widening participation and spreading excellence. | (d) EUR 20 443 000 000 for Pillar IV ‘European Research Area’, of which: |
Or. en
Justification
Proportionate increase as consequence of increase of overall budget to 220 billion euros.
Amendment 91
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point d – point i (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| i. EUR XXX XXX XXX for reforming and enhancing the European R&I system |
Or. en
Justification
Each part of a Pillar needs an indicative financial envelop as well as a at least one budget line in the nomenclature of the annual budget.
Amendment 92
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point d – point ii (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| ii. EUR X XXX XXX XXX for the European Fellowship Scheme for Researchers at Risk |
Or. en
Justification
Each part of a Pillar needs an indicative financial envelop as well as a at least one budget line in the nomenclature of the annual budget.
Amendment 93
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point d – point iii (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| iii. EUR XX XXX XXX XXX for research and technology infrastructures |
Or. en
Justification
Each part of a Pillar needs an indicative financial envelop as well as a at least one budget line in the nomenclature of the annual budget.
Amendment 94
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point d – point iv (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| iv. EUR 7 260 000 000 for widening participation and spreading excellence. |
Or. en
Justification
Reflecting the need to spend 3,3% of the overall budget on Widening. Each part of a Pillar needs an indicative financial envelop as well as a at least one budget line in the nomenclature of the annual budget.
Amendment 95
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5a. Each Pillar identified shall form a Chapter in the nomenclature of the Union’s annual budget. Each part of a Pillar, identified, shall have its own budget line or lines in the nomenclature of the Union’s annual budget. Separate budget lines shall be established for any entity created under Articles 185 and 187 of the TFEU which are entrusted with the implementation of a part of the budget of this Programme. |
Or. en
Justification
For budgetary oversight as well as for the predictability for applicants, the budget needs to be transparent. Setting the budget for Pillar at Chapter level ensure more budgetary stability.
Amendment 96
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. In accordance with Article 15(3) of the Financial Regulation all decommitments stemming from this Programme or its predecessors shall be re-used in the financial year following the year of decommitment. These funds shall be recommitted to the same budget line or the budget line most closely resembling the budget line under which the commitments were originally made. These appropriations shall made available to these budget lines above and beyond the budget agreed in the annual budgetary procedure. |
Or. en
Justification
Full reuse of research decommitments is a longstanding position of the European Parliament.
Amendment 97
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Any international agreement that provides for the possibility of a third country to participate in Union Programmes shall include a list of all Union Programmes to which the third country is associated, including the scope of each association. Those international agreements shall be considered to fall within the scope of Article 218(6)a of the TFEU. Therefore, amending the list will require the consent of the Parliament. |
Or. en
Justification
Maintaining the interinstitutional balance.
Amendment 98
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 7
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 7. The conditions determining the level of the financial contributions referred to in paragraph 2, point (b) shall ensure a regular automatic correction of any significant imbalance compared to the amount that entities established in the associated country receive through participation in the Programme, taking into account the costs in the management, execution and operation of the Programme. The allocation of the financial contributions shall take into account the level of participation of the legal entities of the associated countries in each part of the Programme. | 7. The conditions determining the level of the financial contributions referred to in paragraph 2, point (b) shall ensure a regular automatic correction of any significant imbalance compared to the amount that entities established in the associated country receive through participation in the Programme, taking into account the costs in the management, execution and operation of the Programme. The allocation of the financial contributions shall strictly follow the level of participation of the legal entities of the associated countries in each part of the Programme |
Or. en
Amendment 99
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article9a | |
| Research Security | |
| The Programme shall be implemented in accordance with the Council Recommendation of 23 May 2024 on enhancing research security and/or any other subsequent framework for research security adopted by the Council or co-legislators. |
Or. en
Justification
In line with the Niinisto report
Amendment 100
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. With the exception of financial instruments under the EIC (Fund) where Union support is provided in the form of a budgetary guarantee or a financial instrument, including where combined with non-repayable support in a blending operation, it shall be exclusively provided through the European Competitiveness Fund InvestEU Instrument and implemented in accordance with the applicable rules of the European Competitiveness Fund InvestEU Instrument through the contribution or guarantee agreements concluded for that purpose. Where the Programme makes use of the ECF InvestEU Instrument, it shall provide the provisioning for the budgetary guarantee and the financing to financial instruments, including when combined with non-repayable support in the form of a blending operation. | deleted |
Or. en
Amendment 101
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Where Union funding is provided in the form of a grant, funding shall be provided as financing not linked to cost, or as simplified cost options in particular through lump sums as well as unit costs for personnel, in accordance with Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509. Funding may be provided in the form of actual eligible cost reimbursement only where the objectives of an action cannot be achieved otherwise. Where it is necessary to enable other sources of funding including co-investments with national resources subject to State aid rules, funding shall be provided in the form of actual eligible cost reimbursement or simplified cost options. | 4. Where Union funding is provided in the form of a grant, funding shall be provided in a manner that is most suitable for the relevant action and beneficiary involved, including through simplified cost options, in particular lump sums and unit costs for personnel, in accordance with Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509, as well as through actual eligible cost reimbursement. Where it is necessary to enable other sources of funding including co-investments with national resources subject to State aid rules, funding shall be provided in the form of actual eligible cost reimbursement or simplified cost options. |
Or. en
Justification
Towards a more balance approach to lump sums, following Heitor's recommendation for an applicant-focussed simplification effort.
Amendment 102
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. For the purposes of Article 153(3) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509, the evaluation committee may be composed partially or fully of independent external experts. | 5. For the purposes of Article 153(3) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509, the evaluation committee shall be composed of independent external experts. In duly justified cases set out in the work programme adopted by the Commission and pursuant to Article 10a, the evaluation committee may be composed partially or, in the case of coordination and support actions, partially or fully of representatives of Union institutions or bodies as referred to in Article 150 of the [Financial Regulation.] |
Or. en
Justification
The evaluation of proposals by independent experts is a fundamental principle of excellent science, research and innovation in build. Draghi underlined this by calling for Horizon projects to be "selected through evaluations from top experts". There is no legal reason to leave any doubt about this principle.
Amendment 103
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article10a | |
| Work Programmes | |
| 1. The Programme shall be implemented through work programmes referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article in accordance with Article 110 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509.2. The Commission shall adopt separate work programmes, by means of implementing acts, for the implementation of actions under the following components set out in Annex I: | |
| (a) the European Research Council (ERC), for which the draft work programme shall be established by the ERC Scientific Council under Article 12a(4)b, in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 10b(6). The Commission shall depart from the draft work programme established by the ERC Scientific Council only in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 12a(4), second subparagraph and in that case, the Commission shall adopt the work programme by means of an implementing act in accordance with Article 10b(5); the Commission shall inform the ERC Scientific Council, the Council and the Parliament on its duly motivated departure from the draft work programme established by the ERC Scientific Council; | |
| (b) in accordance with Article 10b(5): | |
| i. Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA), | |
| ii. Fast Track to Excellence, | |
| iii. Fast Track to Innovation, European Demonstrators, | |
| iv. European innovation ecosystems, | |
| v. Reforming and enhancing the European R&I system, | |
| vi. Research and technology infrastructures, | |
| vii. widening participation and spreading excellence, | |
| viii. European support for Researchers at Risk. | |
| (c) the European Innovation Council (EIC), for which the work programme shall be prepared following the recommendation of the EIC Board under Article 16a(1)(b), in accordance with Article 10b(5); | |
| (d) the JRC, for which the multi-annual work programme shall take into account the opinion provided by the Board of Governors of the JRC referred to in Commission Decision 96/282/Euratom. | |
| 2. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 34a concerning the adoption of work programmes, covering three years where each first year of the work programme shall coincide with the last year of the previous work programme for the implementation of actions under the following components set out in Annex I: | |
| (a) Competitiveness Window I "Energy Infrastructure; Decarbonisation & Clean Technology"; | |
| (b) Competitiveness Window II "Biotechnology, Health, and Sustainable Prosperity"; | |
| (c) Competitiveness Window III "Digital Leadership and Infrastructure"; | |
| (d) Competitiveness Window IV "Space, Critical Raw Materials, Security"; | |
| (e) Global Societal Challenges Window |
Or. en
Justification
Article moved from the Specific Programme. Paragraph 2 introduced because the scope of the Work Programmes for Pillar 2 are supplementing the basic act rather than simply implementing it.
Amendment 104
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 b (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article10b | |
| Committee Procedure | |
| 1. The Commission shall be assisted by a committee. That committee shall be a committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. | |
| 2. The committee may convene in the following configurations, having regard to the subject matter to be discussed: | |
| - General configuration: overview of the implementation of the Specific Programme; | |
| - ERC; | |
| - MSCA; | |
| - Competitiveness Window I "Energy Infrastructure; Decarbonisation & Clean Technology" | |
| - Competitiveness Window II "Biotechnology, Health, and Sustainable Prosperity" | |
| - Competitiveness Window III "Digital Leadership and Infrastructure" | |
| - Competitiveness Window IV "Space, Critical Raw Materials, Security" | |
| - Global societal challenges Window | |
| - EU Missions | |
| - New European Bauhaus Facility; | |
| - EIC and innovation ecosystems; | |
| - Research and technology infrastructures; | |
| - Reforming and enhancing the European R&I system and widening participation and spreading excellence. | |
| 3. When relevant joint meetings with [reference to ECF Programme Committee] shall be convened in order to ensure alignment on European priorities. | |
| 4. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 4 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply. | |
| 5. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply. | |
| 6. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 8 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply. Implementing acts adopted under this paragraph shall stay in force for as long as needed to fully execute the actions set out in them. The following limitations shall apply to the adoption procedure of implementing acts adopted under this paragraph: | |
| (a) One committee meeting shall be organised for the consideration of the adopted implementing act; | |
| (b) By derogation from Article 8(3) of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011, the Commission shall submit the adopted text to the committee, together with an invitation for the committee meeting, within 24 hours after adoption of the act; | |
| (c) The committee meeting shall be scheduled at least five and no later than ten working days after the transmission of the adopted act; | |
| (d) The opinion of the committee shall be obtained by a written procedure closing at least three and no later than five working days after the committee meeting. | |
| 7. Where the opinion of the committee is to be obtained by written procedure, that procedure shall be terminated without result when, within the time-limit for delivery of the opinion, the chair of the committee so decides or a simple majority of committee members so request. | |
| 8. In accordance with international agreements concluded by the Union, representatives of third countries or international organisations may be invited as observers in the meetings of the committee under the conditions laid down in its rules of procedure, taking into account security and public order of the Union or its Member States. |
Or. en
Justification
Article moved from Specific Programme. Paragraph 6 added in order to facilitate a more agile implementation of the Programme.
Amendment 105
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Where necessary to achieve the objectives set out in Article 3, activities under this Regulation may be implemented through European Partnerships, by default through the work programmes. | 1. Where necessary to achieve the objectives set out in Article 3, activities under this Regulation may be implemented through European Partnerships, in particular under Articles 185 and 187 of the TFEU. |
Or. en
Justification
Draghi called for Public-Private Partnerships to become more focused on key priorities. To achieve this Horizon Europe should strive to have less, but bigger Partnerships. Institutionalised partnerships are more suited for large initiatives that bring together funding from several Union Programmes, national governments and the private sector. This would also be in line with Draghi's call for an FP that is "refocused on a smaller number of commonly agreed priorities" as well as with the rationale of his proposal for Competitiveness Joint Undertakings.
Amendment 106
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. European Partnerships shall be based on a Memorandum of Understanding, agreed and signed between the partners, stipulating: | 2. European Partnerships shall be based on a contractual arrangement, agreed and signed between the partners, stipulating at least the following points: |
Or. en
Justification
In line with amendment 105 - shifting the default from MoU-based partnership to institutional partnership.
Amendment 107
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. In duly justified cases European Partnerships will be implemented by entrusting budget implementation tasks from various Union funding programmes to bodies established pursuant to Articles 185 and 187 TFEU, in accordance with Article 62(1), point (c), of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509. | 3. European Partnerships shall be implemented by entrusting budget implementation tasks from the Programme to bodies established pursuant to Articles 185 and 187 TFEU, in accordance with Article 62(1), point (c), of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509. Where appropriate, additional budget implementation tasks from other Union Programmes may be entrusted to these bodies as well. A Single Basic Act shall provide the legal framework, including where appropriate harmonised rules, for the establishment of these bodies. Decisions to establish a body will take the form of an annex to the Single Basic Act. This annex shall set out the implementation of paragraph 2 of this Article for a specific partnership, as well as the financial contributions from all partners. Where additional budget implementation tasks from other Union Programmes are foreseen in the annex, it shall also stipulate what share of the Union's financial contribution to the Partnership will stem from the budget of other Union Programmes. |
Or. en
Justification
Clarifying the legal setting of Joint Undertakings. The Commission proposal would allow for only one moment to establish all Joint Undertakings. This takes all the flexibility out of the system and would not allow the Union to use Joint Undertakings effectively to address developing needs for industrial innovation.
Amendment 108
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For European Partnerships established pursuant to paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Article, support from the Programme shall be conditional upon efficient use of Union financing, a proportionate financial contribution from other partners at least matching the Union contribution and voting rights for the Union in the governing bodies ensuring protection of the interests of the Union in the partnership. For that purpose, Joint Undertakings shall be established through a single establishing act ensuring harmonised rules. | 4. For European Partnerships established pursuant to paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Article, support from the Programme shall be conditional upon efficient use of Union financing, a proportionate contribution from other partners at least matching the Union contribution and voting rights for the Union in the governing bodies ensuring protection of the interests of the Union in the partnership. |
Or. en
Justification
Clarifying the legal setting of Joint Undertakings. The Commission proposal would allow for only one moment to establish all Joint Undertakings. This takes all the flexibility out of the system and would not allow the Union to use Joint Undertakings effectively to address developing needs for industrial innovation.
Amendment 109
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 5 – point a
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (a) be established only in cases where Union action alone or other forms of support under the Programme cannot achieve the desired objectives. | (a) be established only in cases where Union action alone or other forms of support under the Programme cannot achieve the desired objectives, and where the Union's contribution is at least EUR 2 000 000 000. |
Or. en
Justification
In order to force the Union institutions to make the hard choices needed to focus on less priorities, this threshold needs to be introduced.
Amendment 110
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 5 – point e
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (e) be based on ex ante, long-term and formal commitments from all partners to contribute financially to the resources of the European Partnership, which shall be centrally managed, except in duly justified cases. | (e) be based on ex ante, long-term and formal commitments from all partners to contribute financially, in-kind and/or in cash, to the resources of the European Partnership. |
Or. en
Justification
Expecting in-cash contribution from private actors (this includes companies but also public research organisations) to projects in which they do not take part while their competitors are undermines any form of economic sense for participation in a Partnership.
Amendment 111
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 5 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5 a. The implementation of European Partnerships shall be based on a Strategic Research and Innovation Agenda (SRIA) agreed between the partners, detailing the thematic priorities and desired scientific and socio-economic results, as well as a roadmap of planned activities during the duration of the programme. |
Or. en
Justification
Underlining this fact supports the call of Draghi to have people with proven track records manage the Programme.
Amendment 112
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 6 – point a
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (a) financial contributions to the operational budget of the initiative; | (a) financial contributions to the administrative budget of the initiative; |
Or. en
Justification
Expecting in-cash contribution from private actors (this includes companies but also public research organisations) to projects in which they do not take part while their competitors are undermines any form of economic sense for participation in a Partnership.
Amendment 113
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 6 – point b
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (b) co-financing by the Partners of their own participation, or that of their members, in projects funded through the initiative. | (b) in-kind contributions through co-financing by the Partners of their own participation, or that of their members, in projects funded through the initiative. |
Or. en
Justification
Expecting in-cash contribution from private actors (this includes companies but also public research organisations) to projects in which they do not take part while their competitors are undermines any form of economic sense for participation in a Partnership.
Amendment 114
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 7
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 7. All Partners other than the Union shall provide information on the structure, membership and activities developed within the partnership. In cases where partnerships are concluded with representative organisations and associations, this shall include regular information on their membership. | 7. All Partners other than the Union shall make public information on the structure, membership and activities developed within the partnership. In cases where partnerships are concluded with representative organisations and associations, this shall include regular information on their membership. |
Or. en
Justification
To clarify that this information should not be provided into a black box, but should be public.
Amendment 115
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article11a | |
| European moonshots | |
| 1. In order to drastically accelerate the achievement of specific Union priorities, European moonshots may be initiated under this Regulation. | |
| 2. A moonshot shall be set out by a Commission Communication, which shall include: | |
| (a) a specific objective which delivers an important contribution to a Union priority; | |
| (b) all policy and legislative initiatives taken to achieve the objective; | |
| (c) the specific contributions the Member States commit to; | |
| (d) the commitment of appropriations from the Programme and at least one other Union Programme other than [Horizon Europe]. | |
| 3. The achievement of the objective set out in paragraph 2 point (a) shall be rooted in research and innovation activities while going beyond this. | |
| 4. The contribution of the Programme to a European moonshot shall: | |
| (a) be implemented through the Work Programmes; | |
| (b) be a cross-Pillar effort; | |
| (c) where appropriate, consist of a set of instruments available under this Regulation. |
Or. en
Justification
Clarifying what Moonshots should be. The design is in line with Draghi's call for better coordination of public R&I across Member States.
Amendment 116
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. The Commission shall establish a European Research Council (the ‘ERC’) to implement the actions under Part I ‘Excellent Science’ set out in Article 6 of Council Decision XXX [reference to the Horizon Europe Specific Programme] which relate to the ERC. The ERC shall succeed the European Research Council set up by Council Decision (EU) 2021/764. |
Or. en
Justification
Moved from Specific Programme.
Amendment 117
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 b (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1b. The ERC shall be composed of the independent ERC Scientific Council provided for in Article 12a and the ERC dedicated implementation structure provided for in Article 12aa. |
Or. en
Justification
Moved from Specific Programme.
Amendment 118
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 c (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1c. The ERC Scientific Council shall have a President (‘ERC President’) who shall be chosen from among senior and internationally respected scientists. |
Or. en
Justification
Moved from Specific Programme.
Amendment 119
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 d (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1d. The ERC President shall be appointed by the Commission following a transparent recruitment process involving an independent dedicated search committee. The recruitment process and the candidate selected shall have the approval of the ERC Scientific Council. The term of office of the ERC President shall be limited to four years, renewable once. |
Or. en
Justification
Moved from Specific Programme. Furthermore, the term length for the President has been restored as part of the framework that ensure the autonomy of the ERC, which was emphasised by both Draghi and Heitor as an essential aspect of the ERC.
Amendment 120
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 e (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1e. The ERC President shall devote in principle at least 80 % of their working time to ERC business. Their place of work shall be Brussels and they shall be remunerated at a level commensurate with the Commission's senior officials. The ERC dedicated implementation structure shall provide the ERC President with the necessary support to carry out their functions. |
Or. en
Justification
Moved from Specific Programme. These specifications on the position of the ERC President are identical to those set out in the Specific Programme 2021-2027 and are safeguards for the autonomy of the ERC, which was emphasised by both Draghi and Heitor as an essential aspect of the ERC.
Amendment 121
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 f (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1f. The ERC shall operate according to its core principles which are scientific excellence, open science, autonomy, efficiency, effectiveness, transparency, accountability and research integrity. It shall ensure continuity with ERC actions conducted under Council Decision (EU) 2021/764. |
Or. en
Justification
Moved from Specific Programme.
Amendment 122
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 g (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1g. The Commission shall act as the guarantor of the autonomy and integrity of the ERC and shall ensure the proper execution of the tasks entrusted to it. |
Or. en
Justification
Moved from Specific Programme.
Amendment 123
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 h (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1h. The Commission shall ensure that the implementation of ERC actions is in accordance with the principles set out in paragraph 7 of this Article as well as with the overall strategy, procedures and positions the ERC, referred to in Article 12a(4), established by the ERC Scientific Council. |
Or. en
Justification
Moved from Specific Programme.
Amendment 124
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article12a | |
| ERC Scientific Council | |
| 1. The ERC Scientific Council shall be composed of up to 22 independent scientists, engineers and scholars of the highest repute and with the appropriate expertise, including both women and men in different age groups, and ensuring a diversity of research areas and a variety of geographical origins. They shall act in their personal capacity, independent of extraneous interests. The members of the ERC Scientific Council shall be appointed by the Commission, following an independent and transparent procedure for their identification agreed with the ERC Scientific Council, including an open consultation of the scientific community and a report to the European Parliament and the Council. | |
| 2. The term of office for members of the ERC Scientific Council shall be limited to four years, renewable once , based on a rotating system which shall ensure the continuity of the work of the ERC Scientific Council. | |
| 3. The members of the ERC Scientific Council shall be compensated for the tasks they perform by means of an honorarium and, where appropriate, reimbursement of travel and subsistence expenses. | |
| 4. The ERC Scientific Council shall exercise its tasks solely and exclusively within the scope and for the purposes of the Council Decision XXX [reference to Specific Programme]. In that context, it shall establish: | |
| (a) the overall strategy for the ERC; | |
| (b) the draft work programme for the implementation of the ERC activities; | |
| (c) the methods and procedures for peer review and proposal evaluation on the basis of which the proposals to be funded are determined; | |
| (d) its position on any matter which from a scientific perspective may enhance the achievements and impact of the ERC, the quality of the research carried out and the implementation of ERC actions, including reference documents and IT systems | |
| (e) a code of conduct covering, among other matters, the avoidance of conflicts of interest; | |
| (f) the procedure for the election of the ERC Vice-Presidents. | |
| The Commission shall depart from the positions established by the ERC Scientific Council in accordance with the first subparagraph only if it considers that this Regulation has not been respected. In that case, the Commission shall adopt measures to maintain continuity in the implementation of the Programme and the achievements of its objectives, setting out and duly motivating the points of departure from the ERC Scientific Council positions. | |
| 5. The ERC Scientific Council is the guarantor of the quality of the activity from the scientific perspective and has full authority over decisions on the type of research to be funded. | |
| 6. The ERC Scientific Council shall act exclusively in the interest of the ERC, according to the principles set out in Article 12(7). It shall act with integrity and probity and carry out its work efficiently and with the greatest possible transparency. There shall be no constraints on the ability of its members to communicate with the academic sector, Member States, all Union institutions, and any other relevant persons or entities. |
Or. en
Justification
Moved from Specific Programme. Term lengths restored. Freedom to communicate guaranteed by paragraph 6. These are all safeguards for the autonomy of the ERC, which was emphasised by both Draghi and Heitor as an essential aspect of the ERC.
Amendment 125
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 b (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article 12b | |
| ERC dedicated implementation structure | |
| 1. The ERC dedicated implementation structure shall be responsible for the administrative implementation and execution of this component of the ERC. | |
| 2. The Commission shall ensure that the ERC dedicated implementation structure follows strictly, efficiently and with the necessary flexibility the objectives and requirements of the ERC alone. To fulfil its responsibilities as set out in Articles 12 and 12a, in the context of its own responsibilities for budget execution, the Commission shall: | |
| (a) ensure the continuity and renewal of the ERC Scientific Council and provide support for a standing Identification Committee for the identification of future ERC Scientific Council members; | |
| (b) ensure the continuity of the ERC dedicated implementation structure and the delegation of tasks and responsibilities to it, respecting the views of the ERC Scientific Council; | |
| (c) ensure that the ERC dedicated implementation structure carries out the full range of its tasks and responsibilities; | |
| (d) appoint the Director and the members of the management of the ERC dedicated implementation structure, following a transparent selection procedure agreed with the ERC Scientific Council; | |
| (e) ensure the timely adoption of the ERC work programme, the positions regarding implementing methodology and the necessary implementing rules including the ERC rules of submission and the ERC model grant agreement, taking into account, primarily, the views of the ERC Scientific Council and, secondarily, the Commission’s corporate policies implemented through the Specific Programme; | |
| (f) monitor, as responsible for the overall implementation of the Programme, the ERC dedicated implementation structure and evaluate its performance. |
Or. en
Amendment 126
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article13a | |
| Fast Track to Excellence | |
| 1. The Fast Track to Excellence scheme shall support small-scale, blue-sky collaborative research activities to foster excellent research in Europe. It shall support researchers in moving the frontier of science and technology by exploring new avenues of collaboration across borders, across disciplines and across sectors. | |
| 2. The Fast Track to Excellence scheme shall be implemented through a continuously open call for proposals and it shall support research projects with a budget of up to EUR 2 000 000 with a duration of up to 2 years. It shall have a cut-off date at least once every four months and shall have at least four cut-off dates per year. By way of derogation from Article 26(1) all applicants shall be informed of the outcome of the evaluation of their application by 10 weeks from the cut-off date at the latest. | |
| 3. For the evaluation of the submitted proposals, the Fast Track to Excellence scheme shall follow the structure the peer review system referred to in Article 12a(9)b(i) with regard to the panels of scientific experts. |
Or. en
Justification
The current Programme lacks a space for genuine bottom-up, blue-sky collaborative scientific research. If the Union will focus its top-down funding on a more limited number of priorities, there will be less space for collaborative research in other topics. This new instrument ensures that where scientists see opportunities, they can still pursue collaboration and follow their own creativity. The speed and size of the instrument will address the risks of the Matthew effect by funding more excellent scientists and make the Programme more accessible for newcomers. Furthermore, it will allow scientists to look for funding at the pace of scientific developments.
Amendment 127
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. This Programme shall include the collaborative research and innovation activities in a specific dedicated part of the work programmes adopted under Chapters IV to VII of the Regulation (EU) XXX European Competitiveness Fund. Those work programmes shall be adopted in accordance with Article 15 of the Regulation (EU) XXX [European Competitiveness Fund Regulation]. | 3. The Programme shall, under the Competitiveness Windows, include the collaborative research and innovation activities in support of the competitiveness of the European economy and its businesses by fostering innovation and contributing to the attractiveness of the Union as a location for startups to scale. |
Or. en
Justification
Adjustment in line with the improved tight connection between Horizon Europe and the ECF.
Amendment 128
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. The Programme shall support activities to tackle global societal challenges in the areas of strengthening democratic values and tackling disinformation, including rule of law and fundamental rights; promoting socio-economic transformations that contribute to inclusion and growth, addressing demographic and intergenerational challenges, including from a youth perspective and including migration management and integration of migrants. | 4. The Programme shall, under the Global Societal Challenges Window, support activities to tackle global societal challenges in the areas of strengthening democratic values and tackling disinformation, including rule of law and fundamental rights; promoting socio-economic transformations that contribute to inclusion and growth, addressing demographic and intergenerational challenges, including from a youth perspective and including migration management and integration of migrants. |
Or. en
Justification
Clarification of the new structure.
Amendment 129
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. The collaborative research activities referred to in paragraphs 3 and 4 of this Article shall be implemented through the Work Programmes as referred to in Article 10a(2). These Work Programmes shall establish general thematic priorities within each Window and the budget available for each priority. The Work Programmes shall be adopted pursuant to Article 34a of this Regulation. |
Or. en
Justification
Part of the new expert-led approach.
Amendment 130
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. The Programme shall contribute to EU Missions notably through the identification of priority actions for R&I funding for the development of new knowledge, technologies, services, and products in view of their goals. Funding for the EU Missions established under Article 8 of the Regulation (EU) 2021/695 shall be awarded on the basis of work programmes covering up to the budgetary year 2030. | 5. The Programme may contribute to EU Missions notably through the identification of priority actions for R&I funding for the development of new knowledge, technologies, services, and products in view of their goals. Funding for research and innovation activities as part of the EU Missions established under Article 8 of the Regulation (EU) 2021/695 may be awarded on the basis of work programmes covering up to the budgetary year 2030. This contribution shall be conditional on sufficient funding being made available under other Union Programmes that make achievement of the Missions' objectives by 2030 credible. |
Or. en
Justification
Clarification that the Programme will only contribute if there are genuine R&I activities still needed to credibly achieve the Missions' objectives by 2030.
Amendment 131
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article15a | |
| Councils for collaborative R&I | |
| 1. The implementation of the Competitiveness Windows shall be guided by the Council for European Competitiveness Research. | |
| 2. The implementation of the Global Societal Challenges Window shall be guided by the European Council for Global Societal Challenges Research. | |
| 3. The Councils referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall consist of at least 15 prominent experts from science, innovation, industry and civil society. Members of those Councils shall be appointed for five years, once extendable by up to six years. The Members of the Councils shall be appointed within six months after the entry into force of this Regulation and shall reflect the national diversity of the Union. | |
| 4. The Councils shall: | |
| (a) Advise the Commission and the relevant committees referred to in Article 10b on the general thematic priorities for the Work Programmes implementing the Windows. This advisory role includes the participation of at least one Member of the relevant Council in the committee meetings in which the Work Programme is being discussed; | |
| (b) Guide the selection procedure of the external experts referred to in Article 15b, including by advising the Commission on the text of the call for expression of interest as well as by further specifying the selection criteria set out in Article 15b(4), which may include a differentiated weighting between the four criteria; | |
| (c) Oversee the work of the external experts referred to in Article 15b, including by establishing a code of conduct as well as guidance on the avoidance of conflicts of interest. This oversight shall also include providing feedback on a draft text presented by a lead expert as set out in Article 15b(1). This feedback may be provided by a subset of Council Members instead of the full Council, if this subset is empowered by the full Council to provide this feedback for a general thematic priority; | |
| (d) Adopt its own code of conduct with clear rules on conflicts of interest. |
Or. en
Justification
The Councils for collaborative R&I together with the Expert-led implementation fulfil Draghi's recommendation that "the governance of the programme should be managed by project managers and by people with proven track at the frontier of innovation". It furthermore aligns with the Heitor recommendation for the establishment of two new Councils. The interplay between Commission, Councils, expert teams and Programme Committees creates a system which allows public authorities to set priorities and to have full control over funding allocation, while also allowing for the empowerment of experts to deliver a better Programme, including by being more agile.
Amendment 132
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 b (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article15b | |
| Expert-led implementation | |
| 1. For each general thematic priority referred to in Article 15(4a), the Commission shall appoint at least one lead expert supported by an expert team to develop draft calls for the implementation of the thematic priority. The draft calls shall be developed on a rolling basis until the budget allocated to the general thematic priority has been fully committed to calls. Before submitting a draft call to the Commission, the lead expert shall present the draft call to the relevant Council referred to in Article 15a for feedback. | |
| 2. The call texts implementing the general thematic priorities shall be adopted by the Commission by means of implementing acts. Where the Commission does not alter the text of the call compared to the draft call submitted to it by the lead expert under paragraph 1 of this Article, Commission shall adopt immediately applicable implementing acts in accordance with Article 10b(6). | |
| 3. The Commission may alter the call text compared to the draft call submitted by the lead expert only in exceptional and duly justified cases. Departures shall only be justified when the call text goes outside the scope of the general thematic priority for which the lead expert has been appointed, when the call text is not in accordance with Union law, including the Financial Regulation, or when two or more draft calls developed by lead experts have such significant overlap that they can be combined in a single call. When the Commission decides to depart from the draft call, the implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with Article 10b(5). The Commission shall provide the Parliament and the Council with a clear and precise justification and explanation for the departure. | |
| 4. After having received the draft call text from the lead expert, the Commission shall decide, in accordance with Article 20(2), if and how Article 10(3) of Regulation (EU) XXX [European Competitiveness Fund] shall be applied. This decision shall be part of the implementing act adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 10b(6). | |
| 5. Each lead expert and the expert team shall be appointed following a call for expression of interest included in the Work Programme referred to in paragraph 1. The call will close at the latest three months after the adoption of the Work Programme. The appointment of the lead expert and expert team shall be concluded no later than three months after the closing of the call. | |
| 6. Lead experts and members of the expert teams shall be external experts within the meaning of Article 10(3) and be appointed for up to five years. The Commission shall selected those lead experts and members of the expert teams based on the following criteria: | |
| (a) scientific expertise ; | |
| (b) track record of success in innovation; | |
| (c) commercial experience ; | |
| (d) management skills | |
| The Commission may appoint one official to an expert team to ensure all decisions are taken in the interest of the Union. |
Or. en
Justification
The Councils for collaborative R&I together with the Expert-led implementation fulfil Draghi's recommendation that "the governance of the programme should be managed by project managers and by people with proven track at the frontier of innovation". It furthermore aligns with the Heitor recommendation for the establishment of two new Councils. The interplay between Commission, Councils, expert teams and Programme Committees creates a system which allows public authorities to set priorities and to have full control over funding allocation, while also allowing for the empowerment of experts to deliver a better Programme, including by being more agile.
Amendment 133
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 c (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article15c | |
| Fast Track to Innovation | |
| 1. The Fast Track to Innovation scheme shall support small-scale, bottom-up collaborative innovation activities to foster excellent innovation in Europe. It shall support researchers and innovators exploring new avenues of collaboration across borders, across disciplines and across sectors to foster innovation. | |
| 2. The Fast Track to Innovation scheme shall be implemented through a continuously open call for proposals and it shall support research projects with a budget of up to EUR 2 000 000 with a duration of up to 2 years. It shall have a cut-off date at least once every four months and shall have at least four cut-off dates per year. By way of derogation from Article 26(1) all applicants shall be informed of the outcome of the evaluation of their application by 10 weeks from the cut-off date at the latest. |
Or. en
Justification
The current Programme lacks a space for genuine bottom-up, collaborative applied research for topics not covered by top-down calls. If the Union will focus its top-down funding on a more limited number of priorities, there will be even less space for collaborative research in other topics. This new instrument ensures that where researchers see opportunities, they can still pursue collaboration and follow their own creativity. The speed and size of the instrument will address the risks of the Matthew effect by funding more excellent researchers and make the Programme more accessible for newcomers. Furthermore, it will allow researchers to look for funding at the pace of technology developments.
Amendment 134
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 d (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article15d | |
| European Demonstrators | |
| 1. This Programme shall support large-scale, European Demonstrator projects to foster the technological base of the Union. | |
| 2. European Demonstrator projects shall support the demonstration of technological prototypes in a real environment. A project shall include demonstrations in at least three Member States or Associated Countries. | |
| 3. There shall be at least two non-thematic calls for European Demonstrator projects per year being no more than seven months apart. Further thematic calls may be opened under the collaborative research activities referred to in paragraphs Article 15. |
Or. en
Justification
This is a new instrument to support bottom-up ideas for large scale, pan-European demonstrator projects through a continuously open call for big projects implemented by a large consortium from across the Union with demonstration sites in several Member States. These projects have an extremely high European added value, even if they take place outside the thematic priorities chosen for Pillar 2 because they accelerate technology across the Union. This is in line with Draghi's suggestions to develop 'an EU industrial demonstrator' and to extend Horizon Europe to "the phase of deployment to market".
Amendment 135
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. The EIC shall identify, develop and scale up deep tech and disruptive innovation from research to scale-up. It shall be implemented mainly through open bottom-up calls for proposals while ensuring a balanced portfolio of actions across thematic areas. This shall be complemented by targeted thematic and ‘Challenge’ calls in areas of potential strategic interest in close coordination and synergy with the ECF policy windows, in particular with the ECF InvestEU Instrument. | 1. The Commission shall establish a European Innovation Council (the ‘EIC’) to implement the actions under Part III ‘Innovation’ set out in Article 12 of Council Decision XXX [reference to the Horizon Europe Specific Programme] which relate to the EIC. |
Or. en
Justification
Text moved from Specific Programme.
Amendment 136
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1 a. The EIC Chair shall be appointed by the Commission following a transparent recruitment process involving an independent dedicated search committee. The recruitment process and the candidate selected shall have the approval of the EIC Board. The term of office of the EIC Chair shall be limited to four years, extendable once for up to four years. |
Or. en
Justification
Mirroring the provisions that ensure the autonomy of the ERC in order to give the EIC the 'high degree of independence in how it selects and manages the development of disruptive solutions and breakthrough projects' building on 'the successful experience of the ERC' called for by Draghi. In this case that is reflected in the restored term limits for the EIC Chair.
Amendment 137
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 b (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1b. The EIC shall be composed of the independent EIC Board provided for in Article 16a and the EIC dedicated implementation structure provided for in Article 16b. |
Or. en
Justification
Mirroring the provisions that ensure the autonomy of the ERC in order to give the EIC the 'high degree of independence in how it selects and manages the development of disruptive solutions and breakthrough projects' building on 'the successful experience of the ERC' called for by Draghi.
Amendment 138
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 c (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1c. The EIC shall identify, develop and scale up deep tech and disruptive innovation from research to scale-up. It shall be implemented mainly through open bottom-up calls for proposals while ensuring a balanced portfolio of actions across thematic areas. This shall be complemented by targeted thematic ‘Challenge’ calls for proposals drafted by Programme Managers in areas of potential strategic interest in close coordination and synergy with the ECF policy windows, in particular with the ECF InvestEU Instrument. |
Or. en
Justification
Moved from the Specific Programme and amended in order to give the EIC the 'high degree of independence in how it selects and manages the development of disruptive solutions and breakthrough projects' building on 'the successful experience of the ERC' called for by Draghi. The amendments strengthen the role of the Programme Managers to reflect Draghi's call for them to "have significant responsibilities and discretion in selecting and managing specific projects".
Amendment 139
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 d (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1d. The EIC Board shall have a Chair (‘EIC Chair’) who shall be a high-profile public figure linked to the world of deeptech innovation, with a solid understanding of developing innovations from research to market and scale-up. |
Or. en
Justification
Mirroring the provisions that ensure the autonomy of the ERC in order to give the EIC the 'high degree of independence in how it selects and manages the development of disruptive solutions and breakthrough projects' building on 'the successful experience of the ERC' called for by Draghi.
Amendment 140
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 e (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1e. The EIC Chair shall be appointed by the Commission following a transparent recruitment process involving an independent dedicated search committee as well as a hearing in by the European Parliament. The recruitment process and the candidate selected shall have the approval of the EIC Board. |
Or. en
Justification
Mirroring the provisions that ensure the autonomy of the ERC in order to give the EIC the 'high degree of independence in how it selects and manages the development of disruptive solutions and breakthrough projects' building on 'the successful experience of the ERC' called for by Draghi.
Amendment 141
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 f (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1f. The EIC Chair shall chair the EIC Board, prepare its meetings, assign tasks to members and may establish dedicated sub-groups. The EIC Chair shall ensure the leadership of the EIC Board and its liaison with the EIC dedicated implementation structure and shall represent the EIC Board in the world of deeptech innovation as well as in interactions with the Union institutions. |
Or. en
Justification
Mirroring the provisions that ensure the autonomy of the ERC in order to give the EIC the 'high degree of independence in how it selects and manages the development of disruptive solutions and breakthrough projects' building on 'the successful experience of the ERC' called for by Draghi.
Amendment 142
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 g (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1g. The EIC Chair shall devote in principle at least 80% of their working time to EIC business. Their place of work shall be in Brussels and they shall be remunerated at a level commensurate with the Commission’s senior officials. The EIC dedicated implementation structure shall provide the EIC Chair with the necessary support to carry out their functions. |
Or. en
Justification
Mirroring the provisions that ensure the autonomy of the ERC in order to give the EIC the 'high degree of independence in how it selects and manages the development of disruptive solutions and breakthrough projects' building on 'the successful experience of the ERC' called for by Draghi.
Amendment 143
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 h (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1h. The EIC shall operate in accordance with its core principles of agility, ability to take risk, autonomy, efficiency, effectiveness, transparency and accountability. It shall ensure continuity with EIC actions conducted under Council Decision (EU) 2021/76 as well as continuously develop and experiment with approaches fostering innovation in order to address changing needs of innovators or technological and global developments. |
Or. en
Justification
Text moved from Specific Programme and amended to give the EIC the "high degree of independence in how it selects and manages the development of disruptive solutions and breakthrough projects" called for by Draghi.
Amendment 144
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 i (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1i. Through its activities, the EIC shall support deeptech innovation from early research under the EIC Pathfinder to market entry and scaling up under the EIC Accelerator. The EIC Transition will foster the transition from science and research to innovation-driven economic activity. The EIC activities shall be designed to support entrepreneurial endeavours of scientists, to keep up with increasing speed of innovation cycles and to align with operational standards in the venture capital market. The EIC shall develop agile and transparent procedures tailored to this approach to innovation funding, while respecting the need for accountability for the use of public funding. |
Or. en
Justification
Text moved from Specific Programme and amended to give the EIC the "high degree of independence in how it selects and manages the development of disruptive solutions and breakthrough projects" called for by Draghi.
Amendment 145
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (ca) The EIC Chair shall chair the EIC Board, prepare its meetings, assign tasks to members and may establish dedicated sub-groups. The EIC Chair shall ensure the leadership of the EIC Board and its liaison with the EIC dedicated implementation structure and shall represent the EIC Board in the world of deeptech innovation as well as in interactions with the Union institutions. |
Or. en
Justification
Mirroring the provisions that ensure the autonomy of the ERC in order to give the EIC the 'high degree of independence in how it selects and manages the development of disruptive solutions and breakthrough projects' building on 'the successful experience of the ERC' called for by Draghi.
Amendment 146
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – point d
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (d) Incentives to procurers to test and provide first customers for deep tech and disruptive innovations; | deleted |
Or. en
Justification
Text to be moved to Specific Programme
Amendment 147
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – point e
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (e) Business Accelerator Services to complement EIC funding by providing access, in complementarity and coordination with the Project Advisory referred to in Chapter III of the of the Regulation (EU) XXX [European Competitiveness Fund], to deep-tech expertise, coaching and mentoring, match making with investors, procurers, corporates and other innovation partners. | deleted |
Or. en
Justification
Text to be moved to Specific Programme
Amendment 148
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. The types of support referred to in paragraph 2 shall be combined flexibly in EIC Challenges developed and overseen by EIC Programme Managers. EIC Challenges shall be implemented using a portfolio approach where actions are selected based on their complementarities to achieve defined objectives and interact with each other under the supervision of EIC Programme Manager. | deleted |
Or. en
Justification
To be moved to Specific Programme
Amendment 149
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 4
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. All EIC investment support shall be implemented by one or more dedicated investment vehicles set up in line with the law of a Member State (the EIC Fund). The EIC Fund shall be structured in a way that it can attract other public or private investors in order to increase the leverage effect of the Union contribution. | deleted |
Or. en
Justification
Moved to Article 16c for more comprehensive regulation of the Fund.
Amendment 150
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 5
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. The EIC may support innovation in critical technologies with focus on defence applications in close coordination with the ECF policy window ‘Resilience and Security, Defence Industry and Space’. In those cases, Articles 51 and 52 of the Regulation (EU) XXX [European Competitiveness Fund] shall apply. | 5. The EIC may support innovation in critical technologies with focus on defence applications in close coordination with the ECF policy window ‘Resilience and Security, Defence Industry and Space’. In those cases, Articles 51 and 52 of the Regulation (EU) XXX [European Competitiveness Fund] shall apply. Any funds used for these purposes shall stem from the Specific Programme on defence research established by Regulation (EU)[XXX] [European Competitiveness Fund]. |
Or. en
Justification
All defence research is to be funded under the ECF. The existing experience of the EIC to implement disruptive innovation programmes makes the EIC an effective and efficient vehicle for implement of those funds, but this should not come at the expense of our civilian and dual-use projects.
Amendment 151
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article16a | |
| The European Innovation Council Board | |
| 1. The European Innovation Council Board (EIC Board) shall advise the Commission on: | |
| (a) the overall strategy for the EIC component under Part III ‘Innovation’ of Horizon Europe, taking into account complementarities with the European Competitiveness Fund; | |
| (b) a recommendation to the Commission for the draft work programme for the implementation of the EIC actions, including criteria for assessment of proposals and the appropriate balance between the different types of funding support; | |
| (c) the draft investment guidelines for the EIC Fund; | |
| (d) the profile of EIC Programme Managers; | |
| (e) European innovation policy; | |
| 2.The EIC Board shall act in the interest of achieving the objectives of the EIC. It shall act with integrity and probity and carry out its work efficiently and transparently. There shall be no constraints on the ability of its members to communicate with the world of deeptech innovation, Member States, all Union institutions, and any other relevant persons or entities. | |
| 3. The EIC Board shall be composed of 15 to 20 independent high-level individuals drawn from various parts of Europe's innovation ecosystem, including entrepreneurs, corporate leaders, investors, innovation experts and innovative researchers and technology transfer experts. The EIC Board shall contribute to outreach actions and its members shall strive to enhance the prestige of the EIC brand. | |
| 4. The members of the EIC Board shall be appointed by the Commission, following an open call for nominations or for expressions of interest, and taking into account the need for balance in expertise, gender, age and geographical distribution. Their term of office shall be limited to two years, renewable twice, with a rolling appointments system so that members are appointed every two years. | |
| 5. The Commission shall, taking into consideration the views of the EIC Board, establish a EIC Board code of conduct addressing, in particular, the avoidance of conflicts of interest and breach of confidentiality. The members of the EIC Board shall agree to abide by the code of conduct upon assuming office. | |
| 6. The EIC Board shall elect from amongst its members three Vice-Chairs who shall assist the EIC Chair in its representation and the organisation of its work. They shall hold the title of EIC Vice-Chair. | |
| 7. The members of the EIC Board shall be compensated for the tasks they perform by means of an honorarium and, where appropriate, reimbursement of travel and subsistence expenses |
Or. en
Justification
Moved from the Specific Programme and mirroring the provisions that ensure the autonomy of the ERC in order to give the EIC the 'high degree of independence in how it selects and manages the development of disruptive solutions and breakthrough projects' building on 'the successful experience of the ERC' called for by Draghi.
Amendment 152
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 b (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article 16b | |
| EIC dedicated implementation structure | |
| 1. The EIC dedicated implementation structure shall be responsible for the administrative implementation and execution of the EIC actions. It shall, in particular, implement the evaluation procedures, including jury interviews, and selection process in accordance with the strategy established by the EIC Board and shall ensure the financial and innovation management of the grants. The EIC Fund established under Article 16c shall be responsible for the implementation of the investment support of the EIC. | |
| The EIC dedicated implementation structure shall support the EIC Board in the conduct of all of its tasks as set out in Article 16a including the development of the overall strategy for the EIC, its monitoring of the operations and its review and assessment of the EIC's achievements as well as its outreach and communications activities. The EIC dedicated implementation structure shall also provide access to the necessary documents and data in its possession and keep the EIC Board informed of its activities. | |
| To ensure an effective liaison with the EIC dedicated implementation structure on strategy and operational matters, the EIC Chair and Vice-Chairs shall hold regular coordination meetings with the Director of the EIC dedicated implementation structure. | |
| 2. The EIC dedicated implementation structure shall employ the EIC Programme Managers and support them in the execution of their tasks as set out in [reference to the Specific Programme] | |
| 3. The Commission shall ensure that the EIC dedicated implementation structure follows strictly, efficiently and with the necessary flexibility the objectives and requirements of the EIC alone. To fulfil its responsibilities as set out in Articles 16 and 16a and in this Article, in the context of its own responsibilities for budget execution, the Commission shall: | |
| (a) ensure the continuity and renewal of the EIC Board and provide support for a standing Identification Committee for the identification of future EIC Board members; | |
| (b) ensure the continuity of the EIC dedicated implementation structure and the delegation of tasks and responsibilities to it, taking into account the views of the EIC Board; | |
| (c) ensure that the EIC dedicated implementation structure carries out the full range of its tasks and responsibilities; | |
| (d) appoint the Director and the members of the management of the EIC dedicated implementation structure, taking into account the views of the EIC Board; | |
| (e) ensure the timely adoption of the EIC work programme, the positions regarding implementing methodology and the necessary implementing rules including the EIC rules of submission and the EIC model grant agreement, taking into account the views of the EIC Board; | |
| (f) monitor, as responsible for the overall implementation of the Programme, the EIC dedicated implementation structure and evaluate its performance. |
Or. en
Justification
Mirroring the provisions that ensure the autonomy of the ERC in order to give the EIC the 'high degree of independence in how it selects and manages the development of disruptive solutions and breakthrough projects' building on 'the successful experience of the ERC' called for by Draghi.
Amendment 153
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 c (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article16c | |
| EIC Fund | |
| 1. All EIC investment support shall be implemented by one or more dedicated investment vehicles set up in line with the law of a Member State (the EIC Fund). The EIC Fund shall be structured in a way that it can attract other public or private investors in order to increase the leverage effect of the Union contribution. | |
| 2. The reflows from investments made by the EIC Fund or by the EIC Fund established by Regulation (EU) 2021/695 of the European Parliament and of the Council shall return to the EIC Fund for reinvestment, in particular to be used for scale-up support. | |
| 3. The EIC Fund shall be implemented under indirect management. The Commission shall adopt investment guidelines for the EIC Fund by means of implementing acts. If the investment guidelines adopted by the Commission deviate from the draft investment guidelines adopted by the EIC Board in accordance with paragraph 1(c) of Article 16a, the Commission shall inform the EIC Board, the Parliament and the Council regarding the reasons for the deviation. | |
| 4. The EIC Fund shall establish a supervisory board. The supervisory board shall include at least the EIC Chair, another EIC Board Member, a representative of the Commission of the level of a Director-General, and the chair of the ECF InvestEU Investment Committee [add reference to ECF Article]. The supervisory board shall have full access to all information of the deal flow of all participants with the aim of ensuring the proper functioning of the Fund in perspective of the objectives of the EIC as well as the adherence to the investment guidelines. The supervisory board shall under no circumstances play a role in the decision-making process on individual projects and investments. |
Or. en
Justification
Partly moved from the Specific Programme. This Article provides clearer and more detailed regulation of the Fund. Legal uncertainty about the Fund under Horizon Europe 2021-2027 created the space for central services of the Commission to shut down the EIC Fund and thereby most of the EIC Accelerator for a year, leaving nearly 100 European deeptech startups in deep financial uncertainty. This situation cannot be allowed to reoccur.
Amendment 154
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 d (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article 16d | |
| European Innovation Council specific rules | |
| 1. In accordance with Article 20(2)(a)(i) of Regulation (EU) XXX [European Competitiveness Fund], EIC Transition grants may be awarded without calls for proposals for the purpose of follow up funding for results generated by actions funded by the Programme and Horizon Europe Regulation No 695/2021. | |
| 2. The EIC Accelerator shall support only single beneficiaries and single investees who are SMEs, including startups, and small mid-caps. | |
| 3. Proposals for EIC Accelerator actions may be submitted by one or more legal entities intending to establish or support a potential recipient, with the prior agreement of that recipient. If the selected for funding, the grant and investment agreement shall be signed only with that recipient. | |
| 4. In the case of blended finance actions, the beneficiary and the investee may differ in the sense that the investee may be the holding or the parent company of the beneficiary. | |
| 5. Funding bodies implementing Union Programmes, or national or regional programmes certified by the Commission, may directly submit a proposal for a EIC Transition or EIC Accelerator call, where such proposals stem from a project review of an action funded by the certified programme and subject to conditions set out in the EIC work programme (EIC Plug in). | |
| 6. For the EIC Accelerator, the third evaluation criteria set out in Article 25(1) shall be replaced by the level of risk of the action, the quality and efficiency of the implementation, and the need for Union support. | |
| 7. Investments shall be made in non-bankable investees and jointly with co-investments by other private investors. However, where such support is not provided fully under the European Competitiveness Fund, support to bankable investees or without participation of other investors, may be provided in order to protect the Union’s strategic interests. | |
| 8. By way of derogation from Article 212(2)(a) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509, the conditions concerning economic viability, shall not apply to EIC Accelerator investment actions. | |
| 9. Blended finance actions shall be suspended, amended or, if duly justified, terminated if measurable milestones are not reached or if the beneficiary refuses the investment support without a duly justified reason. | |
| 10. The EIC Fund may award follow-on investments: | |
| (a) if needed to protect the Union's strategic assets, interests, autonomy or security; or | |
| (b) if subsequent funding rounds would not proceed or would proceed at significantly less favourable terms without EIC follow-on investment. | |
| 11. The EIC work programme may set out additional limitations regarding the award of follow-on support. |
Or. en
Justification
Moved up from the final Chapter of this Regulation
Amendment 155
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. The Programme shall support activities to foster the integration of the knowledge triangle – higher education, research and innovation, and business – across the Union. | 2. The Programme shall support activities to foster the integration of the knowledge triangle – higher education, research and innovation, and business – across the Union, including through the activities funded under [EIT Regulation]. |
Or. en
Justification
According to the Heitor report, a radical reform of the EIT is needed and even the elimination of FP funding should be considered. However, unless the radical decision to eliminate FP funding is taken, the EIT and its role in the Programme needs to be reflected in the FP.
Amendment 156
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2a. The Programme shall offer country-agnostic support to researchers at risk. This support shall be offered through a European Fellowship Scheme which shall provide funding for the placement of researchers at risk at eligible European entities. The Fellowship Scheme shall include a crisis response mechanism to be swiftly deployed to address country or region-specific specific crisis situations. The Programme shall also contribute to the strengthening of support for researchers at risk across the Union by: | |
| (a) providing a mechanism for coordination, networking, peer-learning, exchange of best practices and capacity-building for European actors supporting at risk researchers; | |
| (b) offering non-financial support for the establishment of national schemes for support to researchers at risk; | |
| (c) offering integrate support measures to meet the needs of researchers at risk, including matchmaking, support for host institutions, and capacity development for researchers; | |
| (d) providing support for remote or hybrid fellowship arrangements, enabling researchers at risk to continue their academic work when physical relocation is not possible or immediately feasible. | |
| Given the specific expertise and skills needed for its effective implementation, the support of the Programme for researchers at risk as set out in this paragraph shall be implemented with the involvement of organisations with proven expertise in the field. Where appropriate, it may be implemented under indirect management. |
Or. en
Justification
The European Parliament successfully supported a Preparatory Action to prepare for the introduction of this new Programme. Support to Researchers at Risk is systematically underfunded in Europe and, particularly following Russia's unjustified and illegal invasion of Ukraine, the last few years have shown that the Union can not only provide additional financial resources but also help to improve the functioning of national, regional and private initiatives. Protecting Researchers at Risk is a moral responsibility for us Europeans.
Amendment 157
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 34a concerning the implementation of Articles 10(2), 10(3) and 20 of Regulation (EU) XXX [European Competitiveness Fund] under this Regulation. This delegated act shall: | |
| (a) specify whether measures from the Regulation (EU) XXX [European Competitiveness Fund] provisions shall be implemented through work programmes or through other instruments if the decisions on the award procedures is not taken in work programmes. The implementation of these measures shall fully respect the autonomy of the ERC, the EIC and the Joint Undertakings as well as the role of the expert teams to have the initiative on implementing the general thematic priorities as set out in Article 15b; | |
| (b) specify for the purposes of implementing the Programme the meaning of the ‘results’ referred to in Article 10(2)b, taking into account that the results of actions under this Programme often go through several steps of further development before creating their impact in final products or services; | |
| (c) specify, for the purposes of implementing the Programme, the meaning of Article 10(2)c, taking into account that the sourcing of research equipment, supplies and materials for a research project is a fundamentally different activity than the sourcing of equipment, supplies and materials under Regulation (EU) XXX [European Competitiveness Fund]; | |
| (d) set out, for the purposes of implementing the Programme, a clear decision-making framework for the decisions for application of Article 10(3) of Regulation (EU) XXX [European Competitiveness Fund] to award procedures under this Regulation which shall include at least: | |
| i. how the impact of restrictions on the Union’s scientific position in the world shall be assessed; | |
| ii. how the impact of restrictions on the Union’s global competitiveness shall be assessed; | |
| iii. how the impact of restrictions on the Union’s resilience and strategic autonomy shall be assessed; | |
| iv. how the impact of restrictions on the Union’s security shall be assessed; | |
| v. how the balancing considerations on the Union’s scientific position, global competitiveness, resilience and strategic autonomy, as well as security shall be achieved. |
Or. en
Justification
The Union needs to balance research security, economic security and international collaboration in the implementation of Horizon Europe. This requires a rational and predictable approach to our openness and closeness. Without rationale ad-hoc decisions driven by short term political priorities can fundamentally interrupt scientific collaboration of strategic importance to the Union. Without predictability, the offer the Union makes by opening the Programme for association by our international allies becomes meaningless. We need a detailed, thought-through and publicly debated approach to this.
Amendment 158
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article20a | |
| Implementation of MFF Performance Framework | |
| 1. By way of derogation from Article 1(2) of Regulation (EU) XXX [Performance Framework Regulation], the application of the principles of ‘do no significant harm’ and gender equality referred to in Article 33(2), points (d) and (f) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 respectively as well as other horizontal principles regarding working and employment conditions under this Programme shall be set out in this Article to ensure it is feasible and appropriate. | |
| 2. As contribution to the overall spending target set out in Article 4(2) of Regulation (EU) XXX [Performance Framework Regulation], this Programme shall aim to spend 40 % of its budget, excluding budgets used to implement defence and security (including dual-use parts of civil projects), on climate action and environmental objectives. | |
| 3. Activities under the Programme shall be considered to be in compliance with the ‘do no significant harm’ principle. When activities are being implemented, the Commission shall support beneficiaries in assessing how the final application of the project outcome may result in harm to the environmental objectives of the Union. If such potential harm is identified, the Commission together with the beneficiaries shall seek to address this while fully respecting the objectives of the activity. | |
| 4. In light of the specific nature of entities able to obtain funding under this Programme, activities under this Programme shall be considered to be compliant with the requirements set out in Article 33(2), point 3 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509. The Commission shall develop a framework for assessing, without creating any specific reporting obligations for beneficiaries, whether any of the beneficiaries is at risk of non-compliance with the requirements. This risk assessment shall be applied only to the employees directly involved in the implementation of the project. Where a risk is identified, the Commission shall enter into a dialogue with the concerned beneficiary to ensure the risk does not evolve into non-compliance. Where the Commission establishes non-compliance, all Union payments to the concerned beneficiary shall be halted until the beneficiary is compliant. | |
| 5. The full application of Article 20b to activities funded under this Programme shall be considered as the activities being compliant with the principle of gender equality. | |
| 6. By way of derogation from Article 1(1) of Regulation (EU) XXX [Performance Framework Regulation], the evaluation of the Programme shall be performed in accordance with Article 34a of this Regulation. | |
| 7. Paragraphs 3 and 5 of this Article shall not apply to actions with a single beneficiary when that beneficiary is an SME. |
Or. en
Justification
The Financial Regulation requires that the application of the the DNSH principle, gender equality and social standards to be 'where feasible and appropriate in accordance with the relevant sector-specific rules'. This language was introduced by the Parliament in the Financial Regulation to ensure that the application of the principles was effective and not just window dressing. Therefore it is important to set out the application of these principles in this Regulation. This new Article in conjunction with Article 20b achieves this objective.
Amendment 159
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 b (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article20b | |
| Gender equality | |
| 1. The Programme shall ensure the effective promotion of equal opportunities for men and women, including through the implementation of gender mainstreaming. | |
| 2. The Programme shall aim to address the causes of gender imbalance. Particular attention shall be paid to ensuring, to the extent possible, gender balance in evaluation panels and in other relevant advisory bodies such as boards and expert groups. | |
| 3. The Commission shall identify calls under which the consideration of the gender dimension in R&I content is of particular importance. Applications under those calls shall be required to address the gender dimension. The Commission shall develop a framework to support a gender-sensitive implementation of the activities funded under all other calls. | |
| 4. Any public bodies, research organisations or higher education establishments (including private research organisations and private higher education establishments) receiving funding from the Programme shall have a Gender Equality Plan in place that is adopted by its highest management, is supported by dedicated resources and is publicly available. |
Or. en
Justification
The Financial Regulation requires that the application of the the DNSH principle, gender equality and social standards to be 'where feasible and appropriate in accordance with the relevant sector-specific rules'. This language was introduced by the Parliament in the Financial Regulation to ensure that the application of the principles was effective and not just window dressing. Therefore it is important to set out the application of these principles in this Regulation. This new Article in conjunction with Article 20a achieves this objective.
Amendment 160
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Eligibility criteria shall be set to support achievement of the general and specific objectives laid down in Article 3, in accordance with Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 and apply to all award procedures under the Programme. | 1. Any legal entity, regardless of its place of establishment and including legal entities from non-associated third countries or international organisations, may participate in actions under the Programme, provided that the conditions laid down in this Regulation have been met together with any conditions laid down in the work programme or call for proposals. |
Or. en
Justification
Reinstate text from the current Framework Programme to clarify eligibility under this Programme.
Amendment 161
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. In award procedures under direct and indirect management one or more of the following categories of legal entities may be eligible to receive Union support: | 2. In award procedures under direct and indirect management one or more of the following categories of legal entities shall be eligible to receive Union support: |
Or. en
Justification
"may" implies that none of these entities could be eligible, which would mean no entities would be eligible. "Shall" in combination with wording on 'one or more' ensures that entities from Member States are always eligible, while the other categories are optional.
Amendment 162
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point c
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (c) other entities established in low to middle income non-associated third countries or, exceptionally, in other non-associated third countries if the third country is identified in the work programme adopted by the Commission; | (c) other entities established in low to middle income non-associated third countries or, exceptionally, in other non-associated third countries if the third country is identified in the relevant call documents; |
Or. en
Justification
Clarify the role of the work programme given that work programmes for the Windows in Pillar 2 are no longer meant to include this level of detail.
Amendment 163
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Except when the work programme otherwise provides, to be eligible for participation in grant actions legal entities shall form a consortium that includes as beneficiaries three legal entities independent of each other and each established in different countries as follows: | 3. Except when the relevant call documents otherwise provides, to be eligible for participation in grant actions legal entities shall form a consortium that includes as beneficiaries three legal entities independent of each other and each established in different countries as follows: |
Or. en
Justification
Clarify the role of the work programme given that work programmes for the Windows in Pillar 2 are no longer meant to include this level of detail.
Amendment 164
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 11
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 11. In addition to the grounds set out in Article 132 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509, award procedures and resulting legal commitments shall allow for termination where the objectives of the action are unlikely to be achieved at all or within the set timelines, or the action has lost its policy relevance. | 11. In addition to the grounds set out in Article 132 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509, award procedures and resulting legal commitments shall allow for termination where the objectives of the action are unlikely to be achieved at all or within the set timelines. |
Or. en
Justification
While termination due to policy considerations is appropriate for the specific circumstances and objectives of an ARPA-style agency, this should not be an option in general because most of the projects remain relevant for the beneficiaries even if the specific outcome lost policy relevance. Terminating an action bares a cost of lost investments for setting up the action.
Amendment 165
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article 22a | |
| Evaluation review procedure, enquiries and complaints | |
| 1. An applicant may request an evaluation review if it considers that the applicable evaluation procedure has not been correctly applied to its proposal. The Work Programmes shall provide for and detail the related procedure. | |
| 2. Only the procedural aspects of an evaluation may be the subject of a request for an evaluation review. The evaluation of the merits of a proposal shall not be the subject of an evaluation review. | |
| 3. An evaluation review shall not delay the selection process for proposals that are not the subject of that review. | |
| 4. A request for an evaluation review shall relate to a specific proposal and shall be submitted within 30 days after the communication of evaluation results. It may result in: | |
| (a) a re-evaluation of the proposal to be carried out primarily by evaluators who were not involved in the previous evaluation; or | |
| (b) confirmation of the initial evaluation. | |
| 5. The Commission shall ensure the existence of a procedure for participants to make direct enquiries and complaints about their |
Or. en
Justification
This procedure is essential for the trust in the evaluation procedure run by external experts. The credibility of the determination of the the quality of a proposal relies on the fairness of the procedure. For the integrity of the Programme as well as the interests of the applicants, there is a need for the legal certainty that such a procedure is available.
Amendment 166
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. The work programme shall specify calls for proposals for which Competitiveness Seals may be awarded. Information concerning the application and the evaluation may be shared with interested financing authorities, subject to the conclusion of confidentiality agreements unless explicitly objected by the applicant. | 2. The work programme shall specify the actions under which Competitiveness Seals may be awarded to proposals. Information concerning the application and the evaluation may be shared with interested financing authorities, subject to the conclusion of confidentiality agreements unless explicitly objected by the applicant. |
Or. en
Justification
Clarify the role of the work programme given that work programmes for the Windows in Pillar 2 are no longer meant to include this level of detail.
Amendment 167
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| The work programme shall lay down details concerning the application of the award criteria referred to in paragraph 1. | The work programme or call texts shall lay down details concerning the application of the award criteria referred to in paragraph 1. |
Or. en
Justification
Clarify the role of the work programme given that work programmes for the Windows in Pillar 2 are no longer meant to include this level of detail.
Amendment 168
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. By derogation from paragraph 1, only the excellence criterion referred to in point (a) of that paragraph shall apply for evaluations under ERC frontier research actions and research and training actions. | 2. By derogation from paragraph 1, only the excellence criterion referred to in point (a) of that paragraph shall apply for evaluations under ERC frontier research actions, research and training actions and under the Fast Track to Excellence scheme. |
Or. en
Justification
Ensuring that the excellence criterion is the only one applying to Fast Track to Excellence, to bring it in line with the other Programmes under the 'Excellent Science' Pillar.
Amendment 169
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (a) for informing all applicants of the outcome of the evaluation of their application, a maximum period of five months from the final date for submission of complete proposals; | (a) for informing all applicants of the outcome of the evaluation of their application, a maximum period of 18 weeks from the final date for submission of complete proposals; |
Or. en
Justification
The shorter time-to-grant is welcome, however the Commission proposal requires all the acceleration to come in the phase where most work is done by the applicants. In line with Heitor's recommendation to ensure simplification is applicant-focussed, this approach is not good enough. This proposal balances the burden of the acceleration more equally.
Amendment 170
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (b) for signing grant agreements with applicants, a maximum period of seven months from the final date for submission of complete proposals. | (b) for signing grant agreements with applicants, a maximum period of 30 weeks from the final date for submission of complete proposals. |
Or. en
Justification
The shorter time-to-grant is welcome, however the Commission proposal requires all the acceleration to come in the phase where most work is done by the applicants. In line with Heitor's recommendation to ensure simplification is applicant-focussed, this approach is not good enough. This proposal balances the burden of the acceleration more equally.
Amendment 171
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| In the period between the deadlines set out under points (a) and (b), project officers, or their substitute, shall reply to the substance of a communication from an applicant within five working days. The project officer shall arrange to meet the applicants within the first week of that period. |
Or. en
Justification
The shorter time-to-grant is welcome, however the Commission proposal requires all the acceleration to come in the phase where most work is done by the applicants. In line with Heitor's recommendation to ensure simplification is applicant-focussed, this approach is not good enough. Stakeholders have clearly indicated that the grant preparation phase can only be shortened if the response time of project officers comes down.
Amendment 172
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Beneficiaries shall manage their results in accordance with the obligations set out in the work programme, call conditions or grant agreement. As part thereof, beneficiaries shall: | 1. Beneficiaries shall manage their results in accordance with the obligations set out in the call conditions or grant agreement. As part thereof, beneficiaries shall: |
Or. en
Justification
Clarify the role of the work programme given that work programmes for the Windows in Pillar 2 are no longer meant to include this level of detail.
Amendment 173
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (b a) where relevant, contribute to European and international standardisation; |
Or. en
Amendment 174
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point f
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (f) unless otherwise provided for in the work programme or call conditions, develop and regularly update a plan to manage their results, including data; | (f) unless otherwise provided for in the call conditions, develop and regularly update a plan to manage their results, including data; |
Or. en
Justification
Clarify the role of the work programme given that work programmes for the Windows in Pillar 2 are no longer meant to include this level of detail.
Amendment 175
Proposal for a regulation
Title II – Chapter III – title
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| European Innovation Council | Final and transitional provisions |
| (This should become Title III instead of Chapter III) |
Or. en
Amendment 176
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| [...] | deleted |
Or. en
Justification
Moved to Chapter on EIC
Amendment 177
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article 34a | |
| Exercise of the delegation | |
| 1. The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the conditions laid down in this Article. | |
| 2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 50(2) shall be conferred on the Commission until 31 December 2028. | |
| 3. The delegation of power referred to in Article 50(2) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force. | |
| 4. Before adopting a delegated act, the Commission shall consult experts designated by each Member State in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making. | |
| 5. As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council. | |
| 6. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 50(2) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or by the Council within a period of two months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and to the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council. |
Or. en
Justification
Standard text on delegated acts
Amendment 178
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 b (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article 34b | |
| Programme evaluation | |
| 1. Programme evaluations shall be carried out in a timely manner to feed into the decision-making process of the Programme, the next framework programme and other initiatives relevant to R&I. | |
| 2. The interim evaluation of the Programme shall be carried out with the assistance of independent experts selected on the basis of a transparent process once there is sufficient information available about the implementation of the Programme, but no later than four years after entry into force of this Regulation. The evaluation shall form the basis for Commission proposals to adjust or re-orientate the Programme, as appropriate. It shall assess the Programme's effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, coherence, and Union added value. | |
| 3. At the end of the implementation of the Programme, but no later than four years after the end of the period specified in Article 1, a final evaluation of the Programme shall be completed by the Commission. It shall include an assessment of the long-term impact of previous framework programmes. | |
| 4. The Commission shall publish and communicate the conclusions of the evaluations accompanied by its observations and shall present them to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. |
Or. en
Justification
Programme evaluation should be specified in this Regulation to ensure the evaluation aligns with the specifics of the Programme.
Amendment 179
Proposal for a regulation
Title II a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Annex 1. Broad lines of activities | |
| Pillar I "Excellent Science" | |
| ERC | |
| [...] | |
| MSCA | |
| [...] | |
| FTTE | |
| [...] | |
| JRC | |
| [...] | |
| Pillar II "Competitiveness and Society" | |
| Competitiveness Window I "Energy Infrastructure; Decarbonisation & Clean Technology" | |
| [...] | |
| Competitiveness Window II "Biotechnology, Health, and Sustainable Prosperity" | |
| [...] | |
| Competitiveness Window III "Digital Leadership and Infrastructure" | |
| [...] | |
| Competitiveness Window IV "Space, Critical Raw Materials, Security" | |
| [...] | |
| Fast Track to Innovation | |
| [...] | |
| European Demonstrator Scheme | |
| [...] | |
| Pillar III "Innovation" | |
| EIC | |
| [...] | |
| European Innovation Ecosystems | |
| [...] | |
| Pillar IV "European Research Area" | |
| Reforming and enhancing the European R&I system | |
| [...] | |
| Research and technology infrastructures | |
| [...] | |
| Widening participation and spreading excellence | |
| [...] | |
| European support for Researchers at Risk | |
| [...] |
Or. en
Explanatory statement 16 paragraphs
The European Framework Programmes have been an essential part of European scientific and innovation leadership for decades. They have supported major European achievements and attracted the best scientists from across the globe. They are the bedrock of our climate science and the most sustained effort to strengthen the European semiconductor sector. Framework Programmes have fostered European integration and stable international partnerships. More than ever sustaining our prosperity, our way of life and our security is dependent on our leadership in science and technology. The Framework Programme is at the heart of Europe’s core interests and priorities. We need a strong Framework Programme that can deliver for Europe.
However, it will have to deliver in a new context. Innovation cycles in key technologies are speeding up. Global competition is getting tougher. Europe’s ability to help startups scale up is now more critical than ever. This means we must be more deliberate in how we spend our limited funds. We must recognise the opportunity cost of choosing one topic over another.
Funds cannot be spread thinly across too many topics just to please everyone. We cannot fund topics simply because they are important but lack clear European added value. We cannot allow research funding to be diverted to ad-hoc priorities. We need a focused and agile approach for research and innovation. This approach must be grounded in a strong, world-leading scientific sector driven by academic freedom.
This requires a change of pace in the European Framework Programmes, but not the one proposed by the European Commission. The Commission wants to simply subject Horizon Europe to European Competitiveness Fund (ECF) priorities instead of building strategic pathways. It wants to reduce the autonomy of the European Research Council (ERC) and European Innovation Council (EIC). It wants full control over programming of calls, and this is a step in the wrong direction.
Instead, we should follow the expert advice of Mario Draghi, Enrico Letta, Sauli Niinistö, and Manuel Heitor - all of whom were invited by the Commission to provide their advice exactly for this purpose. We should also take on board the work of Nobel Prize winner Professor Aghion et al. Draghi argued that the Framework Programme should be managed by experts with proven innovation track records and refocused on fewer, agreed priorities. However, his proposals risk incumbency bias, which Aghion’s research shows harms sustainable growth.
We must redesign the ECF-Horizon Europe link—not sever it but improve it so each programme delivers its strengths. I propose that Pillar 2 of Horizon is implemented with public authorities setting priorities and budgets agreed through comitology. Implementation should be left to experts with proven innovation track records. This should be inspired by but not copy the ARPA-style - as recommended by Heitor.
This will allow the Framework Programme to focus on fewer, commonly agreed priorities. It will also minimize the risk of incumbency bias. As an additional safeguard, I propose adopting two new Research Councils, building on the suggestion of the Heitor Group, to oversee expert-led implementation. Furthermore, two separate comitology processes for Pillar 2 of Horizon Europe and the ECF are required to keep research funding truly competitive. At the same time, Programme Committees must have a legal obligation to coordinate to ensure alignment.
The European history of the 20th century taught us that science and technology funding work best at arm’s length from the executive. That is why Member States have research and innovation funding agencies. It is time for the Framework Programmes to mature and recognise this necessity. The Commission cannot remain the main actor in programme implementation. We need to decentralise for the benefit of expertise and agility.
Creative destruction drives sustainable growth, but only in a fair competitive environment. Europe is still working to achieve this in its internal market and given the worsening geopolitical situation, Europe must adapt. In strategically important sectors, the EU must be able to create a critical mass of coordinated European activities beyond the Framework Programme. Letta stressed that in strategic areas, the EU must encourage public-private partnerships. These should focus on knowledge exchange and innovation uptake. This should be the purpose of our Joint Undertakings. Their creation should be rooted in the Framework Programme but designed to support industrial policy objectives. This includes financial contributions from the ECF, from the national level as well as from the private sector. This is one way in which Horizon and ECF will be directly connected.
The second direct connection will be formed by ECF dedicating actions to deploy Horizon, and in particular Pillar 2, results. First, Pillar 2 will invest in priorities chosen with ECF input. It will drive innovation towards the market. Then ECF can take over for deployment to deliver the ECF objectives. The reform of Pillar 2 and the tight connection to ECF must be supported by strengthening our most successful programmes. This starts with the ERC and the EIC. These two Councils need autonomy to function. Draghi called for the EIC to become a genuine ARPA-type agency. Heitor introduced the concept of Competitive Excellence. He stressed the importance of ensuring the independence, authority, and quality of the ERC Scientific Council and EIC Board.
The autonomy of the EIC and ERC is crucial for their excellence. It avoids political influence over selection procedures. It also ensures their agility. Administrative overreach has nearly destroyed the EIC in the past. Their autonomy is also key to attracting the best and brightest. Letta argued that retaining talent is critical for Europe’s economic resilience, innovation capacity, strategic independence, and societal welfare. This should be one of our most urgent priorities. The Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions also play an essential role here. Some top-down steering for parts of MSCA funding may be strategically important. However, it must never undermine researchers’ freedom for bottom-up proposals.
The changing geopolitical landscape requires a more security-minded approach to the Framework Programme. Niinistö emphasised the importance of implementing the Council Recommendation on research security. I believe this must be a legal requirement for this Framework Programme. We must also be transparent to remain trustworthy partners for our global allies. I propose that security-based restrictions on participation be subject to a decision-making framework. This framework should be adopted as a Delegated Act. It should also include our approach to association agreements and the scope of these associations.
The Commission’s proposal to expand Pillar 4 is welcome. It includes important developments. I fully support funding for technology infrastructures. This is essential to speed up the translation of science and research into innovation and industrial deployment. The proposal to continue Widening funding is also welcome. I support the Commission’s general direction, but we will need to further detail its implementation.
In this draft report, I clarify what moonshots are. Moonshots are bold, medium-term policy approaches. They are not standalone funding tools. They are strategic frameworks for implementing EU funding and policy to achieve clearly defined objectives. These objectives are rooted in research and innovation but go beyond them. Each moonshot must be defined using SMART methodology. It must be formally launched by a Commission Communication. It requires coordinated action across EU services and Member States. The goal is to deliver transformative, real-world impact beyond traditional research outcomes.
In accordance with Article 182(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) the Framework Programme will be implemented through the Specific Programme which defines the detailed rules for its implementation, fix its duration and provide for the means deemed necessary. The Specific Programme is, therefore, of an implementing nature. It must remain subordinate to the Framework Programme and should not introduce substantive elements that go beyond or modify the objectives, principles and architecture defined in this Regulation. Legal clarity and institutional coherence require that essential policy choices and governance principles be anchored in the Framework Programme itself, rather than being dispersed across implementing instruments. For this reason, this draft report proposes to align the legal architecture more clearly with the Treaty framework and to ensure that provisions exceeding the implementing function of Article 182(4) TFEU are appropriately reflected at the level of the Framework Programme. The following Articles from the Specific Programme are, therefore, proposed to be moved, in whole or in part, to this Regulation, subject to agreement at Committee level in the European Parliament: Article 4, Article 5, Article 6, Article 7, Article 8, Article 12 and Article 18.
This moment in history does not allow for the traditional European approach based on incrementalism and national interests. The Framework Programme must reflect this. We need a radically European approach. The Framework Programme must offer funding that cannot be provided at the national level. It must attract the best and brightest to push the frontiers of science and technology. It must give Europe the scale needed to compete in a hostile geopolitical environment.
Annex: declaration of input 5 paragraphs
Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur declares that he has received input from the following entities or persons in the preparation of the report, until the adoption thereof in committee:
| 1. Interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register |
| Fraunhofer |
| ERRIN |
| ERIC Forum |
| Helmholtz Association |
| Siemens AG |
| EIT RawMaterials |
| EFPIA |
| Association Nationale Recherche Technology |
| Coimbra Group |
| Scholars at Risk |
| Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations |
| Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS) |
| EU-LIFE |
| Wellcome Trust |
| THE ROYAL DANISH ACADEMY OF SCIENCES AND LETTERS |
| VDMA |
| Euroseeds |
| EERA Joint Programme Hydropower |
| ETIP Hydropower |
| Artistic Research Alliance |
| The British Academy |
| European Cancer Organisation |
| Humane World for Animals |
| Global Health Advocates |
| International Trademark Association |
| Community of European Railway and Infrastructure Companies (CER) |
| Plants for the Future ETP (Plant ETP) |
| DIGITALEUROPE |
| Sweden’s Research and Innovation Office (SWERI) |
| Aerospace, Security & Defence Industries Association of Europe |
| European Aerospace Science Network (EASN) |
| French Academy of Sciences |
| The Good Food Institute Europe ASBL |
| ÖBB-Holding AG |
| Federation of German Industries |
| European Association of Innovation Consultants |
| Hyperloop Development Program |
| Initiative for Science in Europe |
| Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin |
| Climate Strategy |
| Business Europe |
| German Rectors’ Conference |
| German Research Foundation |
| Leibniz Gemeinschaft |
| Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche |
| Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas |
| Max Planck Gesellschaft |
| Deutsche Stiftung Weltbevölkerung |
| University of Copenhagen |
| Netherlands House for Education and Research |
| Informal Group of RTD Liaison Offices |
| Norwegian Research Council |
| European Association of Research and Technology Organisations |
| Orgalim |
| Rolls-Royce |
| CESAER |
| LERU |
| The Guilde of European Research-intensive Universities |
| European University Association |
| YERUN |
| Technology Industries of Finland |
| UASNL |
| TU Delft |
| Danish Technical University |
| CZELO |
| Infineon |
| Tuscan Organisation of Universities and Research for Europe |
| SwissCore |
| European Society for Medical Oncology |
| Aurora Universities |
| Novo Nordisk Foundation |
| Marie Curie Alumni Association Alumni Association |
| ScienceBusiness |
| Bene Meat Technologies a.s. |
| European Patent Office |
| European Union Intellectual Property Office |
| European Council for Automotive R&D - EUCAR |
| Universiteiten van Nederland |
| Politecnico di Milano |
| Aalto University |
| TPorganics |
| Deutsches Institut für Normung e. V. |
| AIT Austrian Institute of Technology GmbH |
| Erasmus University Rotterdam |
| DAAD – Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst |
| The University Alliance Stockholm Trio: Karolinska Institutet, KTH Royal Institute of Technology & Stockholm University |
| Alliance4Europe |
| UniLion |
| Association of German Cities |
| 28DIGITAL |
| UAS4Europe |
| Photonics21 |
| Ghent University |
| CEN/CENELEC |
| ELNET |
| European Defence Research and Innovation Network |
| Diehl |
| Brandenburg Technical University |
| Joint European Disruptive Initiative |
| Science Europe |
| Water Europe |
| German Science and Humanities Council |
| VLIR |
| COST Association |
| Research Council of Finland |
| Business Finland |
| CEPS |
| EuroTech |
| Universities UK International |
| European Consortium of Innovative Universities |
| Alstom |
| Netherlands Organisations for Applied Scientific Research |
| 2. Representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies |
| Mission of Switzerland to the European Union |
| Mission of Canada to the EU |
| Mission of Israel to the EU and NATO |
| UK Mission to the European Union |
| Minister Aasland of Norway |
The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur.
Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur declares that she has submitted to the natural persons concerned the European Parliament's Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/dataprotect/index.do ), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.