Ring fence increased FP7 funds for smaller projects, says Estonia
Estonia has published its position on the Commission's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) proposals, welcoming plans to double the budget, but arguing that if the final allocation is reduced it should not be at the expense of instruments supporting smaller projects. The Estonian government believes that the general structure of the proposals is well considered, and that the Commission has found the right balance between the different specific programmes - Cooperation, Ideas, People and Capacities. As with a number of other countries, however, Estonia calls for a clarification of the practical relationship between FP7 and the new Competitiveness and Innovation Programme (CIP). 'Estonia supports the doubling of the budget in comparison with the current financial perspective. If the amount of the budget suggested by the Commission is to be reduced, it is [in] our interests that it would not be done with regard to instruments supporting smaller projects,' the paper reads. Under the Cooperation specific programme, the position document endorses the nine thematic priorities proposed by the Commission, adding: 'We find it important to cover social problems in the context of thematic priority areas and [...] we stress the importance of the interdisciplinary nature of different programmes and themes.' Instruments in support of emerging research and unforeseen policy needs are especially useful, it continues, given the considerably longer duration of FP7. The Marie Curie scholarship programme and other initiatives under the People specific programme are seen by Estonia as a valuable part of FP7, but Tallinn would like to see Marie Curie scholarships geared more towards competencies and career planning. Mobility between academia and industry as between the EU and the rest of the world is described as important for promoting excellence in science. The Estonian government supports the creation of a European Research Council (ERC), as proposed under the Ideas pillar of FP7, as well as the Commission's desire to increase funding for research infrastructures under the Capacities programme. 'We also support the Commission's proposals concerning the need to increase synergy between the structural funds and FP7, because it provides (especially to the new Member States) a real possibility of increasing its ability to move towards the Lisbon objectives,' the document adds. Lastly, the Estonian government urges the Commission not to try to diminish the role of the Programme Committees as part of its drive to simplify the framework programme. '[T]hrough these committees the Member States can react operatively to the possible problems that might arise in the course of implementing FP7. We find it essential that Member States continue to have a possibility of influencing the selection of projects,' the position paper concludes.
Countries
Estonia