Luxembourg, 26/06/2001 (Agence Europe) - The meeting of the Research Council, on Tuesday in Luxembourg, allowed detailed discussion on the proposed 6th Framework Programme for Research and Development (FPRD). Summarising the work, Council President Thomas Östros stressed that all Member States had urged for "flexible" introduction of the new instruments proposed by the European Commission in order to ensure "a smooth transition". The future president of the Research Council, Belgian François-Xavier de Donnéa, gave his country's frank support to the proposals made by Commissioner Busquin, urging for means to be concentrated on the top priorities. He said that everyone should avoid tackling the debate with their "shopping list" in hand to avoid credits being dispersed over a large number of priority items within each thematic priority. He nonetheless felt it was necessary to give more structure to the section devoted to anticipation of the EU's technological needs, these two concerns being taken up by the British Secretary of State, Lord Sainsbury, and the second being taken up by all delegations. A majority of delegations (United Kingdom, Ireland, Denmark, France and Spain) also took a stance against all direct financing of research infrastructures. All Member States expressed the hope that the current instruments would be kept in place when new instruments are introduced, in order to prevent researchers from losing their current points of reference in their relations with the Commission. German Minister Edelgard Bulmahn hoped for a transitional period during which 2/3 of the budget would be spent through traditional calls for tender and only 1/3 through new integrated projects and excellence networks. She also hoped a place would be reserved for marine technologies, transport, renewable energies and plant genetics. Like most delegations, Irish Minister Mr Treacy insisted on the taking into account of SMEs. He cited marine technologies and the interoperability of transport. Mr Sasi, from Finland, regretted that the priority devoted to genetics was over-concentrated on human health. After the fashion of his British colleague, he urged for JET financing to be maintained but also for the maintaining of the level of merger activities, despite opposition from several delegations, with the sum of 850 million instead of 700 million in the Commission proposal. The concern about merger is shared by France. Ms Gehrer, from Austria, also hoped a more important place would be kept for transport, while her Danish colleague, Ms Weiss, felt the EU's new strategy for sustainable development should be taken more into account. In order to allay certain fears linked to integrated projects which have often been interpreted as only concerning large scale projects, Mr Busquin stressed that this was no where to be found in the Commission proposal and that there may be major projects in certain sectors, such as nanotechnolgoies, and in others smaller integrated projects. Concerning instruments, he recalled that the Commission had not planned to eliminate those that already exist but he also stressed that one should avoid making the FPRD too complex. Regarding the budget devoted to anticipation of needs (EUR 1.7 billion), that the Commission has conceived as a margin of flexibility, he proposed cutting this in half: 50% of credits would be allocated to foreseeable needs for which he will propose a list before October, and the remaining 50% would form the Commission's margin of manoeuvre to meet new needs. EUROPE will come back to this.