2014/2257(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO

Draft opinion
Citation -1 a (new)

-1a. having regard to the "Decision of the European Ombudsman closing her own- initiative inquiry OJ/9/2013/TN concerning the European Commission", of 4 March 2015,

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Welcomes the Commission's Report on the ECI of 1st of April 2015 acknowledging that there is still room to improve the ECI and identifying a number of possible issues with a view to improving the instrument; Equally welcomes the European Ombudsman's own-initiative enquiry into the functioning of the European Citizens' Initiative (ECI) which after a public consultation with ECI organisers and other civil society representatives formulated eleven concrete proposals to the Commission;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Notes the Commission report on the application of Regulation (EU) No 211/2011 on the citizens' initiative of 31.03.2015 and the decision of the European Ombudsman of 04.03.2015 regarding inquiry OI/9/2013/TN and points to the practical experience acquired in many areas since 2012 by the organisers of European citizens’ initiatives;

Amendment 12 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses the importance of European citizens participating in EU policy making in this difficult period of economic crisis;

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Expresses differences with the Commission's conclusion on the fact that two Citizens' Initiatives have gone through the full process shows that the Regulation establishing the ECI has been fully implemented; Is of the opinion that if in the past three years, 51 requests to launch an initiative have been received, 31 of which were registered, 20 were rejected and only 3 have so far reached the threshold of one million signatures, 12 reached the end of their collection period without reaching the threshold, 10 were withdrawn by the organisers and 3 are still collecting statements of support shows that much needs to be done to make sure that the ECI lives up to its full potential;

Amendment 14 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Stresses that all European citizens should be given the opportunity of collecting signatures for an ECI, independently of their Member State of residence;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1c. Welcomes the Commission's efforts aimed at improving the ECI process, but acknowledges that there are still a number of weaknesses in the current ECI setting; Urges the European Commission to truly commit itself to a comprehensive revision of the ECI which should aim at overcoming the existing barriers and bureaucratic hurdles, strengthening the role of the ECI and empowering all citizens with an effective tool of participatory democracy at European level;

Amendment 16 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Recalls that, in previous resolutions and annual reports prepared by the Committee on Petitions, Parliament had already pointed out some of the weaknesses of the existing legal framework and the bureaucratic burdens in the practical running of the ECI owing to a lack of IT support and disparate use in the national administrations; ~~calls for simplified and harmonised personal data requirements and procedur~~is of the opinion, therefore, that urgent revision of the ECI Regulation and Commission Implementing Regulation 1179/2011 is needed to ensure a clear, simple, user- friendly and proportionate procedures is implemented which will also encourage higher political participation by European citizens, which cannot be fully achieved with the current set of rules;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Recalls that, in previous resolutions and annual reports prepared by the Committee on Petitions, Parliament pointed out the weaknesses of the existing legal framework and the bureaucratic burdens in the practical running of the ECI owing to a lack of IT support and disparate use in the national administrations; calls for the simplifiedcation and harmonis~~ed personal data requirements and procedures;~~ ation of requirements and procedures for submission of statements of support by dispensing with the collection of personal ID numbers by all Member States, since this has shown itself to be an unnecessary bureaucratic obstacle to the collection of statements of support;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Recalls that, in previous resolutions and annual reports prepared by the Committee on Petitions, Parliament pointed out the weaknesses of the existing legal framework and the bureaucratic burdens in the practical running of the ECI owing to a lack of IT support and disparate use in the national administrations; ~~calls for simplified and harmonised personal data requirements and~~stresses the need for standardised forms in the various Member States and calls for simplified personal data procedures;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Citation -1 b (new)

-1b. having regard to Article 11 (4) of the Treaty on European Union and Article 24 (1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Amendment 20 #

Eleonora EVI, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO, Marco AFFRONTE, Laura AGEA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Recalls that, in previous resolutions and annual reports prepared by the Committee on Petitions, Parliament pointed out the weaknesses of the existing legal framework ~~and th~~, the problems regarding certain requirements that are hard to meet, and the excessive bureaucratic burdens in the practical running of the ECI owing to a lack of IT support and disparate use in the national administrations; calls for simplified and harmonised personal data requirements and procedures;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)

Highlights, therefore, the need for uniform personal data requirements for the statements of support as provided for by the original Commission proposal 1 a ; stresses that, at present, 18 Member states require the provision of a personal ID number, despite the fact that the European Data Protection Supervisor had advised against it; calls for the establishment of a permanent server, hosted by the Commission, which would provide a certified Online Collection System working as an online ECI tool thus avoiding unnecessary regulatory burdens; __________________ 1a COM(2010)119 final

Amendment 22 #

Julia PITERA, Jarosław WAŁĘSA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Regrets the lack of clear information from the outset regarding the European citizens’ initiative, resulting in widespread misunderstandings as to the nature thereof and disappointment when the first ECIs were rejected by the Commission;

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Points out that before action is taken to improve the ECI, there needs to be evidence that shows the real situation, including the numbers of complaints lodged with the Court of Justice; points out that such changes should not be based solely on the personal assessments of individuals or groups of stakeholders;

Amendment 24 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Stresses that a major simplification and revision of the ECI Regulation needs to focus on measures improving the accessibility to the ECI, both for organisers and for signatories, providing more dynamic and citizen-friendly process, and guaranteeing measures that have greater legal impact of the successful initiatives;

Amendment 25 #

József NAGY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Insist that the Commission effectively implements the ECI regulation and proceeds for the removal of all administrative burdens encountered by citizens when submitting and following an ECI, and urges the Commission to consider the implementation of a common ECIs' registering system to all members states

Amendment 26 #

Eleonora EVI, Marco AFFRONTE, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO, Laura AGEA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Calls on the Commission to urge Member states to use the ECI Validation Tool for Statements of Support, developed under the Interoperability Solutions for European Public Administrations programme;

Amendment 27 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO, Demetris PAPADAKIS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Reports that to date only three initiatives managed to collect one million signatures in at least seven Member States, the first ever initiative was "Right2Water" and the most recent one is "Stop Vivisection ECI"; Regrets that the first two initiatives were not followed-up by a concrete legislative proposal and invites the Commission to adopt more concrete measures with the next successful initiatives;

Amendment 28 #

Eleonora EVI, Marco AFFRONTE, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO, Laura AGEA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Stresses that, within the scope of the instruments available to enhance participatory democracy across the Union, IT tools should be made available also to regions, thus allowing for greater involvement of citizens in public affairs;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Expresses its concern about the low percentage of successful initiatives and the dramatic decrease in the number of new initiatives; points out that this low percentage is the result of disproportionate requirements, and regrets the fact that, because initiatives have had no legislative impact, and because a number of successful ones have been rejected by the Commission, use of the instrument is being discouraged; stresses that the European institutions and the Member States must take all necessary steps – including a review of the requirements for an initiative to be deemed successful – to promote the ECI and to foster citizens’ confidence in this tool; believes that the instrument ~~still has~~, once the ECI Regulation has been revised, may have the potential to engage the public and to promote dialogue among citizens and between citizens and EU institutions; welcomes the fact that some ECIs have managed to have an impact at local level;

Amendment 3 #

Eleonora EVI, Marco AFFRONTE, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO, Laura AGEA

Draft opinion
Recital -1 (new)

-1. A. whereas the European Citizens' Initiative is the very first tool of participatory democracy and it has to be promoted in every level;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Expresses its concern about the ~~low percentage of successful initiatives and the dramatic decrease in the number of new initiative~~fact that, since 2012, out of 31 registered ECIs only 3 reached the last phase; highlights how the dramatic decrease in the number of new initiatives is direct consequence of a cumbersome and unnecessarily complex system as well as discouraging Commission response to successful ECIs; stresses that the European institutions and the Member States must take all necessary steps to promote the ECI and to foster citizens’ confidence in this tool; believes that the instrument still has the potential to engage the public and to promote dialogue among citizens and between citizens and EU institutions; welcomes the fact that some ECIs have managed to have an impact at local level;

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Expresses its concern about the low percentage of successful initiatives and the dramatic decrease in the number of new initiatives; stresses that the European institutions and the Member States must take all necessary steps to promote the ECI and to foster citizens’ confidence in this tool; believes that the instrument still has the potential to engage the public and to promote dialogue among citizens and between citizens and EU institutions; proposes to increase the time span for collection of signatures to 18 months; welcomes the fact that some ECIs have managed to have an impact at local level;

Amendment 32 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO, Demetris PAPADAKIS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Expresses its concern about the low percentage of successful initiatives and the dramatic decrease in the number of new initiatives; stresses that the European institutions and the Member States must take all necessary steps to promote the ECI and to foster citizens’ confidence in this tool; believes that the instrument ~~still~~ has the potential to engage the public and to promote dialogue among citizens and between citizens and EU institutions; welcomes the fact that some ECIs have managed to have an impact at local level;

Amendment 33 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Expresses its concern about the low percentage of successful initiatives and the dramatic decrease in the number of new initiatives; stresses that the European institutions and the Member States must take all necessary steps to promote the ECI and to foster citizens’ confidence in this tool; believes that if revised the instrument still has the potential to engage the public and to promote dialogue among citizens and between citizens and EU institutions; welcomes the fact that some ECIs have managed to have an impact at local level;

Amendment 34 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Considers that the use of regional and minority languages, as defined by the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, is a civic right; further stresses that the possibility to use one's mother tongue encourages citizen participation; calls for the inclusion of the use of regional and minority languages in all the activities linked to an ECI;

Amendment 35 #

József NAGY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Notes that if citizens lose their interest and trust in the EU institutions after their successful and widely supported ECIs are neglected by the Commission, the EU is putting its credibility at risk.

Amendment 36 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Considers that the review of the ECI regulation should be also used as an opportunity to ~~enhance awareness of the petitions process, explain the distinction~~underline the main differences between the ECIs and ~~petitions and promote a link between them,~~the right to petition, whereas this could be done via harmonised information on the European institutions’' websites and in their advertisement policies;

Amendment 37 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Considers that ~~the~~a review of the ECI regulation should be used as an opportunity to ~~enhance awareness of the petitions process,~~ explain the distinction between ECIs and petitions and promote a link between them, via harmonised information on the European institutions’ websites and in their advertisement policies;

Amendment 38 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Stresses the need for services providing legal advice regarding ECIs and for the adoption of legal framework provisions to protect their members;

Amendment 39 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) to be the first direct democratic instrument to enable citizens to become actively involved in the framing of European policies and legislation; underlines the responsibility of the European Parliament, the only directly- elected institution in rendering this instrument a real success; invites the Commission to inform the Parliament on a regular basis about ECI registrations;

Amendment 40 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Regrets the lack of clear information on the ECI instrument at the early stages, which led to a general misconception about its nature and generated some frustration when the first ECIs were rejected by the Commission; recalls that the instrument should be simple, clear and user-friendly; expresses its concerns with the potential conflict of interests within the fact that the Commission itself has the exclusive responsibility to carry out the initial legal check and asks for this situation to be addressed properly in the future;

Amendment 41 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO, Demetris PAPADAKIS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Regrets the lack of clear information on the ECI instrument at the early stages, which led to a general misconception about its nature and generated some frustration when the first ECIs were rejected by the Commission; stresses that the ECI process should be improved in line with the experiences gathered in the practice; recalls that the instrument should be simple, clear and user-friendly;

Amendment 42 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Reports that the general public's awareness and knowledge of the ECI among citizens is very low; Regrets the lack of clear information on the ECI instrument at the early stages, which led to a general misconception about its nature and generated some frustration when the first ECIs were rejected by the Commission; recalls that the instrument should be simple, clear and user-friendly;

Amendment 43 #

Eleonora EVI, Marco AFFRONTE, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO, Laura AGEA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Regrets the lack of clear information on the ECI instrument at the early stages, which led to a general misconception about its nature and generated ~~some~~ frustration when the first ECIs were rejected by the Commission; recalls that the instrument should be simple, clear and user-friendly;

Amendment 44 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Recommends that in order to build knowledge and trust in the ECI, the European institutions and Member States need to use every available communication channel, especially all relevant European Institutions' social and digital media platforms that have a combined following of many millions of citizens to conduct an ongoing awareness raising campaign to proactively promote ECI with the involvement of EU offices and representations as well as national authorities which should spread the concept of the ECI, and furthermore provide information in different national languages about on-going ECI initiatives;

Amendment 45 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls on the Commission, in view of the various problems arising, to table as soon as possible a proposal for the revision of Regulation (EU) No 211/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the citizens’ initiative, so as to make the instrument simple, clear and user-friendly and enable it to fulfil its potential more effectively in future;

Amendment 46 #

Jérôme LAVRILLEUX

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls on the Commission to promote the ECI among elected representatives at national and local level so that they can spearhead the democratisation of the ECI, lending support and bringing it closer to the citizens;

Amendment 47 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Appreciates the Commission's efforts in updating its Guide to the European Citizens Initiative, and also in providing information and advice via its Europe Direct Contact Centre; Is of the opinion that more technical, legal and political support is needed to organisers of ECI initiatives in terms of launching and running an initiative, and in particular when drafting their ECI proposal, identifying a legal basis for it, respecting the strict IT requirements or national data protection rules;

Amendment 48 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Calls for enhanced inter-institutional cooperation when dealing with ECIs in providing information and support to ECI organisers~~; calls for the future establishment of a physical and online ‘one-stop shop’~~ including providing multilingual websites, training programmes, educational material and a single set of guidelines on the right and obligation of the ECI organisers and on the administrative procedures through the ECI process; calls for the future establishment of a 'Citizen's Initiative Centre', designed as a one-stop shop support centre for any kind of ECI-related enquiry providing support, information, ~~leg~~technical, legal and political advice, translation services and funding, which could use the resources of the point of contact based in the Europe Direct Contact Centre and the Commission’'s representations and Parliament’'s information offices in the Member States; considers that such a set- up would bring the ECI project closer to citizens;

Amendment 49 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO, Josep-Maria TERRICABRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Calls for enhanced inter-institutional cooperation when dealing with ECIs in providing information and support to ECI organisers; calls for the future establishment of a physical and online ‘one-stop shop’ providing information, legal advice, translation services and funding, which could use the resources of the point of contact based in the Europe Direct Contact Centre and the Commission’s representations and Parliament’s information offices in the Member States; considers that such a set- up would bring the ECI project closer to citizens; requests the Commission to adopt the necessary regulatory provisions in order to provide citizens' committees with a European legal entity;

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers the European Citizens’' Initiative (ECI) to be the first direct democratic instrument to enable citizens to become actively involved in the framing of European policies and legislation; and to connect them directly with EU institutions to discuss key issues at European level; Underlines that the ECI complements citizens' right to submit petitions to the European Parliament and their right of appeal to the European Ombudsman;

Amendment 50 #

Eleonora EVI, Marco AFFRONTE, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO, Laura AGEA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Calls for enhanced inter-institutional cooperation when dealing with ECIs in providing information and support to ECI organisers; calls for the future establishment of an independent physical and online ‘'one-stop shop’' providing information, legal advice, translation services and funding, which could use the resources of the point of contact based in the Europe Direct Contact Centre and the Commission’'s representations and Parliament’'s information offices in the Member States; considers that such a set- up would bring the ECI project closer to citizens;

Amendment 51 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Calls for enhanced inter-institutional cooperation when dealing with ECIs in providing information and support to ECI organisers; calls for the future establishment of a physical and online ‘one-stop shop’ providing information, legal advice, and translation services ~~and funding,~~ which ~~could~~may use the resources of the point of contact based in the Europe Direct Contact Centre and the Commission’s representations and Parliament’s information offices in the Member States; considers that such a set- up would bring the ECI project closer to citizens;

Amendment 52 #

Julia PITERA, Jarosław WAŁĘSA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Points out that there is a Commission and Parliament representation in each Member State; points out, furthermore, that the possibility of setting up, in every Member State, an office to deal with citizens’ initiatives would generate additional bureaucratic costs;

Amendment 53 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Invites the Commission to consider different options of providing administrative and financial support to the ECI projects through the existing budget lines of the Europe for Citizens Programme and the Rights, Equality and Citizens Programme;

Amendment 54 #

Eleonora EVI, Marco AFFRONTE, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO, Laura AGEA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls on the Commission to consider uniformly lowering the minimum age to support an ECI to 16, to encourage civic participation of the younger generation in EU affairs;

Amendment 55 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO, Demetris PAPADAKIS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Welcomes the European Economic and Social Committee's (EESC) new linguistic service for providing ECI organisers with translation of the ECI submission text in all EU languages for all validated ECIs and calls on the European Commission to propose a long term solution to provide the existing translation services in the institutions to the organisers of ECI initiatives so that translations of ECI texts are provided into all official languages and thus remove one major difficulty for citizens when organising cross-border ECI campaign in all Member States;

Amendment 56 #

Julia PITERA, Jarosław WAŁĘSA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Points out that the idea of promoting the ECI should not rely on excessive involvement in organising and funding citizens’ initiatives, as this deprives them of their quality of citizenship and makes the European Parliament jointly responsible for the intentions of those behind the initiatives;

Amendment 57 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)

6c. Regrets that when it comes to a refusal to register an ECI, the European Commission is not always very clear in its reasoning, therefore there is a need to provide more robust, consistent and transparent reasons as to why the ECIs are not responded to with a legislative proposal and where possible suggest a redrafting of the ECI or partially accepting the parts that are within the Commission's remit;

Amendment 58 #

Peter JAHR, Hermann WINKLER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to ensure transparency in the decision-making process and clarify the procedure for legal admissibility; invites the Commission to respond to successful ECIs with more concrete actions; calls on the Commission, in cases of only partial legal admissibility, not to rule the entire ECI inadmissible but to inform the applicants exactly which part of the ECI is admissible, thereby enabling them to register it, or even to do so itself automatically, as well as indicating which parts are inadmissible and why; asks the Commission to submit a suitable proposal as part of a review if it believes that a review is the only way in which this can be done;

Amendment 59 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. CAgrees that the admissibility test at the beginning of the ECI process puts a legal burden on organisers and therefore calls on the Commission to ensure transparency in the decision-making process and clarify the procedure for legal admissibility; ~~invites the Commission to respond to successful ECIs with more concrete acti~~Is interested in the decision of the European Court of Justice which should clarify whether the Commission applies the admissibility check too rigidly; Suggests meanwhile to the Commission to take a more flexible approach to the registration process and assist organisers in identifying a legal basis and in framing their proposal; invites the Commission to respond to successful ECIs with more concrete actions such as the preparation of a legal act on successful initiatives within 12 months of their acceptance and in case the Commission does not submit a proposal it needs to provide citizens with justifiable reasons;

Amendment 6 #

Svetoslav Hristov MALINOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) to be the first direct democratic instrument to enable citizens to become actively involved in the framing of European policies and legislation; considers that Parliament, as part of its commitment to Europe’s citizens, should do its utmost to ensure that it is an effective instrument;

Amendment 60 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to ensure transparency in the decision-making process and clarify the procedure for legal admissibility; ~~invites the Commission to resp~~regrets the reluctance to declare admissible proposed citizens' initiatives where citizens manifest their oppositiond to ~~successful ECIs with more concrete actions~~the negotiation of international agreements that will become directly or indirectly the basis for a later legal act;

Amendment 61 #

Eleonora EVI, Marco AFFRONTE, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO, Laura AGEA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Calls on~~Encourages the Commission to revise the ECI Regulation with the aim to ensure a transparen~~cy in the~~t and institutionally balanced decision-making process and clarify the procedure for legal admissibility~~; invites the Commission to respond to successful ECIs with more concrete act~~, especially with regard to the exclusive role of the Commissions;

Amendment 62 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to ensure transparency in the decision-making process and clarify the procedure for legal admissibility; ~~invites the Commission to respond to successful ECIs wi~~highlights how, among submitted and registered ECIs, a handful of organisers have brought the Commission before the Court of Justice over the m~~ore concrete actions~~isapplication of proper legal test of regulation No 211/2011;

Amendment 63 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to ensure transparency in the decision-making process and clarify the procedure for legal admissibility; invites the Commission to respond to successful ECIs with more concrete actions and where declared inadmissible to ask the Commission to provide reasoning for rejection that is more robust, consistent and comprehensible to the citizen;

Amendment 64 #

Svetoslav Hristov MALINOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

Amendment 65 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

Amendment 66 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Understands stakeholders' concerns with the collection of signatures and in particular when it comes to the different personal data requirements for signatories; Invites the European Commission and Member States to simplify and harmonise personal data requirements and procedures in order to facilitate the process for EU citizens wishing to sign an ECI and to further explore the possibility of creating a simplified voluntary online EU registry where citizens will be able to sign an ECI initiative;

Amendment 67 #

Eleonora EVI, Marco AFFRONTE, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO, Laura AGEA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Urges the Commission to respond to successful ECIs with more concrete actions, unless the ECI will lose credibility as a democratic mechanism in the eyes of citizens, especially since its stated aim is to enhance the democratic legitimacy of the Union; reiterates that in order to provide proper follow-up to a successful ECI, a parliamentary debate in plenary followed by a vote on the ECI should be allowed; calls therefore on the Commission to modify regulation 211/2011 accordingly;

Amendment 68 #

Pál CSÁKY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Invites the Commission to respond to successful ECIs with more concrete actions; calls on the Commission to provide more consistent reasoning in the case of ECIs refusal; calls on the Commission to examine the possibility of registering only that part of an initiative which falls within the field of the Commission's legislative powers;

Amendment 69 #

József NAGY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Stresses that an ECI is an important tool of participatory democracy for making citizens' voices heard in the legislative procedure and that a successful ECI should in principle result in a new Commission legislative proposal, at least when the Commission has committed itself to doing so, as in the case of the ECI on the Right to Water;

Amendment 7 #

Josep-Maria TERRICABRAS, Marlene MIZZI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers the European Citizens’' Initiative (ECI) to be an innovative instrument for transnational participatory democracy and the first direct democratic instrument to enable citizens to become actively involved in the framing of European policies and legislation;

Amendment 70 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7b. Urges the Commission to respond to each successful ECI with a legislative proposal within 12 months after the submission of the ECI; in case the Commission fails to provide a legislative proposal within this period, the competent committee of the European Parliament will initiate a legislative-initiative report for which the selected rapporteur shall consult the ECI organisers in another hearing; calls on the European Parliament to modify its rules of procedure accordingly;

Amendment 71 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7b. Encourages the institutions to consider the possibility of debating the issues that were raised by not successful ECIs, taking into consideration that they were supported by a significant number of EU citizens;

Amendment 72 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Welcomes Commission's efforts to launch and improve the online signature (OCS) collection system; Acknowledges, however, that further efforts are needed to completely redesign and customise the OCS; Calls on the Commission to improve the online collection system (OCS) software and make it accessible to persons with disabilities, allow for electronic signatures and for the collection of e-mail addresses and to link it to the new relevant social and digital media tools, and include the most up-to-date online campaigning features, following the example of other successful online campaigning platforms; calls on the Commission to support the creation of a public ECI application for mobile ~~devices~~and smart devices; Suggests as well that the Commission turns this temporarily provided server for the collection of online signatures into a permanent solution of a centralised, user- friendly and free of charge central public online collection platform;

Amendment 73 #

Josep-Maria TERRICABRAS, Marlene MIZZI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Commission to improve the online collection system (OCS) software and make it accessible to persons with disabilities, allow for electronic signatures and for the collection of e-mail addresses, and include the most up-to-date online campaigning features, following the example of other successful online campaigning platforms; calls on the Commission to provide the citizens' committees of admissible ECI's access to a permanent free server allowing for the storage the online signatures in compliance with EU data protection standards; encourages the Commission to support the creation of a public ECI application for mobile devices;

Amendment 74 #

Eleonora EVI, Marco AFFRONTE, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO, Laura AGEA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Commission to improve and simplify the oOnline cCollection sSystem (OCS) software and make it accessible to persons with disabilities, allow for electronic signatures and for the collection of e-mail addresses, and include the most up-to-date online campaigning features, following the example of other successful online campaigning platforms; calls on the Commission to support the ~~creation of a public ECI application~~development of an open source dedicated ECI software for mobile devices;

Amendment 75 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Invites the Commission to revise the ECI regulation to clarify when the period of collecting signatures will start and proposes that this should be when the OCS certification is completed;

Amendment 76 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8b. Reiterates that every citizen has the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union by way of a European citizens' initiative and calls for actions at European and national levels to ensure that specific groups of people such as European citizens living abroad, disabled or older people are not denied their right to sign an initiative; urges the Commission and Member States to implement simpler and uniform online and offline signature collection rules to ensure that all EU citizens can support an ECI;

Amendment 77 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO, Gabriele PREUSS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)

8c. Recalls PETI position that in order to encourage the civic participation of the younger generation in EU affairs on important topics such as jobs, education or the environment there is a need in the context of the ECI to uniformly lower the age limit to 16;

Amendment 78 #

Daniel HANNAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Invites the Commission to examine proposals relating to the creation of a European identity card, which should also meet the requirements of the regulation on the citizens’ initiative for gathering signatures;deleted

Amendment 79 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

Amendment 8 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO, Gabriele PREUSS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

Amendment 80 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

Amendment 81 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO, Gabriele PREUSS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. IConsiders that the requirement to provide with the ID number to support a Citizens' Initiative should be eliminated as it generates differences in treatment of citizens depending on the Member State; invites the Commission to examine proposals relating to the creation of a European identity card, which should also meet the requirements of the regulation on the citizens’ initiative for gathering signatures;

Amendment 82 #

Daniel HANNAN

Draft opinion
Point 10

~~10. Calls on the Commission to come forward with proposals concerning the establishment of a complete electoral list of its citizens;~~deleted

Amendment 83 #

Draft opinion
Point 10

~~10. Calls on the Commission to come forward with proposals concerning the establishment of a complete electoral list of its citizens;~~deleted

Amendment 84 #

Josep-Maria TERRICABRAS, Marlene MIZZI

Draft opinion
Point 10

10. Calls on the Commission to come forward with proposals concerning the establishment of a complete electoral list of its citizens; proposes to lower the minimum age threshold for being entitled to support an ECI to 16 years;

Amendment 85 #

Draft opinion
Point 10 a (new)

10a. Considers it crucial for a proper use of this participative democracy tool by citizens and in order to prevent its possible abuse by other sort of private interests, to increase the transparency and the quality of checks on the funding and sponsorship of ECIs;

Amendment 86 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO

Draft opinion
Point 11

~~11. Invites the Commission to consider in the future revision of the regulation the proposal for allowing ECIs that require treaty amendments according to Article 48 TFEU;~~deleted

Amendment 87 #

Draft opinion
Point 11

11. Invites the Commission, in light of the up-coming judgment of the European Court of Justice to clarify whether the EU citizens have the same powers as the European Parliament to propose Treaty amendments and to consider in the future revision of the regulation the proposal for allowing ECIs that require treaty amendments according to Article 48 TFEU;

Amendment 88 #

Beatriz BECERRA BASTERRECHEA

Draft opinion
Point 11

11. Invites the Commission to consider in the future revision of the regulation the proposal for allowing ECIs that require treaty amendments according to Article 48 ~~TFEU~~of the Treaty on European Union;

Amendment 89 #

Draft opinion
Point 11 a (new)

11a. Welcomes the proposal of the European Economic and Social Committee to provide free translations of the ECIs texts in order to reduce burdens of organising an ECI;

Amendment 9 #

Marlene MIZZI, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Andrea COZZOLINO, Demetris PAPADAKIS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) to be the first ~~direct democratic instrument~~instrument of participatory democracy to enable citizens to become actively involved in the framing of European policies and legislation;

Amendment 90 #

Draft opinion
Point 12

12. Recalls that hearings concerning successful ECIs are currently organised by the competent committee, according to the subject of the ECI, with the Committee on Petitions associated; proposes that the Committee on Petitions should take over the role of organising hearings, as a neutral forum with the greatest experience in dealing with citizens., after which the relevant Committee should issue an own initiative report followed by a discussion and vote on each successful ECI in full plenum; invites the European Parliament to further explore the possibilities of organising hearings for initiatives that haven't reached the one million signatures but have more than half of the required signatures;

Amendment 91 #

Eleonora EVI, Marco AFFRONTE, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO, Laura AGEA

Draft opinion
Point 12

12. ~~Recalls that hearings concerning successful ECI~~Stresses the importance in terms of participative democracy of having properly organised hearings in the European Parliament concerning successful ECIs; recalls that the hearings are currently organised by the competent committee, according to the subject of the ECI, with the Committee on Petitions associated; proposes that the Committee on Petitions should take over the role of organising hearings, as a neutral forum with the greatest experience in dealing with citizens., in order to ensure consistency and a fair and equal treatment across hearings of different ECIs;

Amendment 92 #

Draft opinion
Point 12

12. Recalls that hearings concerning successful ECIs are currently organised by the competent committee, according to the subject of the ECI, with the Committee on Petitions associated; proposes that the Committee on Petitions should take over the role of organising hearings, as a neutral forum with the greatest experience in dealing with citizens; notes that the ECI citizens' committee should receive reimbursement to participate in the hearings for all its members (i.e. one for each Member state represented instead of currently three).

Amendment 93 #

Draft opinion
Point 12

source: 554.962

2015/05/21 AFCO 127 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 8

– having regard to the Commission report of 31 ~~April~~March 2015 on the European Citizens’ Initiative,

Amendment 10 #

Sylvie GOULARD, Charles GOERENS

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas, three years on from the entry into application of Regulation 211/2011 on 1 April 2012, it is necessary to thoroughly evaluate its implementation in order to identify ~~any~~ shortcomings and to propose viable solutions for its prompt reviewsion;

Amendment 100 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Commission to revise the wording of Article 10(c) of Regulation 211/2011 to allow proper follow-up to a successful ECI, including, if necessary, a parliamentary debate in plenary followed by a vote on the ECI; urges the Commission to start preparing a legal act on successful ECIs within 12 months of their acceptance;

Amendment 101 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Calls for action to be taken to enhance the viability of citizens’ initiatives that have not achieved the threshold of 1 million signatures but whose proposals have received support from a quarter of the Member States;

Amendment 102 #

Sylvie GOULARD, Charles GOERENS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Calls on the Commission to revise the wording of Article 10(c) of Regulation 211/2011 to allow any European Citizens’ Initiative meeting the conditions laid down in Article 11(4) TEU in respect of which it has decided not to submit a proposal to be authorised for debate in the European Parliament, followed by a vote, where necessary after the national parliaments have delivered an opinion;

Amendment 103 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

Amendment 104 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

Amendment 105 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

Amendment 106 #

Barbara SPINELLI, Helmut SCHOLZ, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

Amendment 107 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Takes the view that, in order to emphasise the political dimension of ECIs, a public hearing held under the terms of Article 11 of Regulation 211/2011 should be structured in such a way as to allow organisers to engage in a dialogue with Members of the European Parliament; stresses that hearings on ECIs should be organised by a neutral committee that does not have the main responsibility for their subject-matter; points out that while the organisers of the ECI should be given the space they deserve for the presentation of their case, it might be useful to also include outside stakeholders and experts at an early stage of the discussion. To this end, the Commission is invited to use additional tools of participation as foreseen in Article 11 of the Lisbon Treaty (e.g., online consultation) and extend the deadline for a Commission response from 3 to 5 months to accommodate this. Is of the opinion that one Vice President of the European Parliament should be in charge of organizing the hearings on ECIs.

Amendment 108 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

Amendment 109 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Calls on organisers and institutions, but above all on the Commission, to ensure that contacts between those involved are not limited to the stage prior to the presentation of initiatives, since there should also be more transparency in the stage after an initiative has been accepted;

Amendment 11 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the majority of organisers of European Citizens’ Initiatives (ECIs) have encountered a number of difficulties in setting up an ECI, in relation to both practical and legal aspects, and whereas the organisers of several rejected ECIs have consequently submitted complaints to the Court of Justice and the European Ombudsman against the Commission’s decision~~, as has emerged from extensive contact with civil society and from research on~~ not to register their ECIs;

Amendment 110 #

Barbara SPINELLI, Helmut SCHOLZ, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Considers it crucial for a proper use of this participative democracy tool by citizens and in order to prevent its possible abuse by other sort of private interests, to increase the transparency and the quality of checks on the funding and sponsorship of ECIs;

Amendment 111 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Under the terms of Article 225 TFEU, urges the Parliament and its committees, if necessary, to claim the right to request the Commission to submit a proposal that takes into account the content of any successful ECI.

Amendment 112 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Invites the Commission to explore the possibility of funding ECIs through ~~the~~existing EU budgets, via European programmes such as the Europe for Citizens programme and the Rights, Equality and Citizenship programme, ~~given~~mindful that there is a real need for financial support for the organisation of ECIs and that numerous amendments to the EU budget have been submitted to this end;

Amendment 113 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Invites the Commission to explore the possibility of ~~funding~~providing financial support for ECIs through the EU budget, via European programmes such as the Europe for Citizens programme and the Rights, Equality and Citizenship programme, given that there is a real need for financial support for the organisation of ECIs and that numerous amendments to the EU budget have been submitted to this end;

Amendment 114 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Invites the Commission to explore the possibility of funding ECIs through the EU budget, via European programmes such as the Europe for Citizens programme and the Rights, Equality and Citizenship programme, given that equality between citizens must be guaranteed and there is a real need for financial support for the organisation of ECIs and that numerous amendments to the EU budget have been submitted to this end;

Amendment 115 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Invites the Commission to explore the possibility of funding ECIs through the EU budget, via European programmes such as the Europe for Citizens programme and the Rights, Equality and Citizenship programme, including the possibility of financing promotional radio and television programmes, given that there is a real need for financial support for the organisation of ECIs and that numerous amendments to the EU budget have been submitted to this end;

Amendment 116 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Invites the Commission to explore the possibility of funding ECIs through the EU budget, via European programmes such as the Europe for Citizens programme and the Rights, Equality and Citizenship programme, given that there is a real need for financial support for the organisation of ECIs and that numerous amendments to the EU budget have been submitted to this end; and, in this connection, urges the Commission to maximise the communication of the instrument, in order to bring its existence to the attention of citizens in as wide a measure as possible;

Amendment 117 #

Barbara SPINELLI, Helmut SCHOLZ, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Calls for the institutions to show greater commitment to making Union citizens aware of European Citizens’ Initiatives;

Amendment 118 #

Nicola CAPUTO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Calls on the Commission to explore the possibility of facilitating the use of ECIs through the implementation of the relevant ICT platforms and tools and the specific provision of information and user channels dedicated to users with disabilities and with a lack of computer knowledge, in order to make this tool increasingly inclusive;

Amendment 119 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Encourages the Commission to run a media campaign to increase public and media awareness. Urges the need to amend the EU budget, in the framework of the mid-term review, so as to provide the Commission with the necessary financial resources to run an effective and large media campaign increasing public and media awareness of the ECI.

Amendment 12 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas experience has highlighted the organisational and technical difficulties involved in launching a European Citizens’ Initiative, and the rules must be designed to make them as accessible as possible to citizens and organisers;

Amendment 120 #

Nicola CAPUTO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)

15b. Calls on the Commission to counter, by taking every possible precaution, the theft – including through internet tools – of sensitive information relating to signatories, especially when it is managed in the form of aggregate data;

Amendment 121 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Welcomes the Commission's report of ~~1 April~~31st March 2015 on the ECI ~~and calls on it to~~ . The Commission should work on the European Citizens' Initiative in order to perceive it more positively as an instrument for citizens to influence European legislation. Therefore the ECI should promote the dialogue and engagement process with the citizens in order to facilitate the constitution of such initiatives. Calls on the Commission to ensure that, in its revision of this instrument, all the appropriate legal measures are implemented when an ECI is deemed to have been completed successfully;

Amendment 122 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Welcomes the Commission’s report of 31 ~~April~~March 2015 on the ECI and ~~calls on it~~European Ombudsman decision OI/9/2013/TN, and calls on the Commission to ensure that, in its revision of this instrument, all the appropriate legal measures are implemented when an ECI is deemed to have been completed successfully;

Amendment 123 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Welcomes the Commission’s report of 1 April 2015 on the ECI and calls on it to ensure, in cooperation with the citizens’ committee which proposed the initiative, that, in its revision of this instrument, all the appropriate legal measures are implemented when an ECI is deemed to have been completed successfully;

Amendment 124 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Welcomes the Commission's report of 1 April 2015 on the ECI and calls on it to ensure that, in its revision of this instrument, all the appropriate legal measures are implemented in order to provide a proper follow up when an ECI is deemed to have been completed successfully;

Amendment 125 #

Sylvia-Yvonne KAUFMANN, Jo LEINEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Welcomes the Commission’s report of 1 April 2015 on the ECI and calls on it to ensure that, in its revision of this instrument, all the appropriate legal measures are implemented when an ECI is deemed to have been completed successfully; this should include the presentation of a legislative proposal in the event of a successful ECI, and a duly reasoned reply in the event that it is rejected;

Amendment 126 #

Andrej PLENKOVIĆ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Welcomes the Commission’s report of 31 March 2015 on the ECI and calls on it to ensure that, in its revision of this instrument, all the appropriate legal measures are implemented when an ECI is deemed to have been completed successfully; calls on the European institutions to carry out the essential communication work through an information campaign on the ECI.

Amendment 127 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16a. Calls on the Commission, in view of the various shortcomings which have arisen, to submit as soon as possible a proposal to revise Regulation No 211/2011;

Amendment 13 #

Barbara SPINELLI, Helmut SCHOLZ, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas European Parliament is the only directly elected body of the European Union. As such it represents, by definition, European citizens;

Amendment 14 #

Barbara SPINELLI, Helmut SCHOLZ, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas a number of institutions, NGOs, think tanks and civil society groups have considered the various deficiencies in the implementation of the Regulation on the Citizens’ Initiative and in the organisation of ECIs and have proposed many improvements;

Amendment 15 #

Vicky MAEIJER

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas the EU has a particularly poor track record with regard to respecting the will of the people, in which connection reference may be made to the referendums in the Netherlands, France and Ireland, in which the electorates voted against the European Constitution, and to the fact that the elite ignored this result and subsequently introduced the Lisbon Treaty without a referendum;

Amendment 16 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas, during the European Year of Citizens, the associations and the civil society representatives expressed in many occasions what was necessary and urgent to be reformed in the Regulation 211/2011;

Amendment 17 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas the practicalities set out in Article 6 of the Regulation, i.e. the setting up of the online collection system and its certification by a competent authority in a Member State, leaves the organizers in most cases less than 12 months to collect the required signatures;

Amendment 18 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)

Db. whereas the submission of a successful initiative to the Commission after the signature collection period is over is not bound to a specific time limit and is thus a source for confusion and uncertainty both for the institutions and the public;

Amendment 19 #

Vicky MAEIJER

Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)

Db. Considers, therefore, that the European Citizens’ Initiative is a sham;

Amendment 2 #

Andrej PLENKOVIĆ

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas it must be one of the priority objectives of the European Union to strengthen the democratic legitimacy of its institutions; whereas the European Citizens’ Initiative is an extraordinary and innovative tool of participatory democracy in the European Union, whose potential must be exploited fully and enhanced in order to achieve the best results;

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that the Citizens' Initiative is an exceptional opportunity for citizens to identify and articulate their aspirations and to ask for EU action~~, and that it~~. However, at the same time recognises that there are significant deficits which need to be tackled and solved in order to make the ECI more effective. Therefore the ECI must be encouraged, simp~~rov~~lified and supported in order to bring about practical improvements; further stresses that the use of one's mother tongue is a civic right, and that all activities connected with an ECI may therefore be undertaken in one's mother tongue;

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that the Citizens' Initiative is an exceptional opportunity for citizens to identify and articulate their aspirations and to ask for EU action, and that it must be encouraged, improved and supported; ~~further stresse~~considers that the use of ~~one's mother tongue is a civic right, and that all activities connected with an ECI may therefore be undertaken in one's mother tongue~~regional and minority languages, as defined by the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, is a civic right; further stresses that the possibility to use one's mother tongue encourages citizen participation; calls for the inclusion of the use of regional and minority languages in all the activities linked to an ECI;

Amendment 22 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that the Citizens’ Initiative is an exceptional opportunity for citizens to identify and articulate their aspirations and to ask for EU action, and that it must be encouraged, improved and supported by all available means; further stresses that the use of one’s mother tongue is a civic right, and that all activities connected with an ECI may therefore be undertaken in one’s mother tongue;

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that the Citizens' Initiative is an exceptional opportunity for citizens to identify and articulate their aspirations and to ask for EU action, and that it must be encouraged, improved and supported; that all further assessment of the instrument should be aimed at attaining its maximal user-friendliness, given that it is a primary means of linking the citizens of Europe to the EU; further stresses that the use of one's mother tongue is a civic right, and that all activities connected with an ECI may therefore be undertaken in one's mother tongue;

Amendment 24 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that the Citizens’ Initiative is an exceptional opportunity for citizens to identify and articulate their aspirations and to ask for EU action, and that it must be encouraged, improved and supported; further stresses that the use of one’s mother tongue is a civic right, and that all activities connected with an ECI may therefore be undertaken in one’s mother tongue;Does not affect the English version.

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that the Citizens’ Initiative is an exceptional opportunity for citizens to identify and articulate their aspirations and to ask for ~~EU action~~the EU to act or to cease acting, and that it must be encouraged, improved and supported; further stresses that the use of one’s mother tongue is a civic right, and that all activities connected with an ECI may therefore be undertaken in one’s mother tongue;

Amendment 26 #

Louis MICHEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that the Citizens’ Initiative is an exceptional opportunity for citizens to identify and articulate their aspirations and to ask for EU action, and that it must be encouraged, improved and supported; calls on the EU to organise publicity and promotion campaigns to give the European Citizens’ Initiative a higher profile in the media and among the public and to encourage active participation in it; further stresses that the use of one’s mother tongue is a civic right, and that all activities connected with an ECI may therefore be undertaken in one’s mother tongue;

Amendment 27 #

Andrej PLENKOVIĆ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)

Calls on the Commission to draw lessons from national experiences of genuinely successful citizens’ initiatives;

Amendment 28 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Further stresses that youth civic engagement is fundamental for the future of all democracies and proposes to lower the minimum age threshold for being entitled to support an ECI to 16 years;

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Points out the importance of public awareness of the ECI in order to be an effective tool of democratic participation; regrets the low knowledge of this tool among European citizens; invites the Commission to run a media campaign to address this situation;

Amendment 3 #

Barbara SPINELLI, Helmut SCHOLZ, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the European Citizens' Initiative is a~~n extraordinary~~ unique and innovative ~~tool of participatory democracy~~agenda setting tool in the European Union, whose potential must be exploited fully and enhanced in order to achieve the best results;

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Calls on the Commission to provide as much guidance as possible – especially of a legal nature – to organisers of ECIs via the Europe Direct Contact Centre, so that they are aware of the possibilities open to them and will not fail by proposing an ECI that is outside the Commission's powers~~, or else to assign the task of giving advice to another independent company or body so as to avoid a possible conflict of interest within the Commission itself; notes, however, that under t~~. Encourages the Commission to assess whether less restrictive judgements on the legal admissibility of an ECI might be possible, thus supporting the engagement of citizens. The legal assessment of the Commission should be advisory in nature. The Tre~~aty of L~~visbion of the issues raised by ECIs may not correspond entirely to the Commission's jurisdiction; takes the view, furthermore, that the Commission should consider setting up a dedicated ECI office in each Member State;ECI should remove Art 4(2)(b) so that an ECI proposal only needs to be within the values of the Union and not abusive, frivolous or vexatious to be registered. Following the receipt of legal advice from the Commission and other sources that the organisers wish to use, the ECI organisers can decide whether to proceed with registration of their ECI.

Amendment 31 #

Raffaele FITTO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

Amendment 32 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Calls on the Commission to provide a~~s much guidance~~ppropriate guidance as early as possible – especially of a legal nature – to organisers of ECIs via the Europe Direct Contact Centre, so that they are aware of the possibilities open to them and will not fail by proposing an ECI that is outside the Commission's powers, or else to assign the task of giving advice to another independent company or body so as to avoid a possible conflict of interest within the Commission itself; notes, however, that under the Treaty of Lisbon the issues raised by ECIs may not correspond entirely to the Commission's jurisdiction; ~~takes the view, furthermore, that the Commission should consider setting up a dedicated ECI office in each Member State;~~

Amendment 33 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Calls on the Commission to provide ~~as much guidance as possibl~~comprehensive guidance – especially of a legal nature – to organisers of ECIs via the Europe Direct Contact Centre, so that they are aware of the possibilities open to them and will not fail by proposing an ECI that is outside the Commission’s powers, or else to assign the task of giving advice to another independent company or body so as to avoid a possible conflict of interest within the Commission itself; notes, however, that under the Treaty of Lisbon the issues raised by ECIs may not correspond entirely tomanifestly outside the Commission’s ~~jurisdiction~~powers; takes the view, furthermore, that the Commission should consider setting up a dedicated ECI office at its representations in each Member State;

Amendment 34 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

Amendment 35 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

Amendment 36 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

Amendment 37 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

Amendment 38 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Calls for the principle of material unity to be enshrined in the regulation to safeguard the wishes of citizens participating in an initiative, following the example set by similar legal systems;

Amendment 39 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Calls for a budgetary and time restriction to be set (so that initiatives cannot be presented on recently adopted legislation);

Amendment 4 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the European Citizens’ Initiative is a new political right for citizens and is an extraordinary and innovative tool of participatory democracy in the European Union, whose potential must be exploited fully and significantly enhanced in order to achieve the best results;

Amendment 40 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Stresses furthermore that a dedicated ECI office could also contribute to raising public and media awareness about the ECI; therefore invites the Commission to promote the ECI as an official EU instrument to achieve this goal; underlines that this measure might also lead to overcome citizen's distrust of sharing the personal data required to support a ECI;

Amendment 41 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Stresses the need to provide~~Calls for the provision of more detailed guidelines on the interpretation of legal bases and more information on data protection obligations in each Member State in which the organisers run their campaigns, and on the possibility for organisers to take out insurance;

Amendment 42 #

Barbara SPINELLI, Helmut SCHOLZ, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses the need to provide more detailed guidelines on the interpretation of legal bases and more information on data protection obligations in each Member State in which the organisers run their campaigns, so as to provide them with legal security, and on the possibility for organisers to take out insurance;

Amendment 43 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses the need to provide more detailed guidelines on the interpretation of legal bases and more information on data protection obligations in each Member State in which the organisers run their campaigns, and on the possibility for organisers to take out insurance at a rate not excluding citizens because of financial reasons;

Amendment 44 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)

Further supports the active participation of EU citizens to use this instrument appropriately for agenda setting; notes however that transparency and accountability should be an objective for all stakeholders in order to preserve the clarity of citizens' activities;

Amendment 45 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Expresses its concerns with the potential conflict of interests within the fact that the Commission itself has the exclusive responsibility to carry out the initial legal check and asks for this situation to be addressed properly in the future;

Amendment 46 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Takes the view that, with a view to assessing whether the legal basis of an ECI submitted is correct, an independent figure should be established, along the lines of the Hearing Officers used in competition proceedings;

Amendment 47 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Regrets the reluctance of the Commission to declare admissible proposed citizens' initiatives where citizens manifest their opposition to the negotiation of an international agreement that will be the basis for a later legal act; encourages the Commission to assess whether less restrictive judgements on the legal admissibility of an ECI might be possible;

Amendment 48 #

Sylvia-Yvonne KAUFMANN, Jo LEINEN, Siôn SIMON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3c. Calls on the Commission to allow ECIs that require treaty amendments according to Article 48 TFEU and to explicitly include this possibility in its proposal to revise Regulation 211/2011;

Amendment 49 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that under the terms of Article 4 of Regulation 211/2011, in the event of a refusal by the Commission to register an ECI, ‘the Commission shall inform the organisers of the reasons for such refusal and of all possible judicial and extrajudicial remedies available to them’; acknowledges, in this connection, the many complaints from organisers about not receiving detailed and exhaustive reasons for the rejection of their ECIs~~, and~~; invites the Commission to ~~provide as many elements as possible in order to explain the reasons and guide organisers to a possible solution~~explain in detail the reasons for rejection of an ECI if in its view an ECI which has been submitted is ‘manifestly outside the Commission’s powers’ and at the same time to inform the organisers of the relevant legal considerations, so that they can decide whether to revise their ECI and resubmit it in a modified form;

Amendment 5 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the European Citizens’ Initiative is an extraordinary and innovative tool of participatory democracy in the European Union, whose potential must absolutely be exploited in fully and enhanced in order to achieve the best results;

Amendment 50 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that under the terms of Article 4 of Regulation 211/2011, in the event of a refusal by the Commission to register an ECI, ‘the Commission shall inform the organisers of the reasons for such refusal and of all possible judicial and extrajudicial remedies available to them’; acknowledges, in this connection, the many complaints from organisers about not receiving detailed and exhaustive reasons for the rejection of their ECIs, and invites the Commission to provide a~~s many~~ll the elements ~~as possible in order to explain the reasons~~substantiating its decision declaring an ECI inadmissible in order that the validity and complete objectivity of those elements can be subject to legal scrutiny and to guide organisers to a possible solution;

Amendment 51 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that under the terms of Article 4 of Regulation 211/2011, in the event of a refusal by the Commission to register an ECI, ‘the Commission shall inform the organisers of the reasons for such refusal and of all possible judicial and extrajudicial remedies available to them'; acknowledges, in this connection, the many complaints from organisers about not receiving detailed and exhaustive reasons for the rejection of their ECIs, and invites the Commission to provide as many elements as possible in order to explain the reasons and guide organisers to a possible solution, and stresses that the detailed and exhaustive reasons should be made in writing and, in the name of transparency, made fully public;

Amendment 52 #

Barbara SPINELLI, Helmut SCHOLZ, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that under the terms of Article 4 of Regulation 211/2011, in the event of a refusal by the Commission to register an ECI, ‘the Commission shall inform the organisers of the reasons for such refusal and of all possible judicial and extrajudicial remedies available to them’; acknowledges, in this connection, the many complaints from organisers about not receiving detailed and exhaustive reasons for the rejection of their ECIs, and invites the Commission to provide as many elements as possible in order to explain the reasons and guide organisers to a possible solution, reducing as much as possible the Commission’s power of discretion as judge and party in the assessment of an initiative’s admissibility;

Amendment 53 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that under the terms of Article 4 of Regulation 211/2011, in the event of a refusal by the Commission to register an ECI, ‘the Commission shall inform the organisers of the reasons for such refusal and of all possible judicial and extrajudicial remedies available to them'; acknowledges, in this connection, the many complaints from organisers about not receiving detailed and exhaustive reasons for the rejection of their ECIs, and invites the Commission to provide as many elements as possible in order to explain the reasons and guide organisers to a possible solution; such elements and reasons provided by the Commission must be sound, intelligible and transparent, in a manner to facilitate the promoters' work, if necessary, of redrafting and resubmitting their proposals.

Amendment 54 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Invites the Commission to ~~consider the possibility of~~ register~~ing~~ only part of an initiative in the event that the entire ECI does not fall within the Commission’s powers, and to give the organisers, at the time of registration, an indication as to which part they could register;

Amendment 55 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Invites the Commission to consider the possibility of registering only part of an initiative in the event that the entire ECI does not fall within the Commission's powers, and to give the organisers, at the time of registration, an indication as to which part they could register; and to inform the European Parliament about its decision concerning the registration;

Amendment 56 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Invites the Commission to consider the possibility of registering only part of an initiative in the event that the entire ECI does not fall within the scope of Commission's ~~power~~competences, and to give the organisers, at the time of registration, an indication as to which part they could register; invites the Commission to explore ways to confer initiatives or those parts of initiatives that do not fall under the scope of Commission's competences to the competent authority, be it at national or regional level;

Amendment 57 #

Barbara SPINELLI, Helmut SCHOLZ, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Invites the Commission to consider the possibility of registering only part of an initiative in the event that the entire ECI does not fall within the Commission's powers, and to give the organisers, at the time of registration, an indication as to which part they could register. Recognising that dialogue and engagement with ECI organisers is essential throughout the process;

Amendment 58 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls on the Commission also to register ECI proposals that require treaty amendment or ask the Commission to propose treaty amendment, because these ECI proposals would fall within the framework of the Commission's powers to propose treaty amendment in accordance with Art 48(2) TEU.

Amendment 59 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Calls on the Commission to improve the user-friendly character of its software for the online collection of signatures, particularly for people with disabilities and to offer its servers for the storage of online signatures for free on a permanent basis using existing EU budgets;

Amendment 6 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the European Citizens’ Initiative is an extraordinary and innovative tool of participatory democracy in the European Union, whose potential must be exploited fully and enhanced in order to ~~achieve the best result~~encourage as many citizens of the Union as possible to participate in the further development of the European integration process;

Amendment 60 #

Sylvia-Yvonne KAUFMANN, Jo LEINEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Calls on the Commission to improve the user-friendly character of its software for the online collection of signatures, to make it accessible to people with disabilities and to offer its servers for the storage of online signatures for free on a permanent basis;

Amendment 61 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Calls on the Commission to improve the user-friendly character of its software for the online collection of signatures and in particular to make it more accessible for people with disabilities, and to offer its servers for the storage of online signatures for free on a permanent basis;

Amendment 62 #

Barbara SPINELLI, Helmut SCHOLZ, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Calls on the Commission to improve the user-friendly character of its software for the online collection of signatures and to offer its servers for the storage of online signatures for free on a permanent basis and to modify the OCS so email addresses can be collected on a non-mandatory basis on the same screen as the support form, but stored in a separate database;

Amendment 63 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Points out the importance of technology as a tool to encourage citizens' participation; stresses that the collection of email addresses would permit ECI organisers to keep signatories informed of the progress of the ECI they sign; calls on the Commission, therefore, to modify the online collection system to allow the collection of email addresses and share this information with the organizers if citizens give their consent;

Amendment 64 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Invites the Commission to reconsider the automatic start of the signature collection period following the registrat~~Calls for an end to the automatic link between the registration of an ECI and the beginning of the 12-month period within which expressions of ~~an ECI and to allow the organisers to decide when it should begin~~support can be collected, so that the organisers of an ECI themselves can decide when they wish to start to collect expressions of support;

Amendment 65 #

Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Enrique GUERRERO SALOM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Invites the Commission to reconsider the ~~automatic start of the signature collection period following the registration of an ECI and to allow the organ~~possibility of registering only part of an initiative where an ECI does not fall entirely within the Commission's remit and inform the organisers at the time of registration which part may be register~~s to decide when it should begin~~ed, a maximum deadline of six months being stipulated;

Amendment 66 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Calls on the Commission to introduce the necessary reforms to stop certain groups of citizens, such as those who are blind or living abroad, from being prevented from exercising their right to support citizens’ initiatives, as such exclusion limits equality among citizens;

Amendment 67 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Invites the Commission to examine whether a specific time limit for the submission of a successful initiative that has gathered the required number of signatures could serve as a guideline to both, the organizers and the Commission;

Amendment 68 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Warmly welcomes the European Economic and Social Committee’s proposal to provide free translations of ECI texts so as to reduce the cost of organising an ECI, and invites it to set up the necessary operational framework;

Amendment 69 #

Barbara SPINELLI, Helmut SCHOLZ, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Calls on the Commission to provide a refund to all members of committees which organise ECIs, to ensure they are able to attend hearings before Parliament;

Amendment 7 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas participatory democracy is strongly connected to ECI, as it allows citizens to be an active part in projects and decisional processes which concern them;

Amendment 70 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Deems it too complicated for organisers to provide different personal data in support of ECIs in the 28 Member States, as laid down in Regulation 211/2011 on the basis of the various national provisions~~, and~~; invites the Commission, therefore, to encourage Member States to reduce data requirements and to remove identification number requirements except for Member States that absolutely need them to verify signatures; further suggests that consideration be given to establishing an EU digital citizenship; calls on the Commission, therefore, to explore this issue in its digital agenda;

Amendment 71 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Deems it too complicated for organisers to provide different personal data in support of ECIs in the 28 Member States, as laid down in Regulation 211/2011 on the basis of the various national provisions, and ~~suggests that consideration be given to establishing an EU digital citizenship; calls on the Commission, theref~~calls for the introduction of a uniform procedure for making statements of support; urges the Member States, accordingly, to dispense with personal identification numbers as a requirement for making a statement of support, since they are not only a needless bureaucratic obstacle to the collection of statements of supporet, ~~to explore this issue in its digital agenda~~but are also not necessary in order to check the identity of a signatory;

Amendment 72 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

Amendment 73 #

Barbara SPINELLI, Helmut SCHOLZ, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

Amendment 74 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Deems it too complicated for organisers to provide different personal data in support of ECIs in the 28 Member States, as laid down in Regulation 211/2011 on the basis of the various national provisions, and suggests that consideration be given to establishing an EU digital citizenship; calls on the Commission, therefore, to explore this issue in its digital agenda; also encourages the Commission to further negotiate with Member States in order to achieve more user-friendly requirements, with regard to numbers and variety of personal data; reminds that an ECI is about participation and agenda-setting instead of binding proposals and that the requirements should accordingly be moderate and well-balanced; calls on the Commission to ask all Member States to remove identification number requirements, accepting for a transitional period the exclusions of the two countries that absolutely need them to verify signatures.

Amendment 75 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

Amendment 76 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Considers the possibility of recommending to the Member States that the age limit for participation be reduced from 18 years to 16;

Amendment 77 #

Barbara SPINELLI, Helmut SCHOLZ, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Calls for the requirements for signatories under Article 3(4) to be amended and for the minimum age for supporting a citizens' initiative not to be tied to the right to vote in elections to the European Parliament, but, rather, to be uniformly set at 16 across the EU in order to give young people in particular the possibility of becoming actively involved in taking the European project forward;

Amendment 78 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Calls on the Commission to ask Member States to lower the age of ECI support to 16, as it is currently legally realized in Austria.

Amendment 79 #

Barbara SPINELLI, Helmut SCHOLZ, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9b. Takes the view that participation in a citizens’ initiative should not be restricted only to nationals of a Member State but that it should also include permanent residents who have been living in a Member State for more than five years;

Amendment 8 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)

Ab. whereas Article 288 TFEU defines as legal acts not only regulations and directives, but also decisions, recommendations and opinions and that the appropriate proposals contained in an ECI may well include each of these acts, among which a proposal for the revision of the Treaties under Article 48.2 of the Treaty on European Union, or a proposal concerning the existence of a clear risk of a serious breach by a Member State of the principles recognized in article 2 TEU or the evidence of a serious and persistent infringement (Art. 7.1 and 7.2 TEU);

Amendment 80 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Acknowledges the delicate problem of organisers' personal liability with regard to data protection when collecting signatories' personal data, and proposes that the range of data required be reduced, or liability extended to volunteer campaigners, and that the wording of Article 13 of Regulation 211/2011, on liability, be changed to make it clear that personal liability is not unlimited; proposes, to this end, that inspiration be drawn from Article 3 of Directive 2008/99/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on the protection of the environment through criminal law, with a view to establishing that organisers are responsible for acts which are ‘unlawful and committed intentionally or with at least serious negligence' and the creation of a European legal status for the citizens' committee;

Amendment 81 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Acknowledges the delicate problem of organisers’ personal liability with regard to data protection when collecting signatories’ personal data, and proposes that the range of data required be reduced~~, or liability extended to volunteer campaigners,~~ and that the wording of Article 13 of Regulation 211/2011, on liability, be changed to make it clear that personal liability is not unlimited; proposes, to this end, that citizens' committees should be able to acquire legal personality and that inspiration be drawn from Article 3 of Directive 2008/99/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on the protection of the environment through criminal law, with a view to establishing that organisers are responsible for acts which are ‘unlawful and committed intentionally or with at least serious negligence’;

Amendment 82 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Acknowledges the delicate problem of organisers’ personal liability with regard to data protection when collecting signatories’ personal data, and proposes that the range of data required be reduced~~, or liability extended to volunteer campaigners,~~ and that the wording of Article 13 of Regulation 211/2011, on liability, be changed to make it clear that personal liability is not unlimited; proposes, to this end, that inspiration be drawn from Article 3 of Directive 2008/99/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on the protection of the environment through criminal law, with a view to establishing that organisers are responsible for acts which are ‘unlawful and committed intentionally or with at least serious negligence’;

Amendment 83 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Proposes that the period for Member States to certify the online collection system be extended to two months (instead of one month) and the collection period for statements of support for organisers to 18 months (instead of 12 months);deleted

Amendment 84 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Proposes that the period for Member States to certify the online collection system be extended to twohree months (instead of one month) and the collection period for statements of support for organisers to 18 months (instead of 12 months);

Amendment 85 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

Amendment 86 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

Amendment 87 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Invites the Member States to be flexible in their verification when they receive statements of support for an ECI which are just above the threshold of 1 million signatures, with a view to allowing its submissEncourages the Commission and the Member States to achieve more user- friendly and harmonised requirements in data collection;

Amendment 88 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. ~~Invites the~~Encourages Member States to be flexible in their verification when they receive statements of support for an ECI which are just above the threshold of 1 million signatures, with a view to ~~allow~~forwarding its submission;

Amendment 89 #

Nicola CAPUTO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Invites the Member States ~~to be flexible~~, in their verification, to use non-formalistic criteria which keep the citizens’ will alive when they receive statements of support for an ECI which are just above the threshold of 1 million signatures, with a view to allowing its submission;

Amendment 9 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas, three years on from the entry into application of Regulation 211/2011 on 1 April 2012, it is necessary to evaluate its implementation in order to identify any shortcomings and to propose viable solutions for its prompt review;(does not affect English version)

Amendment 90 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Invites the Member States to be more flexible in their verification when they receive statements of support for an ECI which are just above the threshold of 1 million signatures, with a view to allowing its submission;

Amendment 91 #

Barbara SPINELLI, Helmut SCHOLZ, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Invites the Member States to be flexible in their verification when they receive statements of support for an ECI which are just above the threshold of 1 million signatures, with a view to allowing its submission; calls, in any event, on the competent national authorities to inform the national parliaments’ European affairs committees on a periodic basis about ECIs in progress which have already gathered a significant number of signatures;

Amendment 92 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Invites the Member States to be flexible in their verification when they receive statements of support for an ECI which are just above the threshold of 1 million signatures, with a view to allowing its submission; calls on the Member States to simplify and unify their respective procedures; urges the Commission to propose a revision of the Regulation 211/2011 aiming at to guarantee citizens to sign an ECI in their country of residence too.

Amendment 93 #

Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Enrique GUERRERO SALOM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to consider incorporating an additional administrative channel into Regulation (EU) No 211/2011 for initiatives that have been rejected because they fall outside the Commission’s remit but which could be dealt with using other policy instruments, given their public interest, such as recommendations to the Member States, opinions, etc., with the aim of avoiding the failure of worthwhile citizens’ initiatives and thereby strengthening citizens’ democratic involvement;

Amendment 94 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Commission to revise the wording of Article 10(c) of Regulation 211/2011 to allow proper follow-up to a successful ECI~~, including a parliamentary debate in plenary followed by a vote~~; urges the Commission to start preparing a legal act on successful ECIs within 12 months onf the ~~ECI; urges the Commission to start preparing a legal act on successful ECIs within 12 m~~ir submission; in case the Commission fails to provide a legislative proposal within this period, the competent committee of the European Parliament will initiate a legislative-initiative report for which the selected rapporteur shall consult the ECI organisers in another hearing; calls on th~~s of their acceptance~~e European Parliament to modify its rules of procedure accordingly;

Amendment 95 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Commission to revise the wording of Article 10(c) of Regulation 211/2011 to ~~allow proper follow-up to a successful ECI, including a parliamentary debate in plenary followed by a vote on the ECI; urges the Commission to start preparing~~eliminate the practice of arbitrarily deciding not to accept ECIs and make it possible for successful ECIs to be followed through; emphasises that preparations for a legal act on successful ECIs must necessarily be underway within 12 months of their acceptance;

Amendment 96 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. ~~Calls on~~Urges the Commission to revise the wording of Article 10(c) of Regulation 211/2011 to allow ~~proper follow-up to a successful ECI, including a parliamentary debate in plenary followed by a vote on the ECI~~all initiatives which have reached the threshold of 1 million signatures from at least one-quarter of the Member States to be effectively and efficiently followed up, in particular by forwarding them to the national parliaments for an opinion and then a debate followed by a vote by the European Parliament in plenary session; urges the Commission to start preparing a legal act on successful ECIs within 12 months of their acceptance;

Amendment 97 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls ~~on the Commission to revise~~for revision of the wording of Article 10(c) of Regulation 211/2011 so as to allow ~~proper~~more extensive follow-up to a successful ECI, including a parliamentary debate in plenary ~~followed by a vote~~ on the ECI; urges the Commission to start preparing a legal act on successful ECIs within 12 months ~~of their acceptance~~after issuing a positive opinion;

Amendment 98 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

Amendment 99 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Commission to revise the wording of Article 10(c) of Regulation 211/2011 to allow proper follow-up to a successful ECI, including a parliamentary debate in plenary ~~followed by a vote on the ECI~~; urges the Commission to start preparing a legal act on, or the measures called for by, successful ECIs within 12 months of their acceptance; (A vote in Parliament could be a double- edged sword. If Parliament voted against, it could jeopardise the Commission’s subsequent assessment. This would mean that an indirect decision-making body of representative democracy would prevail over a direct one).

source: 557.247

2015/06/25 JURI 50 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Underlines ~~the fact~~ that the Citizens' Initiative ~~is the first~~should be regarded as a tool of participatory democracy that confers the right for EU citizens, based on at least one million statements of support, to take the initiative and ask the Commission to submit, within the framework of its powers, an appropriate proposal on matters on which citizens consider that a legislative act is necessary to implement the treaties;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that more than six million EU citizens have participated in a Citizens' Initiative and that three initiatives, namely ‘Right2Water', ‘One of Us' and ‘Stop Vivisection', were successful; points, however, to the various practical difficulties which the organisers have encountered since the entry into force of the regulation in April 2012, and the fact that the number of initiatives is still declining;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that more than six million EU citizens have participated in a Citizens’ Initiative and that three initiatives, namely ‘Right2Water’, ‘One of Us’ and ‘Stop Vivisection’, were successful; points, however, to the various practical difficulties which the organisers have encountered since the entry into force of the regulation in April 2012; points out, moreover, that the ECI is, in its current form, weak and restricted in scope and requires substantial modification, given that only 3 out of 51 initiatives have been ruled eligible by the Commission and six ECI organisers have challenged the Commission's refusal before the European Court of Justice, corresponding to 30% of all rejections;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Calls on the Commission to use all public communication channels to raise awareness of the ECI and facilitate communication of running ECIs, for example by creating a mobile app with information, notifications and possibility of mobile signing;

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Calls for a review of the dual role of the Commission, which could give rise to a conflict of interests, bearing in mind that a number of ECI organisers acknowledge the significance and value of its input; calls in this connection on the Commission to consider the European Parliament also as a decision maker, particularly since it is the only institution whose members are directly elected by the EU citizens;

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Notes that there is a need for a legal entity, but argues that this should be non- mandatory, given the considerable amount of red tape possibly involved in endowing it with binding legal status; calls in addition for risk reduction measures to encourage ECI committee members to take concrete initiatives, the simplification of personal data requirements and the provision of civil liability insurance;

Amendment 15 #

Marlene MIZZI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Is of the opinion that if in the past three years, only 3 initiatives have reached the threshold of one million signatures out of 51 requests to launch an initiative, shows that much still needs to be done to make sure that the ECI lives up to its full potential;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission to ensure comprehensive support, including ~~non- binding~~free (or pro bono) legal advice – for example, by creating a point of contact responsible for the Citizens’ Initiative in the Commission representations in all Member States with the task of providing information and the necessary advice and assistance for Citizens' Initiatives– in view of the difficulty faced by organisers in identifying the relevant treaty and legal provisions on which to base a valid initiative;

Amendment 17 #

Virginie ROZIÈRE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission to ensure comprehensive support, including non- binding legal advice – for example, by ~~cre~~designating a clearly identified point of contact responsible for the Citizens’ Initiative in the Commission representations in all Member States – in view of the difficulty faced by organisers in identifying the relevant treaty and legal provisions on which to base a valid initiative;

Amendment 18 #

Emil RADEV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission to ensure comprehensive support, including non- binding legal advice – for example, by creating a point of contact responsible for the Citizens' Initiative in the Commission representations and Europe Direct Information Centres in all Member States – in view of the difficulty faced by organisers in identifying the relevant treaty and legal provisions on which to base a valid initiative;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Calls on the Commission to undertake to propose a legislative act every time an ECI meets the conditions laid down in Article 2(1) and Article 7 of the Regulation; calls, where the Commission fails to submit a legislative proposal within 12 months, for Parliament’s relevant committee to launch an own- initiative report; calls on the European Parliament to modify its Rules of Procedure accordingly;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Underlines the fact that the Citizens’ Initiative is the first tool of participatory democracy that confers the right for EU citizens, based on at least one million statements of support~~, to take the initiative~~ from at least one- quarter of the EU Member States, to take the initiative, thereby underpinning their new political prerogative, and ask the Commission to submit, within the framework of its powers, an appropriate proposal on matters on which citizens consider that a legislative act is necessary to implement the treaties;

Amendment 20 #

József SZÁJER, Axel VOSS, Emil RADEV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission, furthermore, to ~~revise the list of its competences on~~improve its internet portal ~~and~~in order to make it more comprehensible and user- friendly, especially related to the information on its competences and the support that can be acquired for a successful application, given that the registration of a large number of submitted citizens' initiatives was rejected on the grounds that they manifestly fell outside the framework of the Commission's competence;

Amendment 21 #

József SZÁJER, Therese COMODINI CACHIA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission, furthermore, to revise the list of its competences on its internet portal and make it more comprehensible and user-friendly, given that the registration of a large number of submitted citizens' initiatives was rejected on the grounds that they manifestly fell outside the framework of the Commission's competence; stresses that in the case of rejection the Commission must explain its political choices to the public in a detailed and transparent manner, so that the reasoning is more robust, consistent and comprehensible to the citizen and at the same time inform the organisers of the relevant legal considerations, so that they can decide whether to revise their ECI and resubmit it in a modified form;

Amendment 22 #

Emil RADEV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission, furthermore, to revise the list of its competences on its internet portal and make it more comprehensible and user-friendly, given that the registration of a large number of submitted citizens' initiatives was rejected on the grounds that they manifestly fell outside the framework of the Commission's competence; in addition to a clear list of its competences, the Commission should clarify the registration procedure, providing detailed guidelines it uses to assess the legal basis of citizens' initiatives. Furthermore, the Commission should consider establishing an independent figure with a view to assessing whether the legal basis of an ECI submitted is correct;

Amendment 23 #

József SZÁJER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls on the Commission to consider registering only those parts of the initiatives that meet the required conditions. For such a registration, a prior consultation with the applicant citizens committee would be adequate;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses the need to explore the possibility for a harmonised procedure for submitting statements of support, as it is unacceptable that EU citizens should be excluded from supporting Citizens' Initiatives ~~owing to differing personal data submission requirements in the Member States; calls on the Member States, as a matter of urgency, to remove~~. Calls on the Member States to review their requirement ~~that a~~s on personal identification number be provided for a statement of support, as this represents an unnecessary bureaucratic burden for the collection of statements of support and also an unnecessary way of checking the identity of a signatorydata, as a matter of urgency in order to reduce the unnecessary bureaucratic burden for the collection of statements;

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses the need for a harmonised and more efficient procedure for submitting statements of support, as it is unacceptable that EU citizens should be excluded from supporting Citizens’ Initiatives owing to differing personal data submission requirements in the Member States; calls on the Member States, as a matter of urgency and as a binding measure, to remove the requirement that a personal identification number be provided for a statement of support, as this represents an unnecessary bureaucratic burden for the collection of statements of support and also an unnecessary way of checking the identity of a signatory;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses the need for a harmonised procedure for submitting statements of support, as it is unacceptable that EU citizens should be excluded from supporting Citizens' Initiatives owing to differing personal data submission requirements in the Member States; calls therefore on the Commission to propose simpler and uniform data requirements across all member states to facilitate EU citizens wishing to sign an ECI, irrespective of their country of residence, for example by creating a single web site and a mobile app; calls on the Member States, as a matter of urgency, to remove the requirement that a personal identification number be provided for a statement of support, as this represents an unnecessary bureaucratic burden for the collection of statements of support and also an unnecessary way of checking the identity of a signatory;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls on the Commission to redesign the Online Collestion Software and statement of support forms to enable signatories to share their email address with ECI organisers on non-mandatory basis, bearing in mind also the needs of persons with disabilities who wish to submit statements of support of ECIs online;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines its position that the automatic link between the registration of a Citizens' Initiative and the starting date of the twelve-month period for the collection of statements of support should be removed~~, so that~~ and the ECI organisers ~~of Citizens' Initiati~~should haves a~~re encouraged to decide themselves when to initiate the collection of~~ chance to make a choice in the date for the launch of their ECI, within three months of its registrat~~ements of support.~~ion by the Commission;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines its position that the automatic link between the registration of a Citizens’ Initiative and the starting date of the twelve-month period for the collection of statements of support should be removed, so that the organisers of Citizens’ Initiatives are encouraged to decide themselves when to initiate the collection of statements of support. proposes to increase the time span for collection of signatures to 18 months;

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Regrets however that the law on ECI is unknown, unused and ineffective and therefore powerless, since very few people know of its existence, obstacles are really high and the EU is not even obliged to act, the law has not met expectations of the European citizens, therefore it contributes to a growing frustration of the EU citizens from the functioning of the EU;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Notes also that the collection period for statements of support could be extended to 18 months;

Amendment 31 #

József SZÁJER, Therese COMODINI CACHIA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Notes that liability issues have arisen for the organisers of Citizens' Initiatives owing to the fact that citizens' committees lack legal personality and that this problem could only be solved by revising the regulation; points out however that, in order not to discourage citizens from undertaking an ECI, liability should only be understood as including acts committed intentionally or with serious negligence;

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Notes that liability issues have arisen for the organisers of Citizens' Initiatives owing to the fact that citizens' committees lack legal personality and that this problem could only be solved by revising the regulation; calls on the Commission, therefore, to explore the possibility of the admittance of the legal personality of the Citizens' Committees referred to in Article 3 (2) of the Regulation;

Amendment 33 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Notes that liability issues have arisen for the organisers of Citizens' Initiatives owing to the fact that citizens' committees lack legal personality and that this problem could only be solved by revising the regulation by the creation of a European legal status for the citizens' committee;

Amendment 34 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Notes that liability issues have arisen for the organisers of Citizens’ Initiatives owing to the fact that citizens’ committees lack legal personality and that this problem could only be solved by revising the regulation so as to give citizens’ committee legal personality;

Amendment 35 #

József SZÁJER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Requests an EU-wide uniform approach to setting the minimum age for submitting a statement of support; advocates lowering it to 16, given the need to strengthen young people's sense of responsibility regarding the EU and to give them the opportunity to play a role in shaping the further development of the European project;deleted

Amendment 36 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Requests an EU-wide uniform approach to setting the minimum age for submitting a statement of support; advocates lowering it to 16, given the need to strengthen young people’s sense of responsibility regarding the EU and to give them the opportunity to play a role in shaping the further development of the European project, and participate more actively in present-day civil society;

Amendment 37 #

Emil RADEV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Requests an EU-wide uniform approach to setting the minimum age for submitting a statement of support; advocates lowering it to 16, given the need to strengthen young people’s sense of responsibility regarding the EU and to give them the opportunity and motivation to play a role in shaping the further development of the European project;

Amendment 38 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Emphasises that active popular participation in European citizens’ initiatives depends crucially on their being publicised in the Member States, and therefore suggests that Member States’ national parliaments should mention the European Citizens’ Initiative on their official websites;

Amendment 39 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. ~~Welcomes~~Calls on the Commission to come up with ideas on the two important aspects of translation and funding of ECIs, welcomes in this context the European Economic and Social Committee's willingness to provide free translation services for initiators, thereby facilitating the dissemination of Citizens' Initiatives in all official languages; recognises therein a significant contribution to supporting citizens by enabling them to promote their concerns among the EU population;

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Takes the view that a conflict of interest might arise from the application of Article 4 of Regulation (EU) No 211/2011 given that the Commission, to which ECIs are submitted, is also the institution that verifies their admissibility; considers that the registration procedure should be amended so that the admissibility of ECIs is no longer verified by the Commission but by an independent public body;

Amendment 40 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Welcomes the European Economic and Social Committee’s willingness to provide free translation services for initiators, thereby facilitating the dissemination of Citizens’ Initiatives in all official languages, particularly in so far as native language use is a civil right ; recognises therein a significant contribution to supporting citizens by enabling them to promote their concerns more effectively among the EU population;

Amendment 41 #

József SZÁJER, Therese COMODINI CACHIA, Axel VOSS, Emil RADEV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Highlights that the Commission should present at least a first draft of its proposal on a successful ECT within 12 months of its acceptance at the latest;

Amendment 42 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Underlines the importance of the institutional balance in the process of the evaluation of the applications after registration, therefore, calls on the Commission to explore the possibility of the involvement of the relevant European institutions and bodies, such as the European Parliament, the European Ombudsman, the ECOSOC and the Committee of the Regions;

Amendment 43 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 b (new)

10b. Suggests that, if the organisers of an ECI ask for a second, supplementary hearing, this request should be given due consideration unless there are important obstacles to its satisfaction;

Amendment 44 #

József SZÁJER, Therese COMODINI CACHIA, Axel VOSS, Emil RADEV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 c (new)

10c. Notes the important role of the European Ombudsman in investigating into the handling of ECI requests by the Commission, and especially cases of refusal to register an ECI;

Amendment 45 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Commission ~~to submit a~~for an appropriate and timely proposal for the revision of the Regulation on the Citizen's' Initiative ~~as soon as possible,~~, to meet the expectations of the European Citizens, and to make the Citizen's Initiative easier to use ~~and more citizen-friendly and~~in order to enable it to fully unfold its potential.;

Amendment 46 #

Marlene MIZZI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Commission to submit a proposal for the revision of the Regulation on the Citizen's Initiative and Commission Implementing Regulation 1179/2011 as soon as possible, to make the Citizen's Initiative easier to use and more citizen- friendly and enable it to fully unfold its potential. ;

Amendment 47 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Commission to submit a proposal for the revision of the Regulation on the Citizen's Initiative as soon as possible, to make the Citizen's Initiative easier to use and more citizen-friendly and enable it to fully unfold its potential.; is of the opinion that the Commission should not have the veto right, because of the potential conflict of interest, but its legal assessment should be advisory in nature. The revision of the ECI should also remove Art. 4(2)(b), which restrictively limits the admissibility of ECIs;

Amendment 48 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Commission to submit a proposal for the revision of the Regulation on the Citizen’s Initiative as soon as possible, to make the Citizen’s Initiative easier to use and more citizen-friendly and enable it to fully unfold its potential. and to take the necessary measures to ensure transparency and awareness raising, the objective being to publicise and promote the European Citizens’ Initiative in the media and among the public, encouraging active participation in the mechanism;

Amendment 49 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 b (new)

11b. Calls on the Commission to revise the wording of Article 10 (c) of regulation 211/2011 to allow proper follow-up to a successful ECI, urges the Commission to start preparing a legal act on successful ECIs within 12 months of their submission, in case the Commission fails to do so, the competent committee of the European Parliament will initiate an initiative report after having consulted the ECI organisers and the report should be debated in full plenary followed by vote;

Amendment 5 #

Marlene MIZZI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Welcomes the Commission's Report on the ECI of 1st of April 2015 acknowledging that there is still room to improve the ECI identifying a number of possible issues with a view of improving the instrument; Equally welcomes the European Ombudsman's own-initiative enquiry into the functioning of the European Citizens' Initiative (ECI) formulating eleven concrete proposals to improve the ECI process;

Amendment 50 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Calls on the Commission to come up with a proposal on what to do with ECIs which were not successful, but reached interest of large number of citizens, stresses that the running ECI should serve as a political platform and facilitate public debate on this issue, suggests therefore that a first public hearing in the European Parliament should be held if an ECI reaches 200 000 signatures within the first six months;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Considers it essential that citizens can contribute to the exercise of the legislative prerogatives of the Union and be involved directly in the initiation of legislative proposals; calls on the Commission in this connection to engage actively, providing the organisers of European Citizens’ Initiatives with as many detailed guidelines as possible regarding the interpretation of the legal provisions;

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Notes that the Commission refused to register the Stop TTIP ECI on the grounds that it was not covered by the scope of Regulation (EU) No 211/2011; stresses, however, that a mandate for the negotiation of a trade agreement will in due course be reflected in EU law, and that a legal solution needs to be found to enable European citizens to have a real influence on the EU’s trade policy choices;

Amendment 8 #