Activities of Virginie ROZIÈRE

Eleonora EVI, Ángela VALLINA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miroslavs MITROFANOVS, Laura FERRARA

Recital F a (new)

F a. whereas the case law of the CJEU establishes the autonomous notion in European law of the "normal residence" of the child and the plurality of the criteria on which the national jurisdictions must determine the habitual residence;

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Paragraph 1

1. Notes with great concern that the ~~Committee on Petitions~~ problems concerning the last decade has received more than 30 petitions on parental responsibility or child custody in cross-border family disputes and the role of the German Youth Welfare Office (Jugendamt), many of them involving the alleged discrimination of the non-German parentGerman family law system, including the controversial role of the German Youth Welfare Office (Jugendamt), denounced through petitions by non-German parents continue to remain unsolved; underlines that the Committee on Petitions continuously receives petitions by non-German parents in which serious discriminations are reported as a result of the procedures and practices concretely adopted by the competent German authorities in cross- border family disputes involving children;

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miroslavs MITROFANOVS, Ángela VALLINA, Sofia SAKORAFA

Paragraph 1

1. Notes with great concern that the Committee on Petitions in the last decade has received ~~more than 30~~a large number of petitions on parental responsibility or child custody in cross-border family disputes and the role of the German Youth Welfare Office (Jugendamt), many of them involving the alleged discrimination of the non-German parent;

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Eleonora EVI, Ángela VALLINA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miroslavs MITROFANOVS, Laura FERRARA

Paragraph 1

1. Notes with great concern that the Committee on Petitions in the last decade has received more than 3250 petitions on parental responsibility or child custody in cross-border family disputes and the role of the German Youth Welfare Office (Jugendamt), many of them involving the alleged discrimination of the non-German parent;

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Paragraph 2

2. Points to the long standing work of the Committee on Petitions ~~treating~~on the treatment of petitions concerning the role of the German Youth Welfare Office (Jugendamt); ~~acknowledges the detailed~~takes note of the responses given by the competent German ministry on the functioning of the German family law system but ~~underlines that the Committee on Petitions continuously receives petitions concerning alleged discrimination of the non-German parent~~strongly regrets that German competent authorities failed to ensure a proper follow-up to the recommendations and requests by the Committee on Petitions, thus worsening all problems encountered by non-German parents in the framework of family disputes having cross-border implications;

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Eleonora EVI, Ángela VALLINA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miroslavs MITROFANOVS, Laura FERRARA

Paragraph 3

3. Stresses the obligation, as provided in the Council Regulation Brussels IIa, for national authorities to recognise and enforce judgements delivered in another Member State in child related cases; is concerned of the fact that in family disputes having cross-border implications German authorities can systematically refuse to recognise judicial decisions taken in other Member States in cases where children, who are almost 3 years old, have not been heard; underlines that this aspect undermines the principle of mutual trust with other Member States whose legal systems set different age limits for the hearing of a child;

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Eleonora EVI, Ángela VALLINA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miroslavs MITROFANOVS, Laura FERRARA

Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Regrets that the Commission did not implement for years accurate checks on the procedures and practices used in the German family law system, including the Jugendamt, in the framework of family disputes having cross-border implications, thus failing to effectively protect the best interest of the child and all other related rights;

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miroslavs MITROFANOVS, Eleonora EVI, Ángela VALLINA, Sofia SAKORAFA, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Insists on the importance that Member States collect statistical data on the administrative and judicial proceedings concerning children custody and involving foreign parents, particularly including the outcome of the judgements, in order to allow for a detailed analysis of existing trends over time and provide benchmarks;

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Emphasises, following the case law of the CJEU, the autonomous notion of the "habitual residence" of the child in European law and the plurality of the criteria on which the determination of the normal residence must be conducted by the national jurisdictions;

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miroslavs MITROFANOVS, Eleonora EVI, Ángela VALLINA, Sofia SAKORAFA

Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Calls on the Commission to ensure that such determination of the normal residence of the child has been properly done by the German jurisdictions in the petitions received by the Committee on Petitions;

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Eleonora EVI, Ángela VALLINA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miroslavs MITROFANOVS, Laura FERRARA

Paragraph 3 c (new)

3 c. Strongly criticises the absence of statistical data on the number of cases in Germany in which court rulings were not in line with the recommendations of the Jugendamt and on the outcomes of family disputes involving children of bi-national couples, despite the repeated requests for years to collect data and make them publicly available;

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miroslavs MITROFANOVS, Eleonora EVI, Ángela VALLINA, Sofia SAKORAFA

Paragraph 3 c (new)

3 c. Calls on the Commission to assess in the petitions whether German jurisdictions have duly respected the provisions of Council Regulation Brussels IIa when establishing their competences and if they have taken into consideration judgements or decisions issued by jurisdictions of other Member States; _________________ 1a OJ L 338, 23.12.2003., p. 01

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Eleonora EVI, Ángela VALLINA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miroslavs MITROFANOVS, Laura FERRARA

Paragraph 3 d (new)

3 d. Condemns the fact that, in cases of supervised parental access, failure by non-German parents to comply with the Jugendamt officials procedure to adopt German as language during conversations with their children, led to the harsh interruption of conversations and to a ban on contact between the non- German parents and their children; believes that such procedure adopted by the Jugendamt officials constituted a clear discrimination based on origin and language against non-German parents;

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Eleonora EVI, Ángela VALLINA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miroslavs MITROFANOVS, Laura FERRARA

Paragraph 3 e (new)

3 e. Is firmly convinced that in cases of supervised parental access, German authorities must permit all parental languages during conversations between parents and their children; asks for mechanisms to be put in place to guarantee that non-German parents and their children can have communication in their common language as its use plays a crucial role to keep strong emotional bonds between parents and their children and ensure the effective protection of children’s cultural heritage and welfare;

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Eleonora EVI, Ángela VALLINA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miroslavs MITROFANOVS, Laura FERRARA

Paragraph 3 f (new)

3 f. Firmly believes that a consistent and effective follow-up must be given to the recommendations of the final report of the Committee on Petitions’ Working Group on “Child welfare issues” of 3 May 2017 and notably on those related directly or indirectly to the role of the Jugendamt and to the German family law system;

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miroslavs MITROFANOVS, Eleonora EVI, Ángela VALLINA, Sofia SAKORAFA, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes that in its proposal for a recast of the Brussels IIa Regulation the Commission4 asks the Member States to collect data in matters of parental responsibility falling within the scope of the Regulation; _________________ 4 COM(2016) 411 finaldeleted

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes that in its proposal for a recast of the Brussels IIa Regulation the Commission4 asks the Member States to collect data in matters of parental responsibility falling within the scope of the Regulation; _________________ 4deleted COM(2016) 411 final

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miroslavs MITROFANOVS, Ángela VALLINA, Sofia SAKORAFA, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Considers that in light of Article 81 TFEU the Commission can and must play an active role in ensuring fair and consistent non-discriminatory practices towards parents in the treatment of cross- border child custody cases throughout the Union;

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Emphasises the importance of a close cooperation and efficient communication between the different national and local authorities involved in childcare proceedings from the social service to the jurisdiction and the central authorities,

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Eleonora EVI, Ángela VALLINA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miroslavs MITROFANOVS, Laura FERRARA

Paragraph 8

8. Recalls the importance to provide ~~parents~~without delay non-German parents from the outset and at every stage of child- related proceedings with complete and clear information on the proceedings and on the possible consequences thereof; calls on the Member States to inform parents about the rules on legal support and aid; notes in this context that the competent German ministries at federal level have established the German Central Contact Point for Cross-border Family Conflicts in order to provide counselling and information, in a language that the concerned parents fully understand in order to avoid cases where parents give their consent without fully understanding the implications of their commitments; calls on the Member States to implement targeted measures aimed at improving legal support, aid, counselling and information for their nationals in cases where they denounce discriminatory or disadvantaged judicial and administrative procedures adopted against them by German authorities in cross- border family disputes involving ~~parental responsibility~~children;

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miroslavs MITROFANOVS, Ángela VALLINA, Sofia SAKORAFA

Paragraph 8

8. Recalls the importance to provide parents at every stage of child-related proceedings with complete and clear information on the proceedings and on the possible consequences thereof; calls on the Member States to inform parents about the rules on legal support and aid; notes in this context that the competent German ministries at federal level have established the German Central Contact Point for Cross-border Family Conflicts in order to provide counselling and information in cross-border family disputes involving parental responsibility;

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Eleonora EVI, Ángela VALLINA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miroslavs MITROFANOVS, Laura FERRARA

Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Stresses that the denounced instances whereby non-German parents are prevented from communicating with their children in their common mother tongue during visitations constitute not only a discrimination on the grounds of language, but are also contrary to the aim of fostering multilingualism and diversity of cultural backgrounds within the Union and in breach of the fundamental right of freedom of thought, conscience and religion;

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Paragraph 9

9. Expresses its concern on cases raised by petitioners about short deadlines set by the German competent authorities and about documents sent by the German competent authorities not provided in the language of the non-German petitioner; stresses the right of citizens to refuse acceptances of documents if not written or translated into a language the person understands as laid down in Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) 1393/2007; calls on the Commission to thoroughly assess the implementation in Germany of the provisions of Regulation (EC) 1393/2007 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters (service of documents) in order to properly address all possible violations;

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miroslavs MITROFANOVS, Ángela VALLINA, Sofia SAKORAFA

Paragraph 9 a (new)

9 a. Calls on the Commission to verify the respect of languages requirements in the course of proceeding before the German jurisdictions in the petitions presented to the European Parliament;

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2856(RSP)

Miroslavs MITROFANOVS, Eleonora EVI, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Paragraph 11

11. Reminds the Member States about the importance to systematically implement the provisions of the Vienna Convention of 1963 and to ensure that embassies or consular representations are informed from the start of all child care proceedings involving their nationals and have full access to the relevant documents; stresses the importance of a trustworthy consular cooperation in this field and suggests that consular authorities should be allowed to attend every stage of the proceedings;

2018/10/04
Committee: PETI

2018/2280(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

D a. whereas the Committee on Petitions considers the European Citizens’ Initiative an utmost instrument of direct and participatory democracy, enabling citizens to become actively involved in the framing of European legislation;

2018/12/18
Committee: PETI

2018/2280(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

E a. whereas petitions represent an extra guarantee for EU citizens and residents compared to complaints directly to the Commission, as Parliament is involved in the process which allows to better scrutinise the performance and provides for transparent debates on the matter with the presence of petitioners, Members of the European Parliament and the Commission as well as any other concerned authority where appropriate;

2018/12/18
Committee: PETI

2018/2280(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)

H a. whereas the Resolution on the adverse effects of the US Foreign Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) on EU citizens and in particular ‘accidental Americans’ (2018/2646(RSP)) adopted on 26 June 2018 called on the Commission and the Council to present a joint EU approach to FATCA in order to adequately protect the rights of European citizens (in particular ‘accidental Americans’) and improve equal reciprocity in the automatic exchange of information by the US;

2018/12/18
Committee: PETI

2018/2280(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)

I a. whereas petitions are useful tools for detecting breaches of Union law and enable Parliament and other EU institutions to assess the trans position and application of EU law and its impact on EU citizens and residents;

2018/12/18
Committee: PETI

2018/2280(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Reiterates the need for a continuous public debate about the Union’s fields of activity ~~in order to inform citizens about different levels of decision-making~~, its limits and its future in order to ensure that citizens are well informed about the levels at which decisions are taken and to prevent the “blame Brussels” phenomenon used by some irresponsible Member States;

2018/12/18
Committee: PETI

2018/2280(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Urges the Commission to properly use its powers stemming from its role as Guardian of the Treaties as such role is of utmost importance in the functioning of the EU with regard to the citizens and to the European legislators; calls for a timely handling of the infringement procedures in order to put an end with no delay to situations where EU law is not respected;

2018/12/18
Committee: PETI

2018/2280(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Reminds the Commission that petitions offer a unique means to identify situations in which EU law is not upheld and to investigate such situations by means of political scrutiny of the European Parliament;

2018/12/18
Committee: PETI

2018/2280(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. ~~Regrets the lack of response from the Member States to solve the problems reported by citizens affected by FATCA~~Notes that the FATCA framework of the United State is implemented within the Union through bilateral intergovernmental agreements (IGAs) negotiated between the United States and each Member State; Regrets the lack of response from the Member States to solve the problems reported by citizens affected by FATCA; emphasises the role of the Union to guarantee effective implementation of data protection rules in order to ensure high level of protection of EU citizens in terms of related fundamental rights; asks the Commission to work closely with the national data protection authorities in order to promote a fact-finding exercise to clarify the situation in the Member States concerning possible breaches of EU law on the protection of personal data; furthermore calls on the Commission, in cooperation with the European Data Protection Board, to launch a country based study in order to assess whether and to what extent IGAs concerning FATCA respect the right to privacy of EU citizens; calls on the Member States to prevent discrimination against consumers legally resident in the Union, regardless of whether they are considered or not as ‘US persons’ and, if they are of the importance of their economic and personal ties with the United States;

2018/12/18
Committee: PETI

2018/2280(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17 a. Stresses the important role of the SOLVIT network, which provides a means for citizens and enterprises to address concerns about possible breaches of EU law by public authorities in other Member States; calls on the Commission and on the Member States to promote SOLVIT in order to make it more helpful and visible to citizens; welcomes, in this regard, the Action Plan to reinforce the SOLVIT network published by the Commission in May 2017; calls on the Commission to report back to the European Parliament on the results of the Action Plan to reinforce the SOLVIT network published by the Commission in May 2017;

2018/12/18
Committee: PETI

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 3

– having regard to ~~Article 21 of~~ the Treaty on European Union, in particular Articles 2 and 21 thereof,

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 9 a (new)

– having regard to the European Parliament recommendation of 13 June 2013 on the draft EU guidelines on the promotion and protection of freedom of religion or belief,

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas everyone has the right to respect for all human rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, without discrimination on grounds of race, ethnicity, ability, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs or absence of religious beliefs;

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)

Ab. whereas the European Parliament has defined secularism as strict separation between religious and political authority, which implies rejection of any religious interference in the functioning of public institutions and of any public interference in religious affairs, except to uphold the rules governing the preservation of public safety and order (including respect for the freedom of others) and guarantee to all, whether believers, agnostics or atheists, the same freedom of conscience;

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A c (new)

Ac. whereas, under Article 21 of the Treaty on European Union, the Union's actions on the international scene shall be guided by the principles that have led to its creation; whereas, under Article 2 of the Treaty, the Union is founded on societies in which pluralism and tolerance prevail;

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas FoRB implies the right of the individual to choose what to believe or not to believe, the right to change or renounce one’s religion and convictions without any constraints, and the right to practise and manifest the religion of one’s choice or refuse to do so, whether individually or in community and whether in private or in public; whereas the manifestation of religion or belief can be expressed in worship, teaching, practice and observance as well as by apostasy and criticism of dogma; whereas FoRB entails the right of believers’ or lay communities to preserve their ethos and to act in accordance with it, and the entitlement for their religious or secular organisations to have recognised legal personality; whereas protecting individuals adhering to any religion or none and effectively addressing violations of FoRB, such as discrimination or legal restrictions based on religion or belief, are primordial conditions to ensure that individuals may enjoy FoRB on an equal basis; whether or not they are believers;

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that religion or belief is an important undeniable pillar of human identity, greatly impacting individuals and societies, and is therefore a reality that must not be neglected or denied in policies but requires proper recognition and addressing, in line with the humanitarian values of the European Union such as those enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights;

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Stresses the importance of linking up efforts to promote ~~FoRB~~freedom of thought, conscience and religion and interphilosophical and inter- and intra- religious dialogues with the prevention of violent extremism on a complementary and mutually reinforcing basis, in particular within neighbouring and other countries with which the EU has special relations;

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Welcomes the fact that the Special Envoy has developed effective working networks within the Commission, the Council, and the European Parliament, as well as with other stakeholders; ~~deplores, however, the fact that the Special Envoy’s mandate was not established and consolidated with sufficient human and financial resources;~~

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Council and the Commission to strengthen the Special Envoy’s institutional mandate and capacity, by earmarking funding and human resources adequate to the Envoy’s duties, developing a systemic institutionalisation of working networks established by the Special Envoy within all relevant EU institutions or establishing the position of the EU Special Representative for FoRB;deleted

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Calls on the Council and the Commission to reflect on creating the EU Special Representative for FoRB; considers that the competences and mandate of this Special Representative should include: (a) effectiveness, coherence and accountability of the EU’s FoRB policy outside the EU; (b) Parliament, the Council, the Vice- President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the Commission with an annual progress report and a comprehensive implementation report on the mandate at the end thereof; (c) the Council Working Group on Human Rights (COHOM); (d) his or her counterparts in third countries and at international organisations, also able to engage with the UN (UNGA, UNHRC, etc.) as well as relevant regional organisations; (e) FoRB and interreligious and intercultural issues and leading consultations with third countries on FoRB issues;deleted enhancing the visibility, providing the European working in close cooperation with being a high-level interlocutor for chairing high-level dialogues on

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 – introductory part

12. Calls on the Council and the Commission to reflect on creating the EU Special Representative for FoRB; considers that the competences and mandate of this Special Representative should ~~include:~~take broader account of the various interests at stake, including the non-religious and atheist communities.

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 – point c

(c) working in close cooperation with the Council Working Group on Human Rights (COHOM) and the European External Action Service;

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 – point e

(e) c~~hairing~~ontributing to high-level dialogues on ~~FoRB~~freedom of thought, conscience and religion and interreligious and intercultural issues and ~~leading~~to consultations with third countries on FoRB issues;

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

~~13. Calls for the term of office of the Special Envoy to be extended to a multi- year term, corresponding to the term of the Commission;~~deleted

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Recommends that the title and mandate of the Special Envoy visibly include the promotion of interreligious dialogue and interfaith and interphilosophical cooperation;

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Recommends the setting up of a regular advisory working group of Member States’ FoRB institutions and European Parliament representatives together with experts, scholars, and representatives of civil society, including churches and other faith-based and non-confessional organisations, providing advice on FoRB issues to assist the Special Envoy;

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Recommends that the Special Envoy further develop cooperation with counterparts outside the EU, in particular by working in close cooperation with the UN Special Rapporteur on FoRB, as well as exploring the possibility of EU-UN joint annual reporting on discrimination against religious ~~minorities~~and non-confessional minorities, and also against non-believers and persons who change religion or criticise or leave a religion, also formulating common proposals on how to put an end to such acts;

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Urgently calls for the implementation of the EU Guidelines on FoRB to be increased in intensity and effectiveness; notes that further dedicated efforts need to be made by the EU and its Member States to implement more effectively the EU Guidelines and make the EU more influential in advancing FoRB worldwide; calls for special attention to be paid to the persecution of atheists, apostates and non-religious people, as these are poorly or inaccurately documented; stresses that understanding how societies may be shaped and influenced by religions and other beliefs is instrumental to better comprehending the promotion of FoRB in EU foreign policy and international cooperation;

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Commends, in this respect, the efforts made to date by the EEAS and the Commission to provide training on religious and non-confessional literacy to EU officials and national diplomats; stresses, however, the need for broader and more systematic training programmes which would raise awareness of and increase the use of the EU Guidelines among the EU’s and Member States’ officials and diplomats and strengthen cooperation with the Special Envoy; asks for churches and religious communities and associations to be involved in this training process; calls on the Commission and the Council to earmark resources for establishing such training programmes while respecting the principles of pluralism and neutrality;

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. ~~Calls on the Commission and the EEAS to produce EU Annual Reports on FoRB in the world, to be communicated to the European Parliament and the Council;~~ notes that the EU Guidelines provide for an evaluation of their implementation by COHOM after a period of three years, and that no such evaluation has been communicated or made public; calls for the evaluation to be made public without delay; considers that the evaluation should highlight best practices, identify areas for improvement, and provide concrete recommendations on implementation in accordance with a specified timeline and milestones subject to regular annual evaluation; calls for the evaluation to be included in the EU Annual Reports on FoRB in the world;

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)

24a. Calls for a ban on any funding for the religious activities of religious organisations by virtue of the necessary separation of religious and political authorities, the rejection of any religious interference in the functioning of public institutions and any public interference in religious affairs, except to uphold the rules regarding the safety of believers, atheists, or agnostics and preserve public order;

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 b (new)

2b. Calls for an effort to ensure transparency in the allocation of funding and to monitor the use thereof by religions and their activities;

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 c (new)

24c. Calls on the Commission to respect the principles of pluralism, neutrality and fairness in allocating funds;

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 d (new)

24d. Call for the EIDHR also to be given the means to finance the protection or extraction of free thinkers and human rights activists who are threatened or persecuted in their country of origin;

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2155(INI)

Peter SIMON, Mady DELVAUX, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Evelyn REGNER, Dietmar KÖSTER, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Stresses that the EU’s policies in the fields of peace, security and conflict prevention and development and cooperation face challenges, for which solutions can be devised with the participation of churches, religious leaders, academics, religious communities and associations or faith-based and non- confessional organisations that are a critical part of civil society; acknowledges the importance of being mindful of the diversity of churches, religious communities and associations and faith- based and non-confessional organisations which perform actual development and humanitarian work for and with communities; calls on the Council and the Commission to incorporate, where relevant, objectives and activities relating to the promotion and protection of FoRB into the programming of funding instruments linked to those policies, namely the EDF, the DCI, the ENI, the IcSP and the IPA;

2018/09/13
Committee: AFET

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Evelyn REGNER, Paul TANG, Dietmar KÖSTER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Deplores the fact that some EU Member States confiscate the tax base of other Member States by attracting profits generated elsewhere, thereby allowing companies to artificially lower their tax base; upholds that this practice not only harms the principle of EU solidarity, but also produces a wealth redistribution towards multinationals and their shareholders, at the expense of EU citizens; supports the important work by academics and journalists who help to shed light on these practices;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Evelyn REGNER, Elly SCHLEIN, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Dietmar KÖSTER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Highlights that close to 40 % of MNEs’ profits are shifted to tax havens globally each year25 ~~; _________________~~with some European Union countries appearing to be the prime losers of profit shifting, because 35% of shifted profits come from EU countries, followed by developing countries (30%)1a; deplores that Ireland is the number one shifting destination, followed by Singapore, the Netherlands, Caribbean tax havens and Switzerland1b; deplores furthermore that about 80% of the profits shifted within the EU are shifted to the EU tax havens, primarily Ireland, Luxembourg and the Netherlands1c; [3] _________________ 1a Tørsløv, Wier and Zucman ‘The missing profits of nations’, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 24701, 2018. 1b Tørsløv, Wier and Zucman ‘The missing profits of nations’, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 24701, 2018. 1c Tørsløv, Wier and Zucman ‘Themissing profits of nations’, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 24701, 2018. 25 Tørsløv, Wier and Zucman ‘The missing profits of nations’, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 24701, 2018.

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Reiterates its call on companies, as taxpayers, to fully comply with their tax obligations and refrain from aggressive tax planning leading to BEPS, and to consider fair taxation strategy as an important part of their corporate social responsibility and of their implementation of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Hugues BAYET, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16 a. Stresses that between 1985 and 2018, the global average statutory corporate tax rate has fallen from 49% to 24%1a ; notes that nominal corporate tax rates have decreased by 46% since 2000 at EU level –from an average of 32% in 2000 to 21,9% in 20181b; is concerned about a growing race to the bottom on nominal corporate tax rates at both international and EU levels; regrets that international tax reform such as G20/OECD led BEPS project did not touch upon this unfair tax competition; calls for a second set of international tax reforms aiming at tackling tax competition among countries and ensuring a fair allocation of taxing rights; underlines it is necessary to give a greater role to the UN Committee of Experts on International Cooperation in Tax Matters in the next reform of international tax rules; _________________ 1a Tørsløv, Wier and Zucman ‘Themissing profits of nations’, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 24701, 2018. 1b Taxation trend in the EU, Table 3:Top statutory corporate income tax rates (including surcharges), 1995- 2018,European Commission 2018

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Mady DELVAUX, Evelyn REGNER, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)

16 b. Deplores the imbalance between taxes paid on corporate and capital income and on labour; points out that such distribution of tax burden is unsustainable in view of the expected massive changes in the labour market due to increased robotisation and digitalisation and poses a serious risk to social cohesion;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Hugues BAYET, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 c (new)

16 c. Affirms that a fair and effective solution to tax dumping and aggressive tax competition would reside in the setting of a minimum corporate tax rate; calls for the adoption of a coordinated level of minimum effective taxation at European level through a combination of anti-abuse measures and limitation to tax deductions; asks the European Commission to consider proposing a legislative package aiming at ensuring a minimum effective level of taxation;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Hugues BAYET, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 d (new)

16 d. Takes note that traditional sectors pay in average an effective corporate tax rate of 23% while the digital sector pays about 9,5%1a; asks the European Commission to carry out and release an in depth study on effective level of corporate taxation within the EU and develop a proposal fora coordinated level of minimum taxation within the EU; _________________ 1a COM(2018) 146 final COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEANPARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Time to establish a modern, fair and efficient taxation standard for the digital economy

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Hugues BAYET, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Welcomes the provisions on Controlled Foreign Corporation (CFC) included in ATAD I to ensure that profits made by related companies parked in low or no-tax countries are effectively taxed; acknowledges that they prevent the absence or diversity of national CFC rules within the Union from distorting the functioning of the internal market beyond situations of wholly artificial arrangements as called for repeatedly by Parliament; deplores the coexistence of two approaches to implement CFC rules in ATAD I and calls on Member States to implement only the simpler and most efficient CFC rules as in ATAD I Article 7(2)(a); asks the European Commission to make a legislative proposal reinforcing CFC rules, including a criteria on an actual corporate tax paid on profits lower than 18%;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Hugues BAYET, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Welcomes the general anti-abuse rule for the purposes of calculating corporate tax liability included in ATAD I, allowing Member States to ignore arrangements that are not genuine and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances aimed at obtaining a tax advantage; reiterates its repeated call for the adoption of a general and common anti- abuse rule, namely in existing legislation and in particular in the parent-subsidiary directive, the merger directive and the interest and royalties directive; calls on Member States to consider a general anti- abuse rule including a minimum effective tax rate of 18%;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Recognises that the new flow of information to tax authorities following the adoption of ATAD I and DAC4 creates the need for adequate resources to ensure the most efficient use of such information and to effectively reduce the current tax gap; calls on all Member States to evaluate if the tools of the authorities are sufficient and adequate to use this information; points out the importance of combining different sets of information in order to identify patterns which indicate suspicious activity and can thereby help to discover financial crimes, tax evasion or tax avoidance;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Hugues BAYET, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)

32 a. Calls on the Council, assisted by the European Commission, to define a comprehensive and exhaustive list of potential harmful tax practices within the EU, to be updated every year; demands that criteria aiming at identifying harmful tax practices include, notably, schemes allowing for a large deduction of corporate income tax without benefiting the real local economy;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Evelyn REGNER, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Mady DELVAUX, Hugues BAYET, Dietmar KÖSTER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Welcomes the re-launch of the CCCTB project ~~in a two-step approach,~~ with the Commission’s adoption of interconnected proposals on CCTB and CCCTB; ~~calls on the Council to swiftly adopt them,~~stresses that once implemented fully, the CCCTB will make it possible to attribute income to where the value is created and will eliminate loopholes between national tax systems, in particular transfer pricing; calls on the Council to swiftly adopt and implement the two proposals side by side taking into consideration Parliament’s opinion that already includes the concept of virtual permanent establishment that would close the remaining loopholes allowing tax avoidance to take place and level the playing field in light of digitalisation;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Paul TANG, Evelyn REGNER, Hugues BAYET, Peter SIMON, Dietmar KÖSTER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)

33 a. Recalls that to end the practice of profit shifting and to introduce the principle that tax is paid where profit is generated, the CCTB and CCCTB should be introduced simultaneously in all Member States; calls on the Commission to issue a new proposal based on Article 116 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, whereby the European Parliament and the Council act in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure to issue the necessary legislation, should the Council fail to adopt a unanimous decision on the proposal to establish a CCCTB;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Evelyn REGNER, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Mady DELVAUX, Dietmar KÖSTER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Notes that the phenomenon of digitalisation has created a new situation in the market, whereby digital and digitalised companies are able to take advantage of local markets without having a physical, and therefore taxable, presence in that market, creating a non-level playing field and putting traditional companies at a disadvantage; notes that digital businesses models in the EU face a lower effective average tax burden than traditional business models31 ; deplores that digital businesses pay almost no taxes in some Member States despite their significant digital presence and large revenues in those Member States; reminds that, when it comes to the digitalisation of the whole economy, the location of the value creation should take into account the input from users as well as information collected on consumers' behaviour online; _________________ 31 As evidenced in the impact assessment of 21 March 2018 accompanying the digital tax package (SWD(2018)0081), according to which on average, digitalised businesses face an effective tax rate of only 9.5 %, compared to 23.2 % for traditional business models.

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Paul TANG, Evelyn REGNER, Pervenche BERÈS, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 a (new)

36a. Notes that, across the political spectrum, and across Europe, there is an overwhelming support for a digital tax; recalls that surveys show that 80% of citizens from Germany, France, Austria, the Netherlands, Sweden and Denmark are supportive of a Digital Service Tax (DST) and that 80% of the citizens think that the EU should not wait for international efforts before it undertakes such a step; underlines furthermore that a majority of the surveyed citizens want a broad scope for a digital service tax, which includes services providing digital content and e-commerce1a; _________________ 1a KiesKompas, Public Perception towards taxing digital companies in six countries https://policies.kieskompas.nl/digital-tax- report.pdf,December 2018

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Hugues BAYET, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 b (new)

36b. Calls on Member States to ensure that the ‘Digital Services Tax’ remains a temporary measure by including a ‘sunset clause’ to the proposal for a Council Directive on the common system of a digital services tax on revenues resulting from the provision of certain digital services and by speeding up the discussion on a Significant Digital Presence1a ; _________________ 1a Proposal for a Council Directive laying down rules relating to the corporate taxation of a significant digital presence COM(2018) 147 final

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Mady DELVAUX, Evelyn REGNER, Pervenche BERÈS, Dietmar KÖSTER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 a (new)

44a. Notes the magnitude of the CumEx scandal, which according to some estimates, has taken EUR 55 billion from public coffers in the EU; observes that the "CumEx files" reveal a lack of cooperation between Member States' tax authorities and failures of the current system of exchange of information as some Member States were reportedly aware of these fraudulent tax practices but waited several years to inform other Member States; calls for a regulation of dividend arbitrage practices, preventing "CumEx" and "CumCum" schemes in the future, by putting the burden of proof of ownership of the dividends on the foreign beneficiary; calls on the European legislators to evaluate the possibility of implementing this measure at EU level;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Hugues BAYET, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45

45. SRecalls that public CBCR is one of the key measures to find greater transparency on tax information of companies for all citizens; stresses that the proposal for public CBCR was submitted to the co-legislators just after the Panama papers scandal on 12 April 2016, and that Parliament adopted its position on it on 4 July 2017; recalls that this public nature is essential for civil society, investigative journalists, investors and other stakeholders, in particular, to whom the information is useful to assess potential risks and liabilities; recalls that the latter called for an enlargement of the scope of reporting and protection of commercially sensitive information; deplores the lack of progress and cooperation from the Council since 2016; urges for progress to be made in the Council so that it enters into negotiations with Parliament;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Evelyn REGNER, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Mady DELVAUX, Pervenche BERÈS, Dietmar KÖSTER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a (new)

45a. Calls on the Commission and the Council to create a mandatory standardised public European Business Register in order to gain up-to-date and trustworthy information on companies and to achieve transparency via cross- border access to comparable and reliable information of companies in the EU;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Paul TANG, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Evelyn REGNER, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49 a (new)

49a. Deplores the fact that companies can make agreements with governments to pay almost no tax in a given country despite conducting substantial activity; points in this light to a tax ruling between the Dutch tax revenue authority and Royal Dutch Shell plc that seems to be in violation of Dutch tax law on the sole ground that the head office would be located in the Netherlands after the unification of the two former parent companies, which results in an exemption from Dutch dividend withholding tax, while at the same time recent investigations seem to show that the company pays no profit tax in The Netherlands either; reiterates its call on the Commission to investigate this case of potential illegal state aid;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Evelyn REGNER, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Mady DELVAUX, Dietmar KÖSTER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52

52. ~~Notes that there is no single definition of letterbox companie~~Highlights that companies create cross-border operations and corporate constructions including artificial arrangements in order to avoid or circumvent national tax law; stresses that company mobility should not lead to forum shopping; notes that there is no single definition of letterbox companies; reiterates its call for a clear definition; stresses that the requirement of genuine economic activity in the destination Member States can prevent the creation of a letterbox company through a cross- border operation, as proposed in the draft report for the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive (EU) 2017/1132 as regards cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Evelyn REGNER, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 65 a (new)

65a. Welcomes that a VAT Mini One Stop Shop (MOSS) on telecommunications, broadcasting and electronic services was introduced in 2015 as a voluntary system for registration, declaration and payment of VAT; welcomes the extension of the MOSS to other supplies of goods and services to final consumers as of 1 January 2021;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Hugues BAYET, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 74

74. WNotes that the Commission has recently proposed additional control tools and an enhanced role for Eurofisc as well as mechanisms for closer cooperation between customs and tax administrations and greater involvement of the European Public Prosecutor's Office; welcomes the adoption of the Protection of Financial Interests (PIF) Directive53 which clarifies the issues of cross-border cooperation and mutual legal assistance between Member States, Eurojust, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and the Commission in tackling VAT fraud; _________________ 53 Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2017 on the fight against fraud to the Union’s financial interests by means of criminal law, OJ L 198, 28.7.2017, p. 29, in particular Articles 3 and 15 thereof.

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Arndt KOHN, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Mady DELVAUX, Evelyn REGNER, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 75

75. Points, however, to the need for better cooperation between the administrative, judicial and law- enforcement authorities within the EU, as highlighted by experts during the hearing held on 28 June 2018 and in a study commissioned by the TAX3 Committee; calls on the EPPO, OLAF, Eurofisc, Europol and Eurojust to closely cooperate with a view to coordinating their efforts against VAT fraud and to identifying and adapting to new fraudulent practices;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Dietmar KÖSTER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 81

81. Emphasises that natural persons do not generally exercise their freedom of movement for the purposes of tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning; underlines, however, that some natural persons have a tax base large enough to span several tax jurisdictions; stresses that tax evasion is highly concentrated among the rich, with the 0.01% richest households evading about 25% of their taxes1a; _________________ 1a Alstadsæter, Johannesen & Zucman: Tax Evasion and Inequality; October 2018

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Mady DELVAUX, Hugues BAYET, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 102

102. Calls on the Commission to table a legislative proposal to ensure the automatic exchange of information between the relevant authorities, ~~including tax and customs authorities,~~ on beneficial ownership and relevant transactions for taxation purposes taking place in free ports, customs warehouses or SEZs;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Dietmar KÖSTER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 110 a (new)

110 a. Welcomes the Action Plan adopted by the Council on the 4th of December 2018, including several non-legislative measures to better tackle money laundering and terrorist financing in the EU; requests the Commission to regularly update the Parliament on the progress of the implementation of the Action Plan;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Evelyn REGNER, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 110 b (new)

110 b. Is concerned by the absence of concrete procedures to assess and review the probity of members of the governing council of the European Central Bank, in particular when they are formally accused of criminal activity; calls for mechanisms to monitor and review the conduct and propriety of the members of the governing council of the European Central Bank and to protect them in case of abuse of power by the authority that has the appointment power;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Mady DELVAUX, Evelyn REGNER, Pervenche BERÈS, Dietmar KÖSTER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 111 a (new)

111 a. Stresses the continued use of cash in cases of money laundering; highlights the new Regulation on controls on cash entering or leaving the Union, which harmonises and expands controls on large sums of cash and highly liquid stores of value; regrets that while rules on the EU external borders are harmonised, rules among Member States concerning cash movements within EU borders vary;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Evelyn REGNER, Dietmar KÖSTER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 111 b (new)

111 b. Notes that high-denomination euro notes provide a way to move large amounts of cash and thus potentially evade AML controls; welcomes that the ECB announced in 2016 it would no longer issue new €500 notes (even though the outstanding stock remains legal tender); calls on the ECB to extend this action to the €200 notes and for determining the phasing out of the ability to use of both €500 and €200 notes;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 112 a (new)

112 a. Notes the positive results of the UK law establishing the Unexplained Wealth Order (UWO) in tracking proceeds of criminal activities; highlights that a UWO is a court order that requires a person who is reasonably suspected of involvement in, or of being connected to a person involved in, serious crime to explain the nature and extent of their interest in particular property, and to explain how the property was obtained, where there are reasonable grounds to suspect that the respondent’s known lawfully obtained income would be insufficient to allow the respondent to obtain the property; calls on the Commission to assess the feasibility of proposing a similar measure through EU legislation and report back to Parliament;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 112 b (new)

112 b. Welcomes the decision in some Member States to ban the issuing of bearer shares and to convert the current ones into nominal securities; reiterates its call on the Commission to propose EU- wide legislation to the same effect;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Hugues BAYET, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 112 c (new)

112 c. Stresses the urgent need to create a more efficient system for communication and information exchange among judicial authorities within the EU, replacing the traditional instruments of mutual legal assistance in criminal matters, which provide lengthy and burdensome procedures harming investigations of money laundering and other serious crimes; reiterates its call on the Commission to assess the need for legislative action in this field;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Hugues BAYET, Dietmar KÖSTER, Elly SCHLEIN, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 112 d (new)

112 d. Calls on the Commission to assess and report to Parliament about the role and particular risks presented by legal arrangements such as Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs), Special Purpose Entities (SPEs) and Non Charitable Purpose Trusts (NCPTs) in money laundering, particularly in the UK, and Crown Dependencies and Overseas territories;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Hugues BAYET, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 125 a (new)

125 a. Notes the concerns expressed by the EBA with regards to the implementation of the Directive 2013/36/EU on access to the activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institutions and investment firms1a; welcomes the suggestions made by the EBA to tackle the deficiencies caused by the current Union legal framework; _________________ 1a https://www.eba.europa.eu/documents/101 80/2101654/Letter+to+Tiina+Astola+on+t he+request+to+investigate+a+possible+B UL+under+Article+17+of+Regulation+% 28EU%29%20No+10932010+- +24092018.pdf

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Hugues BAYET, Dietmar KÖSTER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 129 a (new)

129 a. Notes the Commission’s assessment of the framework for FIUs’ cooperation with third countries and obstacles and opportunities to enhance cooperation between FIUs in the Union including the possibility of establishing an EU level coordination and support mechanism; recalls that according to the AMLD5 this assessment should be ready by 1 June 2019; asks the Commission to consider this opportunity to make a legislative proposal for a EU Financial Intelligence Unit, creating a hub for joint investigative work and coordination, with its own remit of autonomy and investigatory competences on cross border financial criminality, and an early warning mechanism;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Hugues BAYET, Dietmar KÖSTER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 129 b (new)

129 b. Calls on the Commission to draw up a report assessing the necessity of uniformisation or harmonisation of the organisational status conferred to FIUs in Member States, to ensure better cooperation and exchange of information, without interfering with their independence;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Evelyn REGNER, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Mady DELVAUX, Dietmar KÖSTER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE

129 c. Calls on the Commission to propose legislation for the creation of a European Financial Police within the framework of Europol, with its own autonomous investigatory competence, based on the European legal framework to tackle cross-border tax fraud, money laundering, financing of terrorism and predicate offences;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 131 a (new)

131 a. Takes note of the repeated calls from obliged entities, namely financial institutions, for proper channels of enhanced dialogue, communication and exchange of information between private bodies and public authorities, on one hand, and among obliged entities themselves, on the other, to provide less fragmented information to FIUs; calls on the Commission to draw up guidelines in accordance with the AMLD5, for Member States to implement at national level in this regard, namely using the mechanisms provided in the General Data Protection Regulation for secure and lawful exchange of data;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Hugues BAYET, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 133 a (new)

133 a. Calls on Member States to ensure that registers of beneficial owners contain verification mechanisms to ensure the accuracy of the data; calls on the Commission to make assessment of verification mechanisms and reliability of the data in its reviews;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Hugues BAYET, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 136

136. Underscores the problem of money laundering through investment in real estate in European cities through foreign shell companies; recalls that the Commission should assess the necessity and proportionality of harmonising the information in the land and real estate registers and assess the need for the interconnection of those registers; takes the view that Member States should have in place publicly accessible information on ultimate beneficial ownership of land and real estate; calls on the Commission, if appropriate, to accompany the report with a legislative proposal;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Evelyn REGNER, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 140 a (new)

140 a. Urges the Commission to lead on creating a global framework regulating virtual currencies which takes into consideration the risks of these new technologies; recalls the dangers posed to consumers by Initial Coin Offerings (ICO’s) and urges the Commission to enact a proposal for their regulation as financial operations; notes in particular that cryptocurrencies' opacity can be used to facilitate money laundering and tax evasion; calls on the Commission to draft legislative proposals to ban certain anonymity measures on specific cryptocurrencies, on a case-by-case basis;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Paul TANG, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 153

153. Welcomes the recent clarifications from the CoC Group on fair taxation criteria, especially regarding the lack of economic substance for jurisdictions having no corporate income tax rate or a rate close to 0 %; calls on the Member States to work towards the gradual improvement of the EU listing criteria to cover all harmful tax practices79 by determining a minimum level of effective taxation and by reviewing all potential harmful practices granting large tax exemptions or deductions which are disconnected from the domestic economy; regrets that the same criteria used to include the jurisdictions of third countries on the European list do not apply internally to Member States and that the EU consequently loses credibility to call on other countries to comply with standards of tax good governance; _________________ 79 Work on fair taxation criteria 2.1 and 2.2 of Council conclusions 14166/16 of 8 November 2016.

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 153 a (new)

153 a. Welcomes the new OECD global standard on substantial activities factor to no or only nominal tax jurisdictions1a, largely inspired by the EU work on the EU listing process (Fair criterion 2.2 of the EU list); calls on EU Member States to push for a more ambitious global standard including a minimum level of effective taxation; _________________ 1a OECD, “Resumption of Application of Substantial Activities Factor to No or only Nominal Tax Jurisdictions Inclusive Framework on BEPS: Action 5”, http://www.oecd.org/tax/beps/resumption- of-application-of-substantial-activities- factors.pdf, 2018

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Mady DELVAUX, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 b (new)

154 b. Welcomes the expected review of the EU list in the first quarter of 2019; asks the Council to release a detailed assessment of commitments from jurisdictions which committed to reform and were listed on Annex II when the first EU list was released on December 5th2017; demands that jurisdictions listed on Annex II thanks to commitments made in 2017 are listed on Annex I if the due reforms have not been implemented by the end of 2018 or the agreed timeline;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Mady DELVAUX, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 c (new)

154 c. Notes that developing countries might not possess the resources to implement newly agreed international or European tax standards and /or might have more urgent tax gap issues to tackle to ensure they generate sufficient revenues to provide for essential public services; subsequently calls on the Council to exclude counter measures such as cuts in development aid;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Paul TANG, Evelyn REGNER, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 e (new)

154 e. Recalls that the European Commission has criticised seven member states - Belgium, Cyprus, Hungary, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta and The Netherlands, for their "aggressive" tax policies, arguing that they have tax policies that undermine the integrity of the European single market;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Paul TANG, Elly SCHLEIN, Evelyn REGNER, Pervenche BERÈS, Dietmar KÖSTER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 f (new)

154 f. Calls, therefore, on the Commission to regard explicitly at least Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Ireland and Malta as EU tax havens;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Elly SCHLEIN, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 g (new)

154 g. Notes the current negotiations between the EU and Switzerland towards a Framework Agreement; stresses its view that the EU should renegotiate its trade, economic and other relevant bilateral agreements with Switzerland to bring them into line with EU anti-tax fraud policy and anti-money laundering legislation, so as to eliminate serious flaws in the Swiss supervisory system which enable a policy of internal banking secrecy to continue, as well as the creation of offshore structures worldwide, tax fraud and tax evasion not constituting a criminal offence, weak supervision, the inadequate self-regulation of obliged entities, and aggressive prosecution and harassment of whistle-blowers;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Evelyn REGNER, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 158

158. Reiterates its call for the EU to have a leading role in the global fight against tax evasion, aggressive tax planning and money laundering, in particular through Commission initiatives in all related international forums; calls on the EU as a member of the G20 to aim for that forum to undertake a strong action against tax competition;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Pervenche BERÈS, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Mady DELVAUX, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 160 a (new)

160 a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to push for a second set of international tax reform gathering all countries interested on an equal footing and aiming at tackling the growing corporate tax race to the bottom and the allocation of taxing rights;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Evelyn REGNER, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Mady DELVAUX, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 161

161. Believes that supporting developing countries in combating tax evasion and aggressive tax planning, as well as corruption and secrecy that facilitate illicit financial flows, is of the utmost importance for strengthening policy coherence for development in the EU and improving developing countries’ tax capacities and domestic resource mobilisation; stresses the need to increase the share, in terms of aid and development, of financial and technical assistance to the national tax administrations of developing countries;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Elly SCHLEIN, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 170 b (new)

170 b. Notes that some tax treaties allow the development of potential harmful tax schemes, such as the ‘SingleMalt’ 1awhich directs profits to countries with which Ireland has a double taxation agreement but that do not have any corporation tax; asks the European Commission to investigate such schemes and assess if they constitute an abuse of tax treaties; _________________ 1a Christian Aid, ‘Impossible’ structures: tax outcomes overlooked by the 2015 tax Spillover analysis, Part Two, 2017 https://www.christianaid.ie/sites/default/fil es/2018-02/impossible-structures-tax- report.pdf

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Dietmar KÖSTER, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Evelyn REGNER, Elly SCHLEIN, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 171 a (new)

171 a. Asks Member States to renegotiate their bilateral tax treaties with third countries with the aim of introducing anti-abuse clauses, preventing ‘treaty shopping’ and a race to the bottom among developing countries;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Dietmar KÖSTER, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Elly SCHLEIN, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 171 b (new)

171 b. Reiterates its call on the European Union and its Member States to ensure that, when negotiating tax and investment treaties with developing countries, income or profits resulting from cross-border activities be taxed in the source country, where value is extracted or created; stresses, in this regard, that the UN Model Tax Convention ensures a fairer distribution of taxing rights between source and residence countries; stresses than when negotiating tax treaties, the European Union and its Member States should comply with the principle of policy coherence for development established in Article 208 TFEU;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Dietmar KÖSTER, Elly SCHLEIN, Evelyn REGNER, Olle LUDVIGSSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 172

172. Calls on the Commission to review all tax treaties in force and signed by Member States with third countries through impact assessment in order to identify potential negative impacts of such treaties on low and lower-middle income countries and to ensure that they treaties are all compliant with new global standards such as the Multilateral Convention to Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures to Prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (‘MLI’); ~~asks the Commission to release recommendations to Member States regarding their existing bilateral tax treaties to ensure that they~~notes that the MLI represents OECD-based standards which were not established with consideration to the needs or challenges of developing countries; asks the Commission to release recommendations to Member States regarding their existing bilateral tax treaties to ensure that Member States are open to country context specific responses and enter into bilateral conversations with treaty countries to discuss allocation of taxing rights, and that bilateral tax treaties include general anti-abuse rules, looking at genuine economic activity and value creation;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Elly SCHLEIN, Hugues BAYET, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 172 a (new)

172 a. Calls on Member States to mandate the Commission to propose a European tax treaty template, containing a clause on significant digital presence, an anti-abuse rule and an anti-tax dumping clause including a minimum level of effective taxation set at 18% of profits;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Dietmar KÖSTER, Peter SIMON, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Evelyn REGNER, Olle LUDVIGSSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 177

177. Welcomes the broad definition of both ‘intermediary’ and ‘reportable cross- border arrangement’ in the recently adopted DAC683 ; ~~_________________ 83~~stresses that the relevant information in relation to potentially aggressive tax planning arrangements should also be accessible to the general public; _________________ 83 OJ L 139, 5.6.2018, p. 1. OJ L 139, 5.6.2018, p. 1.

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Dietmar KÖSTER, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Evelyn REGNER, Olle LUDVIGSSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 178 a (new)

178 a. Calls for a rotation of auditors every 7 years to prevent conflicts of interests and the limitation of the provision of non-audit services to a minimum;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Dietmar KÖSTER, Peter SIMON, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Evelyn REGNER, Olle LUDVIGSSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 178 b (new)

178 b. Reiterates that intermediaries play a crucial role in facilitating money laundering and the financing of terrorism and should beheld accountable for these actions;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Dietmar KÖSTER, Peter SIMON, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 179 b (new)

179 b. Calls on the Commission to assess the possibilities of blacklisting financial and non-financial intermediaries based in the EU which operate branches in countries blacklisted as non-cooperative jurisdictions or which are listed as high risk third countries by the Commission; Suggests further that intermediaries should be restricted from operating in the single market if convicted of financial crimes or of facilitating tax evasion;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Dietmar KÖSTER, Evelyn REGNER, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Alfred SANT, Olle LUDVIGSSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 180 a (new)

180 a. Calls for a general EU fund to be set up to give appropriate financial support to whistle-blowers whose livelihood is put at risk as a result of disclosures of criminal activity or facts with clear public interest;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Elly SCHLEIN, Dietmar KÖSTER, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 181 a (new)

181 a. Is concerned by the impact of non- disclosure agreements in employment contracts and dismissal agreements, particularly in the financial sector; calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of proposing legislation banning abusive non-disclosure agreements and declared void agreements which limit the employee’s ability and right to report unlawful activity;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Dietmar KÖSTER, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Pervenche BERÈS, Evelyn REGNER, Arndt KOHN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 194 a (new)

194 a. Notes that no EU Member States were included on the EU list of non- cooperative jurisdictions as EU Member States were not assessed; welcomes the declaration from the Chair of the Code of Conduct Group indicating that Member States could be assessed in the future1a; demands that such assessment is conducted without any further delay; _________________ 1a “The fact of screening the EU Member States with the same criteria is exactly what is under discussion in the context of the revision of the mandate of the Code Group that currently the Austrian Presidency of the Council is taking forward.” Exchange of views with Fabrizia Lapecorella, Chair of the Code of Conduct Group on Business Taxation, European Parliament, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/1 55396/TAX3%20Verbatim%2010%20Oct ober%202018_OR.pdfOct 2018

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Hugues BAYET, Elly SCHLEIN, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 197

197. Believes that the mandate of the CoC Group needs to be updated, since it addresses matters beyond the assessment of harmful EU tax practices, which is more than simply providing technical input to the decisions made by the Council; calls, based on the nature of the work undertaken by the Group which is also of a political nature, for such tasks to be brought back under a framework which enables democratic control or supervision, starting by applying transparency; invites Member States to update the mandate of the CoC Group to include a minimum level of effective taxation set at 18% of profits as well as an increased and improved work on harmful tax practices and on the EU listing process;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyn REGNER, Mady DELVAUX, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Hugues BAYET, Elly SCHLEIN, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 199 a (new)

199 a. Reiterates its call for the creation of an EU Tax Policy Coherence and Coordination Centre (EUTPCCC) within the structure of the Commission1a,which would ensure effective and expeditious cooperation between Member States’ and facilitate early warning in cases like the Cum Ex scandal; urges Member States to support this call and for the Commission to present a legislative proposal for such a mechanism; _________________ 1a European Parliament resolution of 6 July 2016 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect (2016/2038(INI))

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2121(INI)

Peter SIMON, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pervenche BERÈS, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Arndt KOHN, Paul TANG, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Mady DELVAUX, Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Hugues BAYET, Elly SCHLEIN, Olle LUDVIGSSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 207

207. Takes the view that the work of the TAXE, TAX2, PANA and TAX3 committees should be continued, in the forthcoming parliamentary term, in a permanent structure within Parliament ~~such as a subcommittee to the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON)~~, including Members from a diverse range of committees; considers that the Commissioner for Taxation, the Chair of the CoC Group and the Finance minister holding the rotating EU presidency should appear at least twice a year before the heretofore mentioned permanent structure;

2018/12/20
Committee: TAX3

2018/2111(INI)

Demetris PAPADAKIS, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Marlene MIZZI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miltiadis KYRKOS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers that EU institutions should enhance efforts to ensure greater effectiveness of the electoral rights of Union citizens; highlights the fact that electoral laws in many Member States remain complex and urges the Commission to call on the Member States to actively uphold best practices which help citizens to vote in and stand for EU elections pursuant to Article 22(2) TFEU, including the publication of electoral laws one year before EU elections, the combating of fake news and the promotion of media pluralism, calls on the Commission to follow-up on the disenfranchisement of EU citizens living in another Member State and to propose concrete actions to protect their political rights;

2018/10/16
Committee: PETI

2018/2111(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers that EU institutions should enhance efforts to ensure greater effectiveness of the electoral rights of Union citizens with the view to effectively tackle the problem of decreasing levels of voter turnout; highlights the fact that electoral laws in many Member States remain complex and urges the Commission to call on the Member States to actively uphold best practices which help citizens to vote in and stand for EU elections pursuant to Article 22(2) TFEU, including the publication of electoral laws one year before EU elections, the combating of fake news and any populist rhetoric, and the promotion of media pluralism;

2018/10/16
Committee: PETI

2018/2111(INI)

Demetris PAPADAKIS, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Andrea COZZOLINO, Miltiadis KYRKOS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Invites all European institutions to fight against the "blame Brussels" phenomenon by which Member States put the responsibility on the European Union for decisions they have taken themselves as members of the Council, calls on the Council for greater transparency in the decision-making processes;

2018/10/16
Committee: PETI

2018/2111(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Recalls that freedom of movement for workers is one of the founding principles of the EU; calls on Member States to fully and effectively implement Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems in order to ensure the portability of social security benefits (e.g. state pensions, health insurance, unemployment benefits and family benefits) and consequently reduce barriers to labour mobility

2018/10/16
Committee: PETI

2018/2111(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Strongly recalls the predominant importance of a timely and effective enforcement of the rights of the European citizens deriving from the Treaties; reminds that the correct application of EU law is a shared responsibility of the Member States and the European institutions ; underlines in that respect the crucial role the Commission has to play as the Guardian of the Treaties in the implementation of the articles 258-260 TFEU;

2018/10/16
Committee: PETI

2018/2111(INI)

Demetris PAPADAKIS, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Marlene MIZZI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miltiadis KYRKOS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Urges the Commission to faster its EU law enforcement policy by using all available tools mechanisms in order to bring a correct application of EU law closer to the citizens and reinforce their beliefs in the action of the European Union and its policies;

2018/10/16
Committee: PETI

2018/2111(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Regrets the existing opt-outs from parts of the EU treaties by some Member States which undermine and generate de facto differences in citizens' rights that are intended to be equal under the EU Treaties

2018/10/16
Committee: PETI

2018/2111(INI)

Demetris PAPADAKIS, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Marlene MIZZI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Andrea COZZOLINO, Miltiadis KYRKOS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Encourages Member States to give more space to political education on EU affairs, inter alia on EU citizens' rights, in their school curricula and to adapt teacher training accordingly

2018/10/16
Committee: PETI

2018/2111(INI)

Demetris PAPADAKIS, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Marlene MIZZI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miltiadis KYRKOS, Andrea COZZOLINO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Calls on Member States to better inform EU citizens as to their rights and duties, and to facilitate entitlement to these rights being respected equally both in their country of origin and in any other Member State

2018/10/16
Committee: PETI

2018/2111(INI)

Demetris PAPADAKIS, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Marlene MIZZI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Miltiadis KYRKOS, Andrea COZZOLINO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5c. Recalls Article 1 of the TEU which provides that decisions should be taken as openly and as closely as possible to the citizen; democratic and transparent decision-making at European level is indispensable to increase citizens' trust in the European project and the EU institutions; fully endorses the European Ombudsman's recommendations on the transparency of the Council legislative process

2018/10/16
Committee: PETI

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Nicola DANTI

Motion for a resolution
Citation 9

~~– having regard to the multiannual strategic plan for electronic customs adopted on the basis of Article 8 of Decision No 70/2008/EC as updated in 2017,~~deleted

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Nicola DANTI

Motion for a resolution
Citation 9 a (new)

– having regard to the resolution of the European Parliament of 1 January 2017 on tackling the challenges of the Union Customs Code implementation (2016/3024 (RSP))

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Nicola DANTI

Motion for a resolution
Citation 9 b (new)

– having regard to the Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the implementation of the Union Customs and on the exercise of the power to adopt delegated acts pursuant to Article 284 thereunder (COM(2018) 039 final)

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO

Motion for a resolution
Citation 10

– having regard to Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/578 of 11 April 2016 establishing the Work Programme relating to the development and deployment of the electronic systems provided for in the Union Customs Code,deleted

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Lucy ANDERSON

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas the necessary balance that customs authorities must strike between the facilitation of legitimate trade and their customs controls designed to protect the security of the Union and its citizens as well as its financial and commercial interests, and emphasising in this respect the key role played by the status of authorised economic operator

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Nicola DANTI

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas the UCC stipulates that the electronic systems needed for its application must be deployed by 31 December 2020, and digitisation of customs procedures was ~~propos~~initiated as long ago as 2003 and enacted in 2008 with the adoption of Regulation (EC) No 450/2008 establishing the Community Customs Code (modernised customs code) and the adoption of the e-Customs Decision No 70/2008/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January2008 on a paperless environment for customs and trade;

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Nicola DANTI

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas the digitalisation of customs is a work in progress, more than 98% of the customs declarations are today electronic and the following areas of customs are now handled through electronic systems: transit(NCTS), export control (ECS); security data (ICS), risk management (CRMS),Economic Operators Registration and Identification Number (EORI),authorisations (CDS), Authorised Economic Operators (AEO), Binding Tariff Information (EBTI), quota and tariff (QUOTA), autonomous tariff suspensions, the combined nomenclature (TARIC), surveillance of import and export (SURV2)and Registered Exporter System for certificates of origin (REX);

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Nicola DANTI

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas implementation of key electronic systems necessary for the full implementation of the UCC will be delayed and deferred until after 31 December 2020;

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Nicola DANTI, Lucy ANDERSON

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas particular attention should be paid to the standardisation of customs information and processes;

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO

Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)

Eb. whereas the governance of the Customs 2020 programme and hence of customs IT work is shared between the Commission, the Member States and representatives of commercial interests in a multitude of decision-making structures that have a lasting negative impact on its effectiveness and the management of IT projects;

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO

Motion for a resolution
Recital E c (new)

Ec. whereas it is necessary, following the end of the on-going Customs 2020 programme and a cost-benefit assessment of the various possible options, to overhaul the governance of the Customs programmes;

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Nicola DANTI, Lucy ANDERSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Stresses that a fully functional Customs Union is essential to guarantee the credibility and strength of the EU when negotiating trade agreements; Emphasises that an efficient EU Customs Union should facilitate trade and reduce administrative burdens for legitimate traders, as well as ensure effective controls, inter alia by fostering cooperation between European and third countries’ customs authorities;

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Nicola DANTI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Stresses that creating seamless customs processes across the Union based on the IT infrastructure reform is pivotal; Considers that reaping the potential of digitisation will enable the exchange of information and the payment of duties to become more transparent and accessible, in particular for third countries’ operators;

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Nicola DANTI, Lucy ANDERSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2c. Notes that current divergent level and quality of controls, customs procedures and sanction policies, at EU points of entry into the Customs Union, often results in distortion of trade flows, feeding the problem of ‘forum shopping’ and putting at risk the integrity of the Single Market; in that context, strongly requests that the Commission and the Member States address this issue;

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Nicola DANTI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 d (new)

2d. Recalls that the United Kingdom will become a third country after withdrawal from the EU, thus altering EU’s external borders and highlights that the Brexit process shouldn’t negatively impact on the development of EU Customs and its governance;

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Regrets deeply the request by the Commission to the Parliament and the Council for an extension to the transitional period, and regrets the fact that the Commission has provided incomplete information in support of a further extension, particularly in the light of what comes within its remit and that of Member States, as a result of which Parliament cannot exercise its budgetary and political oversight in an appropriate manner;

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls on the Commission to update its multiannual strategic plan by sequencing projects throughout the transition period to avoid as much as possible the concentration of deployments at the end of the period and by establishing binding milestones, including for Member States;

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Nicola DANTI, Lucy ANDERSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Calls on the Commission to report regularly and transparently on the conduct of the multiannual strategic work plan so as not to repeat the mistakes of the previous programming and to avoid asking for a further extension of the transition period at a moment’s notice;

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Nicola DANTI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7b. Invites the Commission to continuously evaluate the Customs 2020 programme and to respond to the shortcomings identified, in particular by under-utilising the teams of experts set up under this programme and making it possible to increase cooperation between customs services;

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Nicola DANTI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 c (new)

7c. Takes note of and welcomes the Commission’s work in developing a tool on the performance of the Customs Union which will eventually enable the performance of the Customs Union to be systematically assessed against its strategic objectives in terms of efficiency, effectiveness and uniformity;

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Nicola DANTI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 d (new)

7d. Suggests to the Commission that this tool should also assess the performance of customs controls in terms of digitisation potential and dataflows in order to create even more effective risk- based controls while optimising the burden on customs authorities;

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Nicola DANTI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Invites the Commission to pursue reflection together with the European Parliament and the Council on the creation of a one-stop shop bringing together in one place customs and tax procedures linked to international trade, insists on the necessary caution to be adopted on the subject, which must not interfere with the priority of implementing digitised customs procedures foreseen in the UCC at the end of the transitional period;

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2109(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Nicola DANTI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Invites the Commission to propose, at the end and only at the end of the implementation of the 17 UCC-related IT systems of the Customs 2020 programme, a more effective governance structure for the conduct of customs IT projects and their updates, stresses the importance, in view of the economic, fiscal and security challenges represented by the customs IT system, that the solution adopted fully preserves European sovereignty;

2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 3 a (new)

– having regard to Articles 9 and 11 of the TFEU,

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)

– having regard to Article 35 and 37 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas the EU is still facing the worst economic, social and political crisis since its foundation; whereas ~~the ineffectiv~~it important to improve the approach ~~adopted by~~of the EU Iinstitutions in tackling the lack of transparency in both the EU decision- making process and in lobbying activities, in addition to other significant ethical issues within the Institutions, are contributing to further undermining the image of the EU;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)

Ga. whereas given the often time- sensitive nature of requests for access to document the Ombudsman initiated a trial phase for a fast-track procedure;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas the Ombudsman has a crucial role to play in ~~ensur~~making the ~~full transparency and impartiality of both the EU’s decision-making processes and administration in order to successfully protect citizens’ rights~~EU legislative process more accountable to citizens so they can exercise their right to participate in the democratic life of the Union thereby increasing their engagement and trust;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Marlene MIZZI

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas the Court of Justice has stipulated that the principles of publicity and transparency are inherent to the EU legislative process, and that the effectiveness and integrity of the legislative process cannot undermine the principles of publicity and transparency which underlie that process; whereas the Court of Justice of the EU has given clear guidance on this matter such as in its ruling of22.03.2015 in the case T-540/15;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital L

L. whereas on 25 October 2017 a meeting took place between former Commission President Barroso and a current Commission Vice-President, and was registered as an official meeting with Goldman Sachs; whereas the Ombudsman noted that the exact nature of this meeting was not clear; whereas the Ombudsman highlighted that there are understandable concerns that the former President is using his previous status and his contacts with former colleagues to influence and obtain information; whereas this case raises systematic issues as to the Commission’s overall approach to handling such cases and the degree of independence of the Ethics Committee and thus questions the need for stronger rules at EU level to prevent and sanction any conflict of interests within the Institutions and the agencies of the EU;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Michela GIUFFRIDA, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Recital M

M. whereas in March 2017 the Ombudsman opened a strategic inquiry into the openness and accountability of the Council; whereas the Ombudsman found maladministration in the Council’s failure to record the identities of Member States that take a position in a legislative procedure and in the lack of transparency by the Council on public access to its legislative documents; such as the practice of disproportionately marking documents as “limite”, meaning not for circulation;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital M a (new)

M a. whereas more openness on positions taken by national governments may reduce the ‘blame Brussels’ phenomenon which misrepresents the reality of how EU legislation is agreed, promoting Euro- scepticism and anti-EU sentiment”

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Marlene MIZZI

Motion for a resolution
Recital P

P. whereas the Ombudsman inquired into citizens’ complaints denouncing the Commission’s failure to reach a timely decision on infringement cases concerning the abuse of fixed-term work contracts; whereas several Member States have, over the years, experienced a significant increase in atypical and temporary employment contracts, which has ~~undermi~~questioned the i~~ntegrity~~mplementation of European employment law and the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q

Q. whereas for the purposes of decisions relating to the protection of human health orand the safety of humans, animals orand plants, the EU institutions, agencies and offices should be particularly ~~citizen-friendly~~focused on citizens in their outlook and should properly address the public’s concerns regarding full transparency, independence and accuracy in the collection and evaluation of scientific evidence; whereas the scientific evidence and procedures used at EU level which led to the authorisations of, inter alia, genetically modified organisms, pesticides and glyphosate drew significant criticism and triggered a wide public debate;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Marlene MIZZI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Congratulates Emily O’Reilly for her excellent work and constructive efforts to improve the quality of the EU’s administration and the accessibility and quality of the services it offers to citizens; reaffirms its strong support for the actions carried out by the Ombudsman for citizens and European democracy;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Welcomes the Ombudsman’s five- year strategy ‘Towards 2019’ which aims to increase the impact and visibility of her office and build strong relationships with the EU institutions, agencies and organisations, for the greater benefit of citizens

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Welcomes the Ombudsman’s introduction of the fast-track complaint procedure to deal with inquiries on access to documents

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Marlene MIZZI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises the importance of ~~full~~greater transparency and ~~full~~greater public access to the documents held by the EU institutions; highlights the Ombudsman’s structural work in bringing suspec~~ific secretive p~~ted maladministracti~~ces~~on to light by adopting a case-by- case approach and launching an increasing number of own-initiative enquiries;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises the importance of ~~full~~ transparency and ~~full~~ public access to the documents held by the EU institutions; highlights the Ombudsman’s structural work in bringing specific secretive practices to light by adopting a case-by- case approach and launching an increasing number of own-initiative enquiries;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Underlines the fact that EU legislation on access to documents ~~is seriously out~~should be updated; reiterates its call for a revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 in order to also facilitate the Ombudsman’s work in scrutinising the granting of access to documents by Parliament, the Council and the Commission; emphasises that Regulation 1049/2001 no longer reflects the current legal situation and institutional practices implemented by EU institutions, offices, bodies and agencies;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Emphasises that citizens must be able to ~~directly~~ participate more directly in and follow in detail the decision-making process within the EU institutions, and have access to all the relevant information in order to fully exercise their democratic rights;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Marlene MIZZI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses th~~at the lack of information and debate about~~e role of the Ombudsman in working for greater transparency and accountability in the EU legislative process in order to increases citizens’ ~~dis~~trust, with regard not only to the lawfulness of an isolated act, but also to the legitimacy of the decision-making process as a whole;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Recognises the need for ~~full~~increased transparency in the EU decision-making process and commends the Ombudsman’s inquiry into informal negotiations between the three main EU institutions (‘trilogues’); supports the publication of all trilogue documents in accordance with the rulings of the Court;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Strongly believes that the Ombudsman’s ~~recommenda~~suggestions on the EIB’s Transparency Policy ~~must be implemented~~should be acted on without further delay; calls on the EIB to immediately start to remove the presumption of non-disclosure relating to the information and documents collected during audits, inspections and investigations~~, including~~ after thoese ~~launched both during and after fraud and corruption ca~~have been closesd;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Marlene MIZZI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Stresses that the positions of the Member States in the EU legislative process must be recorded and made a matter of public knowledge in a timely and accessible manner, as in any system rooted in the principle of democratic legitimacy, co-legislators must be held accountable to the public for their actions; ~~strongly criticises the fact that the Council’s legislative documents are not, to any significant extent, directly and proactively accessible to the public while the legislative process is ongoing~~believes that increased accountability in the Council on positions taken by national governments on EU legislation could reduce the ‘blame Brussels’ culture for decisions ultimately taken by national governments themselves; calls on the Council to revise its confidentiality policy in order to ensure the highest level of transparency in its work;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Commission to ensure ~~full~~ transparency and access to documents and information with regard to the EU Pilot procedures in relation to petitions received, and full transparency and full access to the EU Pilot and infringement procedures that have already ended;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Reiterates its call for a central transparency hub for all EU institutions and agencies.

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Supports the Ombudsman’s commitment to improving the transparency of EU lobbying; stresses the importance of making the EU transparency register fully mandatory ~~and legally-binding in order to ensure full transparency of lobby~~for interest representatives and third parties and legally-binding ~~for~~on all EU institutions, and agencies ~~and third parties~~, in order to ensure greater transparency;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Stresses the importance of greatly improving the accuracy of data in the EU transparency register, including ~~the oblig~~information ~~for~~on law firms that lobby ~~to declare all their clients~~; underlines the need to make available all information on the influence of lobbyists free of charge, fully comprehensible and easily accessible to the public; believes that full transparency of the funding of all interest representatives must be ensured; calls for any organisation that breaks the revolving doors rules to be suspended from the Transparency register;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Marlene MIZZI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Calls on the Ombudsman to continue her work on strengthening ethics rules within the EU institutions in order to solve revolving door issues and to ensure the swift publication of the ~~names of all those EU officials involv~~cases assessed , and to guarantee full transparency on ~~all related inform~~the implementation of this obligation; looks forward to the Ombudsman’s analysis into how the Commission is implementing her guidelines and suggestions on how to improve the handling of revolving doors situations;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Calls on the Ombudsman to continue her work on strengthening ethics rules within the EU institutions in order to solve revolving door issues and to ensure the swift publication of the names of all those EU officials involved, and to guarantee full transparency on all related information; looks forward to the Ombudsman’s analysis into how the Commission is implementing her guidelines and suggestions on how to improve the handling of revolving doors situations including the possibility to adopt legislative rules for preventing and sanctioning such situations and possible abuses;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Marlene MIZZI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Strongly believes that stricter moral and ethical rules and standards need to be applied throughout the EU institutions with a view to securing respect for the duty of integrity and discretion, as well as full independence from the private sector; considers that these rules and standards could be based on a legislative act;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Michela GIUFFRIDA, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Reiterates its call on the Commission to guarantee proactive publication and full transparency with regard to the post-term-of-office occupations of former Commissioners; calls on the Commission to ensure that the Ethics Committee is fully ~~independent~~accountable and encourages the Ombudsman to continue to assess and report on any possible conflict of interest of the Ethics Committee’s members;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Highlights the need to adopt major improvements on conflict of interest rules for special advisers; calls on the Commission to fully implement the Ombudsman’s recommendations, by adopting ~~full~~a more transparencyt and a proactive approach to its assessment of any potential conflict of interests before and after their appointment, and ensuring that citizens have complete access to all the relevant information on special advisers;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Urges the Ombudsman to monitor the implementation of the recommendations for EU public officials on their interactions with interest representatives, and to continue to raise awareness of these recommendations among EU staff members throughout all the EU institutions, through educational training, seminars and related support measures;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Deeply regrets the delays accumulated by the Commission in connection with infringement procedures on the abuse of fixed-term contracts, which has ~~served to perpetuate~~allowed for the abuse and violation of workers’ rights in the Member States; calls on the Ombudsman to ~~step up her efforts on~~monitor this issue in order to safeguard citizens’ rights effectively;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Supports the Ombudsman’s role in shaping a proactive and transparent policy in all EU agencies; urges the Ombudsman to continue monitoring all EU agencies in order to ensure that they meet the highest standards of transparency and provide ~~full~~ public access to documents and information, with a particular focus on procedures and activities relating to the protection of human health;

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)

27a. Welcomes the Ombudsman’s annual conference with the European Network of Ombudsmen which took place in June 2017 dedicated to the fallout for citizens’ rights from Brexit and from increased ‘populism’ in Europe.

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2105(INI)

Andrea COZZOLINO, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 b (new)

27b. Welcomes the Ombudsman’s Award for Good administration that recognises efforts among the EU civil service in finding innovative ways of implementing citizen-friendly policies.

2018/09/07
Committee: PETI

2018/2104(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas the number of petitions received was modest in relation to the total population of the EU; whereas this indicates that a portion of EU citizens make use of the right to petition; whereas however, more needs to be done to promote the right to petition the European Parliament;

2018/10/01
Committee: PETI

2018/2104(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marlene MIZZI, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Andrea COZZOLINO, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas petitions are a useful ~~source of information with regard to~~tools for detecting breaches of EU law and enable Parliament and other EU institutions to assess the transposition and application of EU law and its impact on EU citizens and residents;

2018/10/01
Committee: PETI

2018/2104(INI)

Andrea COZZOLINO, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Recital L

L. whereas petitions often provide useful information in various EU policy areas to other parliamentary committees, also in relation to their legislative activities; whereas fulfilling the fundamental right to petition through an adequate treatment of petitions is a responsibility of the Parliament as a whole;

2018/10/01
Committee: PETI

2018/2104(INI)

Andrea COZZOLINO, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Recital M

M. whereas each petition ishould be carefully assessed and dealt with; whereas the petitioner has the right to receive information on the decision on admissibility taken by the Committee that addresses their issue fully within a reasonable period of time;

2018/10/01
Committee: PETI

2018/2104(INI)

Andrea COZZOLINO, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Recital P

P. whereas the main subjects of concern raised in petitions in 2017 pertained to environmental matters (notably issues concerning water and waste management, and preservation), fundamental rights (notably voting rights and rights of the child), the issue of the stolen babies, free movement of persons, social affairs (working conditions), various forms of discrimination and immigration, in addition to many other areas of activity;

2018/10/01
Committee: PETI

2018/2104(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marlene MIZZI, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Andrea COZZOLINO, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Motion for a resolution
Recital T

T. whereas the Committee on Petitions considers the European Citizens’ Initiative an i~~mportant instrument~~nstrument of utmost importance of direct and participatory democracy, enabling citizens to become actively involved in the framing of European policies and legislation;

2018/10/01
Committee: PETI

2018/2104(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marlene MIZZI, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Draws attention to the fundamental role of the Committee on Petitions as a bridge between EU citizens and the European institutions, through which EU citizens and residents can formally alert the European Parliament of cases of misapplication of EU law and bring their concerns and ideas to the attention of their elected representatives, thereby allowing for the timely examination and resolution of citizen requests wherever possible; Reminds the Commission that petitions offer a unique means to identify situations in which EU law is not upheld and to investigate such situations by means of the political scrutiny of the European Parliament;

2018/10/01
Committee: PETI

2018/2104(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marlene MIZZI, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Andrea COZZOLINO, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Points out that petitions constitute both an opportunity and a challenge for Parliament and other EU institutions to reconnect with EU citizens and to maintain dialogue with them, particularly if they are affected by the application of EU law and seek an effective and efficient redress mechanism;

2018/10/01
Committee: PETI

2018/2104(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marlene MIZZI, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses the importance of a continuous public debate about the competences of the EU, its limits and its future in order to ensure that citizens are well informed about the levels at which decisions are taken and to prevent the "blame Brussels" phenomenon used by some irresponsible Member States; considers that a broader public debate about the EU and everyday media reporting would reduce the number of inadmissible petitions, as citizens would be better aware of the competences of the EU; emphasises that the subject matter of an inadmissible petition can play an important role for policymaking even though it falls outside the scope of the Committee;

2018/10/01
Committee: PETI

2018/2104(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marlene MIZZI, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Andrea COZZOLINO, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses the need for enhanced cooperation between the Commission and other EU institutions with Member States’ national, regional and local authorities on inquiries regarding the implementation of and compliance with EU law; underlines the need for more active cooperation with Member States’ representatives at committee meetings and for swifter follow- up on requests sent from the Committee; calls therefore for a strong commitment from all the authorities involved at national and European levels in handling and resolving petitions as a matter of priority;

2018/10/01
Committee: PETI

2018/2104(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marlene MIZZI, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Urges the Commission to use properly its powers stemming from its role as Guardian of the Treaties as such a role is of utmost importance in the functioning of the EU with regard to citizens and to European legislators; calls for a timely handling of infringement procedures in order to put an end, without delay, to situations where EU law is not respected;

2018/10/01
Committee: PETI

2018/2104(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marlene MIZZI, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Andrea COZZOLINO, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Repeats its call on the Commission for regular information on developments with regard to ongoing infringement procedures; welcomes the centralised platform created by the Commission in 2014 on which infringement decisions are published1 ; demands access to the relevant Commission documents on infringements, and to EU pilot procedures pertaining to petitions, especially when they were fully or partly opened on the basis of petitions; asks the Commission to receive, on a systematic basis, the documents exchanged in the course of EU pilot and infringement procedures once these are closed in application of the jurisprudence of the European Court of justice; _________________ 1 http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/applying-eu- law/infringements- proceedings/infringement_decisions/?lang_ code=en

2018/10/01
Committee: PETI

2018/2104(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marlene MIZZI, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Emphasises the role of protection of the Committee on Petitions within the EU framework of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities; points to a workshop on the Protection of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities that took place at the committee meeting on 12 October 2017, which included the presentation of a study on inclusive education; calls on the European institutions to lead by example on this subject and to ensure that national authorities are correctly implementing, without delay, the legislation adopted in this field;

2018/10/01
Committee: PETI

2018/2104(INI)

Andrea COZZOLINO, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Recognises the work done by the Working Group on Child Welfare Issues, and takes note of its final report and recommendations adopted on 3 May 2017; calls on the EU institutions and the Member States to promote cross- border cooperation on family matters, by providing training for judges and professionals, information on legal aid and bilingual lawyers;

2018/10/01
Committee: PETI

2018/2104(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marlene MIZZI, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Andrea COZZOLINO, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20 a. Stresses the important role of the SOLVIT network, which provides a means for citizens and enterprises to address concerns about possible breaches of EU law by public authorities in other Member States; calls on the Commission, and on the Member States, to promote SOLVIT in order to make it more helpful and visible to citizens; welcomes, in this regard, the Action Plan to reinforce the SOLVIT network published by the Commission in May 2017; calls on the Commission to report back to the European Parliament on the results of the Action plan to reinforce the SOLVIT network published by the Commission in May 2017;

2018/10/01
Committee: PETI

2018/2104(INI)

Andrea COZZOLINO, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21 a. Calls for a more focused and active press and communication service and a more active social media presence, making the work of the Committee more responsive to public concerns;

2018/10/01
Committee: PETI

2018/2103(INI)

Sylvie GUILLAUME, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Cécile Kashetu KYENGE, Ana GOMES, Christine REVAULT D'ALLONNES BONNEFOY, Miltiadis KYRKOS, Emilian PAVEL, Péter NIEDERMÜLLER, Tanja FAJON, Sylvia-Yvonne KAUFMANN, Caterina CHINNICI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Underlines the fact that whistle- blowing is an essential element in investigative journalism and press freedom~~, and~~; denounces the threats, retaliations and condemnations that whistle-blowers still face in the EU; in this context, recalls its resolution of 24 October 2017 on legitimate measures to protect whistle-blowers acting in the public interest when disclosing the confidential information of companies and public bodies3; points out that, according to the Communication from the Commission on Strengthening whistle-blowers protection at EU level in April 2018, only ten Member States have introduced comprehensive legislation to protect whistle-blowers; welcomes the Commission’s proposal for a horizontal Directive on the protection of persons reporting on breaches of Union law, and calls on co-legislators to swiftly pursue and end negotiations in that regard; __________________ 3 Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0402.

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2089(INI)

Lucy ANDERSON, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses, however, that while autonomous vehicles may revolutionise the transport sector, the technologies currently available on the market present vulnerabilities that could become serious threats for users, other vehicles or pedestrians; urges the automobile industry to take responsibility for the safety and security of drivers and passengers with measures targeted at the entire supply chain.

2018/09/06
Committee: IMCO

2018/2089(INI)

Lucy ANDERSON, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Points out that while the deployment of connected and automated mobility canould contribute to road safety, help to reduce road fatalities to zero in Europe by 2050, and favour lower emissions, social inclusion and overall transport efficiency~~; stresses that~~, societal acceptance will be achieved only if autonomous vehicles can offer the highest safety and security standards, a~~re guaranteed;~~s well as more and better travel options, which are affordable and environmentally-friendly.

2018/09/06
Committee: IMCO

2018/2089(INI)

Lucy ANDERSON, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Recalls that technological innovations cannot solve, in isolation, environmental issues, and that studies have shown that autonomous driving could make congestion and pollution worse; calls on authorities to develop policies that will ensure that autonomous vehicles will increase and improve travel options for all citizens, without negatively affecting the demand for and investments in public transport.

2018/09/06
Committee: IMCO

2018/2089(INI)

Lucy ANDERSON, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Underlines that autonomous vehicles are technologically complex and differ substantially from current motor vehicles on the road; for legal certainty, better safeguards of consumer rights and to prevent that unknown risks are borne by injured parties, it is necessary to have a review of the current EU legislative framework for liability rules and insurance for autonomous vehicles, addressing the limitations of laws as regards the shift in responsibility to the introduction of new rules for covering new types of risks.

2018/09/06
Committee: IMCO

2018/2089(INI)

Lucy ANDERSON, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Arndt KOHN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Urges all stakeholders, including vehicle manufacturers, component suppliers and software and design services, as well as Members States and authorities involved to cooperate in fostering innovation, in ensuring investment in infrastructure fit for automated mobility, both on highways and on city roads, and in facilitating cross- border testing.

2018/09/06
Committee: IMCO

2018/2089(INI)

Lucy ANDERSON, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Warns that autonomous driving threatens to disrupt the job opportunities and lives of millions of workers in the transport sector, without also creating significant numbers of secure and quality jobs through innovation and new technology; recalls that the anticipated savings in labour costs should not be a pretext for a reduction in workers’ rights, pay, conditions and safety.

2018/09/06
Committee: IMCO

2018/2080(INI)

Recital 7

(7) Whereas it is for the European Parliament to appoint the Ombudsman at the beginning of its mandate and for the duration thereof, choosing him from among persons who are Union citizens and offer every requisite guarantee of independence and competence and shall not have held a political function at national ministerial level or within the European institutions;

2018/10/19
Committee: PETI

2018/2080(INI)

Article 1 – paragraph 3

3. The Ombudsman may not intervene in cases before national courts or question the soundness of a court's ruling.

2018/10/19
Committee: PETI

2018/2080(INI)

Article 1 – paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. In cases falling within its duties, the Ombudsman may intervene in cases before the Court of Justice of the European Union in accordance with article 40 of the statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

2018/10/19
Committee: PETI

2018/2080(INI)

Article 2 – paragraph 9a (new)

9a. The Ombudsman may be subject to an action for failure to act in accordance with Article 265 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU.

2018/10/19
Committee: PETI

2018/2080(INI)

Article 3 – paragraph 2

2. The ~~Community~~Union institutions and bodies shall be obliged to supply the Ombudsman with any information ~~he has~~ requested from them and ~~give him~~provide access to the files concerned. Access to classified information or documents, in particular to sensitive documents within the meaning of Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, shall be subject to compliance with the rules on security of the ~~Community~~Union institution or body concerned. The institutions or bodies supplying classified information or documents as mentioned in the previous subparagraph shall inform the Ombudsman of such classification in advance. For the implementation of the rules provided for in the first subparagraph, the Ombudsman shall have agreed in advance with the institution or body concerned the conditions for treatment of classified information or documents and other information covered by the obligation of professional secrecy. The institutions or bodies concerned shall give access to documents originating in a Member State and classed as secret by law or regulation only where that Member State has given its prior agreement. They shall give access to other documents originating in a Member State after having informed the Member State concerned. In both cases, in accordance with Article 4, the Ombudsman ~~may not divulge the content of such documents~~has to observe a strict application of Regulation 1049/2001. Officials and other servants of Community institutions and bodies must testify at the request of the Ombudsman; they shall continue to be bound by the relevant rules of the Staff Regulations, notably their duty of professional secrecy.

2018/10/19
Committee: PETI

2018/2080(INI)

Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Where appropriate the Ombudsman may be requested to appear before the responsible committee of the Parliament in relation to the Ombudsman’s duties. When this request concerns an on-going inquiry, the institution concerned may be requested to appear together with the Ombudsman.

2018/10/19
Committee: PETI

2018/2080(INI)

Article 4 – paragraph 1

1. ~~The Ombudsman and his staff, to whom~~ Article ~~287~~339 of the Treaty ~~establishing~~on the Functioning of the European ~~Comm~~unityon and Article 194 of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community shall apply, shall be required not to divulge information or documents which they obtain in the course of their inquiries. They shall, in particular, be required not to divulge any classified information or any document supplied to the Ombudsman, in particula to the Ombudsman and his staff. The Ombudsman and his staff shall strictly apply Regulation 1049/2001 on information or documents which they obtain in the course of their inquiries. Particular attention is required for the treatment of classified or sensitive documents within the meaning of Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, or documents falling within the scope of Community legislation regarding the protection of personal data, as well as any information which could harm the person lodging the complaint or any other person involved, without prejudice to paragraph 2.

2018/10/19
Committee: PETI

2018/2080(INI)

Article 4a

The Ombudsman and his staff shall The Ombudsman and his staff shall deal with requests for public access to documents~~, other than those referred to in Article 4(1),~~ in accordance with the conditions and limits provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001. With regard to complaints on the right of public access to official documents, the Ombudsman shall issue, following due analysis and all necessary consideration, a recommendation concerning the release of the said documents to the concerned institution. If the concerned institution does not follow the recommendation to divulge the said documents, it must duly motivate its refusal. This refusal may be referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union by the Ombudsman.

2018/10/19
Committee: PETI

2018/2080(INI)

Article 4a (new)

4a. Where appropriate, the Ombudsman may demand that the Court of Justice of the European Union applies the accelerated procedure provided in its rules of procedures.

2018/10/19
Committee: PETI

2018/2080(INI)

Article 5a (new)

5a. The Ombudsman shall conduct regular assessments of the whistleblowing policies and procedures in place in the relevant EU institutions, bodies and agencies in accordance with Article 22 of the Staff Regulations. The Ombudsman may formulate appropriate recommendations for improvement. Potential whistle-blowers may contact the Ombudsman in order to obtain information on the scope of application of the relevant provisions in the Union’s legislation. This advice shall be impartial and confidential.

2018/10/19
Committee: PETI

2018/2080(INI)

Article 6 – paragraph 2

2. The Ombudsman shall be chosen from among persons who are Union citizens, have full civil and political rights, offer every guarantee of independence, shall have not held a political function at national ministerial level or within the European institutions and meet the conditions required for the exercise of the highest judicial office in their country or have the acknowledgement competence and experience to undertake the duties of Ombudsman.

2018/10/19
Committee: PETI

2018/2056(INI)

Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Nicola DANTI

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas most of the goods and services are supplied and provided in the internal market between economic agents or between economic agents and public authorities through deferred payments, in a way that the supplier grants its client a payment term of the invoice, according to what is agreed between parties, what is established in the supplier's invoice or in the legal provisions;

2018/10/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/2056(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas small and medium-sized companies are especially affected by default, negatively influencing their liquidity, complicating their financial management and affecting their competitiveness and profitability;

2018/10/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/2056(INI)

Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Recital P

P. whereas problems leading to late payment must be addressed through a combination of legal and voluntary measures, with targeted interventions involving the Commission, Member States and business associations; whereas it must legally define which is a blatantly abusive situation; whereas such a combination would include preventive measures targeting issues arising before a transaction takes place and remedial solutions addressing issues after a transaction has been completed; whereas any intervention, whether regulatory or voluntary, should take into account the specificities of the economic sector concerned;

2018/10/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/2056(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses the importance of providing entrepreneurs, in particular SMEs, with more information and education on credit and invoice management; recalls that effective credit management shortens the average collection period and maintains an optimal cash flow, thus reducing the risk of default and increasing the potential for growth; believes that training and support may also make SMEs more likely to take advantage of Late Payment Directive remedies; notes that ~~SMEs unfortunately often lack the capacity to invest in training and that~~ there are currently no programmes at EU or national level focusing on enhancing businesses’ knowledge of credit and invoice management; believes that more EU funds should ~~possibly~~ be directed towards the financial education of SMEs;

2018/10/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/2056(INI)

Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Nicola DANTI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Urges all public administrations of Member States to carry out the appropriate legislative reforms to ensure payment traceability regarding subcontracting carried out by companies that have been awarded public works or services so that the main contractor is obliged to pay the subcontractors the agreed price in a term not superior to thirty calendar days from the partial or total payment on the part of the public administration, being unable to establish greater terms;

2018/10/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/2056(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Calls on the Member States to improve their legislation ~~and~~, to promote the implementation of the Late Payment Directive in all its parts, being transparent and assuming responsibility in the exercise of payment on the part of the public administration;

2018/10/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/2056(INI)

Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Nicola DANTI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to foster ‘a decisive shift towards a culture of prompt payment’12 by taking the most appropriate measures, including, where necessary, legislative initiatives, taking into account the abovementioned proposals~~; _________________ 12~~, creating a reliable business environment for companies and a punctual payment culture; _________________ 12 Recital 12 of Directive 2011/7/EU. Recital 12 of Directive 2011/7/EU.

2018/10/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0332(COD)

Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI

Proposal for a directive
–

The Committee on Legal Affairs calls on the Committee on Transport and Tourism, as the committee responsible, to propose rejection of the Commission proposal.

2019/02/05
Committee: JURI

2018/0332(COD)

Proposal for a directive
–

The Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection calls on the Committee on Transport and Tourism, as the committee responsible, to propose rejection of the Commission proposal.

2018/12/19
Committee: IMCO

2018/0332(COD)

Christine REVAULT D'ALLONNES BONNEFOY, Isabella DE MONTE, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Proposal for a directive
–

The European Parliament rejects the Commission proposal.

2019/01/29
Committee: TRAN

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2

(2) The Fund would contribute to the establishment of a strong, competitive and innovative defence industrial and technological base and go hand in hand with the Union's initiatives towards a more integrated European Defence Market and in particular, the two Directives6 on procurement and on EU transfers in the defence sector adopted in 2009. In all cases, the requirements of Directive 2009/81/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council1a should be respected in full, including the transparency and non-discrimination principles, and exceptions should be allowed only within the strict framework of that Directive. _________________ 6 Directive 2009/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, simplifying terms and conditions of transfers of defence-related products within the Community, OJ L 146, 10.6.2009, p. 1; Directive 2009/81/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the coordination of procedures for the award of certain works contracts, supply contracts and service contracts by contracting authorities or entities in the fields of defence and security, OJ L 216, 20.8.2009, p. 76.

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3

(3) Following an integrated approach and in order to contribute to the enhancement of the competitiveness and innovation capacity of the Union's defence industry, a European Defence Fund should be established. The Fund should aim at enhancing the competitiveness, innovation, efficiency ~~and~~, environmental performance and technological and industrial autonomy of the Union's defence industry thereby contributing to the Union's strategic autonomy by supporting the cross border cooperation between Member States and between enterprises, research centres, national administrations, international organisations and universities, in the research phase and in the development phase of defence products and technologies. To achieve more innovative solutions and an open internal market, the Fund should support the cross-border participation of defence small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) and middle capitalisation companies (mid-caps).

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8

(8) The difficulty to agree on consolidated defence capability requirements and common technical specifications or standards hampers cross- border collaboration between Member States and between legal entities based in different Member States. The absence of such requirements, specifications and standards has led to increased fragmentation of the defence sector, technical complexity, delays and inflated costs as well as decreased interoperability. The agreement on common technical specifications should be a prerequisite for actions involving a higher level of technological readiness. Activities of Member States leading to common defence capability requirements and supporting studies as well as actions aiming at supporting the creation of a common definition of technical specifications or standards should also be eligible for support by the Fund, in order to reinforce a more integrated internal market and efficiency in the defence industry.

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

(13) In certain circumstances, if this is necessary for achieving the objectives of the action, it should be possible to derogate from the principle that recipients and their subcontractors should not be subject to control by non-associated third countries or non-associated third country entities. In that perspective, legal entities established in the Union that are controlled by a non- associated third country or a non- associated third country entity can be eligible if relevant and strict conditions relating to the security and defence interests of the Union and its Member States are fulfilled. The participation of such entities should not contravene the objectives of the Fund. Applicants should provide all relevant information about the infrastructure, facilities, assets and resources to be used in the action and demonstrate that their input could not be brought by European entities.

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)

(13 a) The Fund should support industry best practice in corporate governance and procurement practices. This should include the possibility for confidential whistleblowing in accordance with European standards and with procedures in place to prevent retaliation. The award procedure should reflect these corporate governance standards with the goal of raising corporate accountability standards in the European defence sector.

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33

(33) In order to support an open internal market, participation of cross-border SMEs and mid-caps, either as members of consortia or as subcontractors~~, should be encouraged.~~ is of crucial importance

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42

(42) As the Fund supports only the research and development phases of defence products and technologies, in principle the Union should not have ownership or intellectual property rights (IPRs) over the products or technologies resulting from the funded actions unless the Union assistance is provided through procurement. However, for research actions, interested Member States and associated countries should have the possibility to use the results of funded actions and participate in follow-up cooperative development and therefore derogations to that principle should be allowed. Technological products developed or manufactured with the help of this European fund may not be the subject of a transfer of technology or any intellectual property right for the benefit of a third State outside the European Union that is not an associated country, or for the benefit of any economic actor that is not controlled by a Member State.

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a

(a) support collaborative research projects that could significantly boost the performance of future European capabilities, aiming at maximising innovation and introducing new defence products and technologies, including disruptive ones;

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1

1. The financial envelope for the implementation of the European Defence Fund for the period 2021 – 2027 shall be EUR 1~~3 000~~1 453 000 000 in c~~urre~~onstant prices.

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

(a) up to EUR ~~4 100 0~~3 612 100 000 for research actions (constant prices);

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b

(b) up to EUR ~~8 90~~7 840 0900 000 for development actions (constant prices).

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3

3. The amount referred to in paragraph 1 may be used for technical and administrative assistance for the implementation of the Fund, such as preparatory, monitoring, control, audit and evaluation activities including corporate information technology systems. This amount shall not exceed 5% of the value of the financial envelope referred in paragraph 1.

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1

1. Actions carried out under the Fund shall comply with ethical principles and relevant national, Union and international legislation, notably the Arms Trade Treaty which was ratified by all the EU Member- States.

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2

2. Proposals shall be systematically screened to identify those actions raising complex or serious ethics issues and submit them to an ethics assessment. Ethics screenings and assessments shall be carried out by the Commission with the support of independent representative experts on defence ethics. The Commission shall ensure the transparency of the ethics procedures ~~as much as possible~~.

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4

4. ~~If appropriate, e~~Ethics checks shall be carried out ~~by the Commission~~ during the implementation of the action~~. For serious or complex ethics issues, th~~, at the Commission's discretion or upon request of the European Parliament. Those checks shall be carried out by the Commission with the support of experts on defence ethics.

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 5

5. Actions which are not ethically acceptable ~~may~~shall not be eligible. In case of an ethical incompatibility is detected, the action shall be rejected or terminated at any time.

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2

2. The Fund may provide funding in any of the forms laid down in the Financial Regulation, in particular grants, prizes and procurement, in full respect of the requirements of Directive 2009/81/EC on defence and security procurement. It may also provide financing in the form of financial instruments within blending operations.

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1

1. Applicants and their subcontractors shall be eligible for funding provided that they are established in the Union or in an associated country, have their executive management structures in the Union or in an associated country and are not controlled by a non-associated third country or by a non-associated third country entity. They shall demonstrate to the Commission that they have robust corporate governance standards including whistleblowing channels operated in accordance with the European standard and European law.

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)

(c a) the non-associated third country or third country entity provides a technological and/or industrial input which could not be supplied by a European entity.

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4

4. By derogation from the paragraph 3 and where appropriate beneficiaries and subcontractors involved in the action may use their assets, infrastructure, facilities and resources located or held on the territory of a non- associated third country if this is strictly necessary for achieving the objectives of an action and provided that this will not ~~put at risk~~contravene the security and defence interests of the Union and its Member States as established in the framework of Common Foreign and Security Policy in accordance with Title V of the TEU. Under the same conditions, when performing an eligible action, beneficiaries and their subcontractors may cooperate with an entity established in a non- associated third country. The costs related to the use of such infrastructure, facilities, assets or resources and to such cooperation shall not be eligible under the Fund. Technological products developed or manufactured with the help of this European fund may not be the subject of a transfer of technology or any intellectual property right for the benefit of a third State outside the European Union, or for the benefit of any economic actor that is not controlled by a Member State.

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – point i

(i) the development of technologies or assets increasing efficiency and reducing the environmental impact across the life cycle of defence products and technologies;

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4

4. ~~Unless otherwise provided for in the work programme referred to in Article 27, t~~The action shall be undertaken in a cooperation of at least three legal entities which are established in at least three different Member States and/or associated countries. At least three of these eligible entities established in at least two Member States and/or associated countries shall not, during the whole implementation of the action, be effectively controlled, directly or indirectly, by the same entity, and shall not control each other.

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Actions for the development of products and technologies which could serve the following purposes shall not be eligible: (i) commit or facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law; (ii) commit or facilitate a serious violation of international human rights law; (iii) commit or facilitate an act constituting an offense under international conventions or protocols relating to terrorism ; (iv) commit or facilitate an act constituting an offense under international conventions or protocols relating to transnational organized crime.

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) contribution to the competitiveness of the European defence industry as well as contribution to the reinforcing of the single market for defence, in particular by creating new market opportunities and accelerating the growth of companies throughout the Union;

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

(c a) contribution to the industrial autonomy of the European defence industry by enhancing defence technologies or products in line with defence capability priorities agreed by Member States within the framework of the Common Foreign and Security Policy;

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0254(COD)

Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2

2. Independent experts shall be Union's citizens identified and selected on the basis of calls for expressions of interest addressed to relevant organisations such as Ministries of Defence and subordinated agencies, research institutes, non- governmental organisations, universities, business associations or enterprises of the defence sector with a view to establishing a list of experts. ~~By derogation from Article [237] of the Financial Regulation, this list shall not be made public.~~

2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2

(2) The internal market has to continuously adapt to a rapidly changing environment of digital revolution and globalisation. A new era of digital innovation continues to provide opportunities for businesses and individuals, creates new products and business models but equally constitutes a challenge to regulation and enforcement and safety of consumers.

2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO

2018/0231(COD)

Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) Public procurement is used by public authorities to ensure value for public money spent and to contribute to a more innovative, sustainable, inclusive and competitive internal market, including by applying criteria other than simply the lowest price or cost effectiveness, taking into account qualitative, environmental and/or social aspects. Directive 2014/23/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council49 , Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council50 and Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council51 provide the legal framework for the integration and effective functioning of the public procurement markets representing 14% of Union’s gross domestic product, to the benefit of public authorities, businesses as well as citizens, including consumers. The Programme should therefore support measures to ensure a wider uptake of strategic public procurement, the professionalisation of public buyers, to facilitate and improved access to procurement markets for SMEs and microenterprises, in particular through advisory services and training, increase of transparency, integrity and better data, boosting the digital transformation of procurement and promotion of joint procurement, through strengthening a partnership approach with the Member States, improving data gathering and data analysis including through development of dedicated IT tools, supporting exchange of experiences and good practices, referencing European and international standards, providing guidance, pursuing beneficial trade agreements, strengthening cooperation among national authorities and launching pilot projects. _________________ 49 Directive 2014/23/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on the award of concession contracts (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 1). 50 Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 65). 51 Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EC (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 243).

2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO

2018/0231(COD)

Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30

(30) European standards play an important role in the internal market. They are of vital interest for the competitiveness of undertakings, and especially SMEs. They are also a crucial tool to support Union legislation and policies in a number of key areas such as energy, climate change, information and communication technology, sustainable use of resources, innovation, product safety, consumer protection, worker's safety and working conditions and ageing population, thus positively contributing to the society as a whole. However, experience has shown that improvement is needed regarding the speed and timeliness in the elaboration of standards and more efforts should be done in order to include weaker stakeholders representing consumers, environment and workers' interests.

2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO

2018/0231(COD)

Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44

(44) A high level of health protection through the food supply chain is necessary to allow the internal market to operate efficiently and smoothly. A safe and sustainable food supply chain is a prerequisite for society and for the internal market. Cross border health crises and food scares disrupt the functioning of the internal market by limiting the movements of persons and goods and disrupting production. It is of utmost importance to prevent cross border health crises and food scares; therefore, the Programme should support concrete actions, such as establishing emergency measures in the event of crisis situations and unforeseeable events affecting animal and plant health.

2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO

2018/0231(COD)

Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47

(47) OIn view of an increasingly globalised food chain, official controls carried out by the Member States are now more than ever an essential tool for verifying and monitoring that relevant Union requirements are being implemented, complied with and enforced, especially as regards imported food products. The effectiveness and efficiency of official control systems is vital for maintaining a high level of safety for humans, animals and plants along the food chain, as well as consumer confidence, whilst ensuring a high level of protection of the environment and of animal welfare. Union financial support should be made available for such control measures. In particular, a financial contribution should be available to Union reference laboratories in order to help them bear the costs arising from the implementation of work programmes approved by the Commission. Moreover, since the effectiveness of official controls also depends on the availability to the control authorities of well trained staff with an appropriate knowledge of Union law, the Union should be able to contribute to their training and relevant exchange programmes organised by competent authorities.

2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO

2018/0231(COD)

Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point e

(e) contributing to a high level of health for humans, animals and plants along the food chain and in related areas, including by preventing and eradicating diseases and pests, also by means of emergency measures in the event of large- scale crisis situations and unforeseeable events affecting animal or plant health, and to support the improvement of the welfare of animals as well as a sustainable food production and consumption;

2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO

2018/0231(COD)

Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1

1. The financial envelope for the implementation of the Programme for the period 2021 to 2027 shall be EUR ~~4 088 58~~6 563 000 000 in current prices.

2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO

2018/0231(COD)

Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a

(a) EUR ~~1 000~~3 122 000 000 to the objective referred to in Article 3(2)(b);

2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO

2018/0231(COD)

Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b

(b) EUR 1898 000 000 to the objective referred to in Article 3(2)(d)~~(i)~~;

2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO

2018/0231(COD)

Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)

(da) EUR 394 590 000 to the objective referred to in Article 3(2)(a)(i);

2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO

2018/0231(COD)

Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point d b (new)

(db) EUR 220 510 000 to the objective referred to in Article 3(2)(c)

2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO

2018/0231(COD)

Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) for actions in the area of market surveillance implementing the specific objective referred to in Article 3(2)(a)(ii) of this Regulation, the market surveillance authorities of the Member States as referred to in Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 and Article 11 of [Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down rules and procedures for compliance with and enforcement of Union harmonisation legislation on products]97 ; _________________ 97 COM(2017) 795 final

2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO

2018/0231(COD)

Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) for actions in the area accreditation and market surveillance implementing the specific objective referred to in Article 3(2)(a)(ii) of this Regulation, the body recognised under Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 to carry out the activities referred to in Article 32 of Regulation (EC) No 765/2008;

2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO

2018/0231(COD)

Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1

1. For actions implementing the specific objective referred to in Article 3(2)(a)(ii) of this Regulation with reference to market surveillance authorities of the Member States and of the third countries associated to the Programme and with reference to Union testing facilities as referred to in Article 20 of [Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down rules and procedures for compliance with and enforcement of Union harmonisation legislation on products], the Programme may finance up to 100% of eligible costs of an action, provided that the co-financing principle as defined in the Financial Regulation is not infringed.

2018/11/13
Committee: IMCO

2018/0208(COD)

Sylvia-Yvonne KAUFMANN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Caterina CHINNICI, Jytte GUTELAND

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14

(14) Pursuant to Article 67 TFEU, the Union should constitute an area of freedom, security and justice with respect for fundamental rights, to which access to justice is instrumental. In order to facilitate effective access to justice, and with a view to foster the mutual trust which is indispensable for the good functioning of the area of freedom, security and justice, it is necessary to extend financial support to activities of other authorities than judicial authorities and legal practitioners, as well as of civil society organisations, which contribute to these objectives. Support should be given, in particular, to activities which facilitate effective and equal access to justice for persons at risk, namely women, children, persons with disabilities, LGBTI people and migrants, irrespective of their residence status.

2018/12/07
Committee: JURI LIBE

2018/0208(COD)

Sylvia-Yvonne KAUFMANN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Caterina CHINNICI, Jytte GUTELAND

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) Pursuant to Articles 8 and 10 TFEU, the Programme should also support the mainstreaming of gender equality ~~between women and men~~ and non-discrimination objectives in all its activities.

2018/12/07
Committee: JURI LIBE

2018/0208(COD)

Sylvia-Yvonne KAUFMANN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Caterina CHINNICI, Jytte GUTELAND

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 a (new)

(16 a) As highlighted by the European Parliament's Report on the European Commission's 2017 Justice Scoreboard, there are still significant gender balance disparities among the Member States' judiciary and judicial staff, particularly (but not exclusively) in relation to the following aspects: proportion of female judges in higher levels of the judiciary, transparency in appointments, reconciliation between work and non- work responsibilities and the existence of mentoring practices. The Programme should therefore support training activities seeking to address those disparities. These activities may, for instance, be tailored for female professionals within Member States' judiciary and judicial staff or, where adequate, target both female and male professionals, in an effort to raise awareness among all relevant staff.

2018/12/07
Committee: JURI LIBE

2018/0208(COD)

Sylvia-Yvonne KAUFMANN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Caterina CHINNICI, Jytte GUTELAND

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1

1. ‘Judiciary and judicial staff’ means judges, prosecutors and court staff, as well as other justice professionals associated with the judiciary, such as lawyers, legal experts working for civil society organisations, notaries, bailiffs or enforcement officers, insolvency practitioners, mediators, court interpreters and translators, court experts, prison staff and probation officers.

2018/12/07
Committee: JURI LIBE

2018/0208(COD)

Sylvia-Yvonne KAUFMANN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Caterina CHINNICI, Jytte GUTELAND

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1

1. Indicators to report on progress of the Programme towards the achievement of the specific objectives set out in Article 3 are set out in Annex II. The data collected for monitoring and reporting shall, where applicable, be disaggregated by gender, age and staff category.

2018/12/07
Committee: JURI LIBE

2018/0208(COD)

Sylvia-Yvonne KAUFMANN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Caterina CHINNICI, Jytte GUTELAND

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3

3. The performance reporting system shall ensure that data for monitoring programme implementation and results are collected efficiently, effectively, and in a timely manner. To that end, proportionate reporting requirements shall be imposed on recipients of Union funds and Member States. The Commission shall make available user-friendly formats and provide orientation and support, in particular to applicants and beneficiaries who may not have the adequate resources and staff to meet reporting requirements.

2018/12/07
Committee: JURI LIBE

2018/0208(COD)

Sylvia-Yvonne KAUFMANN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Caterina CHINNICI, Jytte GUTELAND

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 3

3. analytical and monitoring activities25 to improve the knowledge and understanding of potential obstacles to the smooth functioning of a European area of justice and to improve the implementation of Union law and policies in the Member States, including research on how to eliminate obstacles to an equal and effective access to justice for all; _________________ 25 These activities include for instance the collection of data and statistics; the development of common methodologies and, where appropriate, indicators or benchmarks; studies, researches, analyses and surveys; evaluations; impact assessment; the elaboration and publication of guides, reports and educational material.

2018/12/07
Committee: JURI LIBE

2018/0208(COD)

Sylvia-Yvonne KAUFMANN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Caterina CHINNICI, Jytte GUTELAND

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)

3 a. addressing gender balance disparities among the Member States' judiciary and judicial staff through training either tailored to female professionals (focusing, for instance, on aspects such as reconciliation between work and non-work responsibilities or mentoring practices) or targeting both female and male professionals (raising awareness on issues like the low proportion of female judges in higher levels of the judiciary or the need for transparency and objective criteria during appointment procedures).

2018/12/07
Committee: JURI LIBE

2018/0208(COD)

Sylvia-Yvonne KAUFMANN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Caterina CHINNICI, Jytte GUTELAND

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – paragraph 1 a (new)

capacity building and training of legal experts working for civil society organisations, that seek to promote effective access to justice for all and support of victims of crime, in particular persons at risk; fostering cooperation between these organisations and relevant national authorities.

2018/12/07
Committee: JURI LIBE

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)

(2a) Pursuant to the framework of Directive 96/53/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, enabling vehicles to have a new cab profile would contribute to improving road safety by reducing blind spots in the driver’s vision, and ought to help to save the lives of many vulnerable road users such as pedestrians or cyclists. Once improved safety requirements for longer cabs have been developed, consideration should be given to whether it is appropriate to apply them to vehicles which do not benefit from the length extension;

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Kerstin WESTPHAL, Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Nicola DANTI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)

(2a) Road safety in the European Union requires a coordinated policy at international level in the framework of the UNECE convention and especially in the working party 29 (WP.29) and an integrated approach at Union, national, regional and local level. It is therefore necessary to coordinate actions and measures taken by different authorities in key components of the road safety covering vehicles, driving behaviours and road signs and infrastructures;

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3

(3) Over the past decades, developments in vehicle safety have contributed significantly to the overall reduction in the number of road fatalities and severe injuries. However, these reductions have recently stalled in the Union due to various factors, such as structural and behavioural factors, and without new initiatives on general road safety, the safety effects of the current approach will no longer be able to off-set the effects of increasing traffic volumes. Therefore, the safety performance of vehicles needs to be further improved as part of an integrated road safety approach aiming at the Vision Zero goal of “no fatalities” and in order to protect ~~vulnerable~~all road users better, in particular vulnerable ones.

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Kerstin WESTPHAL

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3

(3) Over the past decades, developments in vehicle safety have contributed significantly to the overall reduction in the number of road fatalities and severe injuries. However, ~~these reductions have recently stalled in the Union due to various factors, such as structural and behavioural factors, and w~~25,300 people were killed in 2017 on EU roads, and at least 135,000 people are seriously injured every year on these same roads. Without new initiatives on general road safety, the safety effects of the current approach will no longer be able to off-set the effects of increasing traffic volumes. Therefore, the safety performance of vehicles needs to be further improved as part of an integrated road safety approach and in order to protect vulnerable road users better.

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)

(3a) As some of proposed measures require substantial road infrastructure interventions, including necessary investments, phased implementation strategy for these measures should be introduced. Considerations should be therefore given to requirements for accurate traffic sign recognition, in particular speed limits. The Commission should also assess a public support and level of user’s acceptance for those measures, and promote them through road traffic safety awareness campaigns.

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4

(4) Technical progress in the area of advanced vehicle safety systems substantially changes the conditions in the field of road transport and offers new possibilities for reducing casualty numbers. In order to minimise the number of fatalities and severe injuries, some of the relevant new technologies need to be introduced. Those systems that have proven to be fully developed in order to improve road safety significantly should be introduced on compulsory basis.

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4

(4) Technical progress in the area of advanced vehicle safety systems offers new possibilities for reducing casualty numbers. In order to minimise the number of fatalities and serious injuries, some of the relevant new technologies need to be introduced.

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4

(4) Technical progress in the area of advanced vehicle safety systems offers new possibilities for reducing casualty numbers. In order to minimise the number of fatalities, some of the relevant new and proven technologies need to be introduced.

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 b (new)

(4b) Vehicles of all categories will continue to be technically more complex and more demanding for maintenance and repairs in the near future. New technologies should therefore have a favourable cost-benefit ratio throughout the whole life cycle of the vehicle so to be affordable for all consumers and not increasing average age of the vehicle fleet on European roads.

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Kerstin WESTPHAL, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

(6) Intelligent speed assistance, lane- keeping systems, driver drowsiness and attention monitoring and distraction detection and reversing detection systems have a high potential to reduce casualty numbers considerably. The driver drowsiness and attention monitoring systems should work without any facial recognition. In addition, those systems are based on technologies which will be used for the deployment of connected and automated vehicles too. Therefore, harmonised rules and test procedures for the type-approval of vehicles as regards those systems and for the type-approval of those systems as separate technical units should be established at Union level.

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Kerstin WESTPHAL, Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Nicola DANTI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)

(6a) It is widely recognised that the safety belt is one of the most important and effective vehicle safety features. Safety-belt reminder systems therefore have the potential to further prevent fatalities or mitigate injuries by increasing the safety belt wearing rates across the Union. It is therefore necessary to make it compulsory to install intelligent safety- belt reminder systems for all front and rear seats of M1 and N1 vehicles and all front seats of N2, N3, M2 and M3 vehicles.

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 a (new)

(7a) The type-approval requirements concerning safety should be tested and ensured in the light of the specific performance standards with which all vehicles are to comply, regardless of vehicle segment.

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) Automated and connected vehicles may be able to make a huge contribution in reducing road fatalities since in the region of 90 per cent of road accidents are estimated to result from human error. As automated vehicles will gradually be taking over tasks of the driver, harmonised rules and technical requirements for automated vehicle systems should be adopted at Union level. These rules should be coordinated and promoted at international level in the framework of the UNECE WP.29.

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21 a (new)

(21a) The Commission should establish a Working Group so as to better inform and engage civil society stakeholders, industry and interested participants on the latest work at UNECE.

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 3

(3) ‘intelligent speed assistance’ means a system to aid the driver in observing the appropriate speed for the road environment by providing ~~haptic feedback through the accelerator pedal with~~ speed limit information obtained through observation of road signs and signals, based on infrastructure signals or electronic map data, or both, made available in-vehicle;

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Kerstin WESTPHAL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 6

~~(6) ‘advanced distraction recognition’ means a system capable of recognition of the level visual attention of the driver to the traffic situation and warning the driver if needed;~~deleted

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Nicola DANTI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 7

(7) ‘emergency stop signal’ means rapid flashing stop lamps or hazard lights to indicate to other road users to the rear of the vehicle that a high retardation force is being applied to the vehicle relative to the prevailing road conditions;

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Kerstin WESTPHAL, Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Nicola DANTI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 13 a (new)

(13a) ‘safety-belt reminder’, means a system dedicated to alert the driver when any of the occupants do not use the safety-belt. The system is constituted by a detection of an unfastened safety-belt and by two levels of driver’s alert: a first level warning and a second level warning;

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Kerstin WESTPHAL, Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Nicola DANTI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Manufacturers shall provide clear and comprehensive information in the owner’s manual about the existence of the systems introduced by this Regulation and how to use them.

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Kerstin WESTPHAL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d

~~(d) advanced distraction recognition;~~deleted

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Kerstin WESTPHAL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a

(a) it shall be possible for the driver to ~~feel through the accelerator pedal~~recognise that the applicable speed limit is reached or exceeded;

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

2. Vehicles of categories M1 and N1 shall be equipped with advanced emergency braking systems designed and fitted in twohree phases and providing for:

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)

(ba) warning of the presence or avoiding collision with vulnerable road users ahead of the motor vehicle in the third phase;

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Nicola DANTI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – introductory part

4. Advanced emergency braking systems ~~and~~, pedestrian and cyclist collision warning and emergency lane-keeping systems shall meet the following requirements in particular:

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – introductory part

4. Advanced emergency braking systems, pedestrian and cyclist collision warning and lane-keeping systems shall meet the following requirements in particular:

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – point a

(a) it shall be possible to switch off systems only one at a time, and only at standstill with the parking brake engaged, by a complex sequence of actions to be carried out by the driver. In case the systems are not fully operational, in particular due to shortcomings in road infrastructure, they shall deactivate themselves and give information about the deactivation to the driver. If they do not deactivate automatically, it shall be possible to switch them off manually in those cases. Such deactivation shall be temporary and shall last for period when the system is not fully operational only;

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Kerstin WESTPHAL, Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Nicola DANTI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. All seating positions of M1 and N1 categories of vehicles shall be equipped with safety-belt reminder.

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Kerstin WESTPHAL, Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Nicola DANTI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. The seating position of the driver of N2, N3, M2 and M3 categories of vehicles as well as the seating positions of the occupants of seats in the same row as the driver seat of N2, N3, M2 and M3 categories of vehicles shall be equipped with a safety-belt reminder.

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0145(COD)

Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Kerstin WESTPHAL, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 a (new)

Article 14a Reporting and review 1. By 31 March 2021, the Commission shall prepare and submit an evaluation report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the following issues: (a) technical feasibility and road infrastructure readiness, including traffic sign recognition; (b) users’ acceptance analysis. Member States, regardless of their relative population or geographical location, shall be proportionally represented in the data collected. 2. The Commission shall assess whether the scope of this Regulation should be extended to other potential safety technologies and measures, in particular intelligent speed assistance system that would provide driver with a haptic feedback through the accelerator pedal and advanced distraction recognition. If appropriate, the Commission shall present a legislative proposal to that effect.

2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO

2018/0112(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)

(3a) In the same vein, operating system providers (including device manufacturers when they customise the operating system developed by a third party) now play a critical role as an intermediary between content providers and consumers. The main purpose of an operating system is to control the basic functions of a device and enable the user to make use of such a device and run application software on it. However, beyond the strict core functionalities of a device, operating systems are usually proposed with a set of accessory by- default application software in order to offer the consumer a turnkey device. This can shape deeply the choice of applications used by consumers later on since it can create a status quo bias. Moreover, operating systems also handle the way those applications can be run on the device (e.g. shutting down software application programs running in the background when they wear down the battery, managing the memory allocations for these software application programs, etc.). As such, operating systems also act as a key platform between application developers and consumers. As operating system providers are often vertically integrated with application developers, issues can arise notably regarding the possibility of a differentiated treatment between native and third-party applications; this differentiated treatment can for example be of a technical or a contractual nature. Increasing transparency would help prevent unfair commercial behaviours.

2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO

2018/0112(COD)

Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Maria GRAPINI, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)

(4a) It is important to note that the term “business users”, and by extension the scope of this Regulation, should also cover individuals working or providing services by personally performing work via online platforms. This is not only about SMEs but also about people who may be categorised as independent economic entities or self-employed. Due to the rising number of individuals employed in this way in the economy it is vital that they are also covered and able to rely on the possibility of seeking redress. They should have the right to participation in the process of setting prices and working conditions by platforms as they are vulnerable to arbitrary delisting, a lack of access to personal data and discrimination.

2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO

2018/0112(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5

(5) Online intermediation services, operating systems and online search engines, as well as the commercial transactions facilitated by those services, have an intrinsic cross- border potential and are of particular importance for the proper functioning of the Union’s internal market in today’s economy. The potentially unfair and harmful trading practices of certain providers of those services in respect of business users and corporate website users hamper the full realisation of that potential and negatively affect the proper functioning of the internal market. In addition, the full realisation of that potential is hampered, and the proper functioning of the internal market is negatively affected, by diverging laws of certain Member States which, with a varying degree of effectiveness, regulate those services, while other Member States are considering adopting such laws.

2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO

2018/0112(COD)

Nicola DANTI, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Maria GRAPINI, Pina PICIERNO, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Marlene MIZZI, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5

(5) Online intermediation services and online search engines, as well as the ~~commercial~~ transactions facilitated by those services, have an intrinsic cross- border potential and are of particular importance for the proper functioning of the Union’s internal market in today’s economy. The potentially unfair and harmful trading practices of certain providers of those services in respect of business users and corporate website users hamper the full realisation of that potential and negatively affect the proper functioning of the internal market. In addition, the full realisation of that potential is hampered, and the proper functioning of the internal market is negatively affected, by diverging laws of certain Member States which, with a varying degree of effectiveness, regulate those services, while other Member States are considering adopting such laws.

2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO

2018/0112(COD)

Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marlene MIZZI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

(6) A uniform and targeted set of mandatory rules should therefore be established at Union level to ensure a fair, predictable, sustainable and trusted online business environment within the internal market by ensuring, in particular, that the business users of online intermediation services are afforded appropriate transparency as well as effective redress possibilities throughout the Union. Also, we must ensure that platforms give fair treatment to business users with whom they compete directly. Those rules should also provide for appropriate transparency as regards the ranking of corporate website users in the search results generated by online search engines. At the same, those rules should be such as to safeguard the important innovation potential of the wider online platform economy.

2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO

2018/0112(COD)

Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Maria GRAPINI, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Marlene MIZZI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)

(6a) The information and transparency duties of the parties involved must be rigorously enforced in order for consumers to be able to trust in the platforms and businesses they use and so as not to undermine their trust in the single market. All initiatives that enhance transparency of rating mechanisms and help establish reliable reputation criteria should be encouraged.

2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO

2018/0112(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Marlene MIZZI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7

(7) Since online intermediation services, operating systems and online search engines typically have a global dimension, this Regulation should apply to providers of those services regardless of whether they are established in a Member State or outside the Union, provided that two cumulative conditions are met. Firstly, the business users or corporate website users should be established in the Union. Secondly, the business users or corporate website users should, through the provision of those services, offer their goods or services to consumers located in the Union at least for part of the transaction. Such consumers should be located in the Union, but do not need to have their place of residence in the Union nor have the nationality of any Member State. Accordingly, this Regulation should not apply where the business users or corporate websites users are not established in the Union or where they are established in the Union but where they use online intermediation services or online search engines to offer goods or services exclusively to consumers located outside the Union or to persons who are not consumers.

2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO

2018/0112(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Lucy ANDERSON

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9

(9) Examples of online intermediation services covered by this Regulation should consequently include online e-commerce market places, including collaborative ones on which business users are active, online software applications services such as application stores, and online social media services. Services that partially operate offline, for example for the purpose of data consumption saving, should also be understood as online intermediation services; as the local storage and the computing power of devices increase rapidly, such a flexibility in assessing the online character of a service is crucial to limit the risk of bypassing the present proposition of regulation. However, this Regulation should not apply to online advertising serving tools or online advertising exchanges which are not provided with the aim of facilitating the initiation of direct transactions and which do not involve a contractual relationship with consumers. This Regulation should also not apply to online payment services, since they do not themselves meet the applicable requirements but are rather inherently auxiliary to the transaction for the supply of goods and services to the consumers concerned.

2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO

2018/0112(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Lucy ANDERSON

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11

(11) For reasons of consistency, the definition of online search engine used in this Regulation should be aligned with the definition used in Directive (EU) 2016/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council21. Services that partially operate offline, for example for the purpose of data consumption saving, should also be understood as online search engines; as the local storage and the computing power of devices increase rapidly, such a flexibility in assessing the online character of a search engine is crucial to limit the risk of by passing the present proposition of regulation. _________________ 21 Directive (EU) 2016/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning measures for a high common level of security of network and information systems across the Union (OJ L 194, 19.7.2016, p. 1).

2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO

2018/0112(COD)

Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Marlene MIZZI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12

(12) In order to effectively protect business users where needed, this Regulation should apply ~~where the terms and conditions of a contractual relationship,~~ regardless of twheir name or form, are not individually negotiated by the parties to them. Whether or not terms and conditions were individually negotiated should be determined on the basis of an overall assessment, whereby the fact that certain provisions thereof may have been individually negotiated is, in itself, not decisivether terms were individually negotiated or not.

2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO

2018/0112(COD)

Nicola DANTI, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Lucy ANDERSON, Pina PICIERNO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14

(14) Ensuring transparency and equity in the general terms and conditions can be essential to promoting sustainable business relationships and to preventing unfair behaviour to the detriment of business users. Providers of online intermediation services should therefore also ensure that the terms and conditions are easily available at all stages of the contractual relationship, including to prospective business users at the pre-contractual phase, and that any modifications to those terms are notified to business users within a set notice period which is reasonable and proportionate in light of the specific circumstances and which is at least 15 days. That notice period should not apply where, and to the extent that, it is waived in an unambiguous manner by the business user concerned or where, and to the extent that, the need to implement the modification without respecting the notice period stems from a legal obligation incumbent on the service provider under Union or national law.

2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO

2018/0112(COD)

Nicola DANTI, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Maria GRAPINI, Lucy ANDERSON, Pina PICIERNO, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Marlene MIZZI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18 a (new)

(18a) Providers of online search engines often allow the ranking of search results to be influenced against forms of remuneration paid by corporate website users. Clear details regarding such practice should be made publicly available for corporate website users and consumers to understand the effects of remuneration on ranking. Nevertheless, search results whose placement in the ranking has been influenced by forms of payment should be clearly flagged, making them easily distinguishable from other search results where remuneration was not paid.

2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO

2018/0112(COD)

Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Maria GRAPINI, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Marlene MIZZI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a (new)

(19a) As online intermediaries often own more than one platform or website, they should inform business users that sign a contract for listing with them of which platforms or websites the listing is displayed on.

2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO

2018/0112(COD)

Nicola DANTI, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Maria GRAPINI, Lucy ANDERSON, Pina PICIERNO, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Marlene MIZZI, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20 a (new)

(20a) Business users should be able to transfer their online reputation, such as ratings and reviews accumulated with one provider of online intermediation services, to alternative providers of similar services with a comparable system of online reputation. The portability of business users’ reputation will enable for greater competition between providers, giving access to a wider choice to both business users and consumers alike.

2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) Providers of online intermediation services ~~might in certain cases~~often restrict in the terms and conditions the ability of business users to offer goods or services to consumers under more favourable conditions through other means than through those online intermediation services. In those cases, the providers concerned should set out the grounds for doing so, in particular with reference to the main economic, commercial or legal considerations for the restrictions. This transparency obligation should however not be understood as affecting the assessment of the legality of such restrictions under oCertain Member States already prohibit such practices, as they unfairly limit the freedom of business users to set the conditions of sale of their own products and services, and may also harm consumers by restricting their ~~acts of Union law or the law of Member States in accordance with Union law, including in the areas of competit~~choice. Thus, this Regulation should prohibit such clauses in the European Union, and ~~unfair commercial practices, and the application of such law~~hence harmonise the legal framework of Member States.

2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO

2018/0112(COD)

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Lucy ANDERSON, Olga SEHNALOVÁ

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28 a (new)

(28a) Breaches of the provisions of this Regulation will in certain instances require a rapid and flexible enforcement. Enforcement bodies set up or nominated by Member States should be responsible for the enforcement of this Regulation in an adequate and effective manner. The enforcement bodies should be established in addition to the procedure for judicial proceedings by representative organisations set out in this Regulation. The decisions made by enforcement bodies could be challenged in judicial proceedings according to relevant national legislation.

2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO

Mady DELVAUX, Sylvia-Yvonne KAUFMANN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Tiemo WÖLKEN, Enrico GASBARRA, Evelyn REGNER, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Jytte GUTELAND, Evelyne GEBHARDT

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12

(12) Since both judicial and administrative procedures may effectively and efficiently serve the protection of the collective interests of consumers or citizens it is left to the discretion of the Member States whether the representative action can be brought in judicial or administrative proceedings, or both, depending on the relevant area of law or relevant economic sector. This shall be without prejudice to the right to an effective remedy under Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, whereby Member States shall ensure that consumers, citizens and businesses have the right to an effective remedy before a court or tribunal, against any administrative decision taken pursuant to national provisions implementing this Directive. This shall include the possibility for the parties to obtain a decision granting suspension of enforcement of the disputed decision, in accordance with national law.

2018/11/08
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Emphasises that all Member States should be in a position to provide all necessary data on public procurement implementation, including data on tenders, procedures and contracts and statistical information, also in order to enable the Commission to assess the single market on procurement;

2018/04/06
Committee: IMCO

7. Notes the anxiety of petitioners concerned about their future rights following the referendum in the United Kingdom on withdrawal from the European Union; ~~supports the Commission’s commitment to fully guarantee the rights of European citizens residing in the United Kingdom during the Brexit negotiations and following its exit from the EU;~~recalls its resolution of 5 April 20171aby which the European Parliament underlines that the withdrawal agreement can only be concluded with its consent and its requirement of a fair treatment of EU-27 citizens living or having lived in the United Kingdom and of United Kingdom citizens living or having lived in the EU- 27 and is of the opinion that their respective rights and interests must be given full priority in the negotiations; _________________ 1a P8_TA(2017)0102

2017/10/25
Committee: PETI

2017/2222(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Gabriele PREUSS, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Sorin MOISĂ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Points to the important ongoing work carried out by the Committee on Petitions in connection with petitions pertaining to issues on disabilities, and underlines the willingness of the committee to continue its support to efforts to strengthen the rights of persons with disabilities; calls on the European institutions to lead by example on this subject and to ensure that national authorities are correctly implementing without delay the legislation adopted in this field;

2017/10/25
Committee: PETI

2017/2222(INI)

Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Gabriele PREUSS, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Points to the committee’s support of the European Citizens’ Initiative; notes the Commission’s proposal for a revision of the regulation with a view to maintaining its relevance as a tool for democratic participation; ~~invit~~urges the Commission to consider Parliament’s substantive input, in particular the opinion of the Committee on Petitions on the European Citizens’ initiative;

2017/10/25
Committee: PETI

2017/2222(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Gabriele PREUSS, Sorin MOISĂ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Stresses the wide range of subjects raised in the petitions filed, from the internal market, justice, energy and transport to fundamental rights, health, environmental law, disability and animal welfare; underlines the increase by 10% of the number of petitions received in 2016 (1.569) and calls on the European institutions to adequately staff the services in charge of handling petitions, notably the secretariat of the Committee on Petitions;

2017/10/25
Committee: PETI

2017/2222(INI)

Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Gabriele PREUSS, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Stresses the wide range of subjects raised in the petitions filed, from the internal market, justice, energy and transport to fundamental rights, health, environmental law, disability and animal welfare; and on the various implications of Brexit on citizens;

2017/10/25
Committee: PETI

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ

5a. Notes that the Ombudsman's office achieved the second highest compliance rate with its decisions and/or recommendations so far; recommends to the Ombudsman to stay alert and identify reasons for non-compliance with its recommendations and to inform the European Parliament of any recurrent non-compliance cases by the EU administration;

2017/07/19
Committee: PETI

2017/2126(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Welcom~~Notes the decreasing number of inquiries concerning the European institutions conducted by the Ombudsman in 2016 (245 in 2016, 261 in 2015); reiterates its call on the EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies to respond and react within a reasonable time-frame to the critical remarks of the Ombudsman and to improve their compliance rate with the Ombudsman’s recommendations and/or decisions;

2017/07/19
Committee: PETI

2017/2126(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Notes that transparency-related inquiries again account for the greatest proportion of cases in particular concerning issues related to transparency of decision-making process, lobbying transparency, access to EU documents, followed by other problems that arise in a range of issues from violation of fundamental rights to EU contracts and grants and ethical issues;

2017/07/19
Committee: PETI

2017/2126(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. ~~Encourag~~Invites the Commission’s efforts to facilitate access to documents and information, particularly with regard to the EU Pilot procedures in relation to petitions received and to ensure full access once an EU-pilot procedure is closed; encourages the continuation of the Ombudsman’s strategic inquiry into the Commission’s transparency in handling infringement complaints under the EU Pilot procedures, and urges the Ombudsman to be determined and vigilant in continuing to investigate the matter in 2017;

2017/07/19
Committee: PETI

2017/2126(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Supports the Ombudsman's recommendations for improving the current revision of the European Investment Bank Complaints Mechanism (EIB-CM); Calls on the European Ombudsman to play a more active role in exercising its scrutiny over the EIB and in particular in ensuring that the new EIB- CM remains credible and efficient respecting the principles of operational independence, transparency, accessibility, timeliness and adequate resources;

2017/07/19
Committee: PETI

2017/2126(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)

11b. Supports the Ombudsman's recommendations to further improve the transparency of the Eurogroup by publishing detailed and attributable minutes and by making its meeting documents and voting results available, including for its Working Group and its preparatory body;

2017/07/19
Committee: PETI

2017/2126(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Notes the Ombudsman’s findings of maladministration with the Code of Conduct for Commissioners; stresses the importance of high moral and ethical standards within the EU administration, and welcomes the Commission’s decision to extend the cooling-off period to two years for former Commissioners and three years for former Commission Presidents; supports the Ombudsman’s recommendations for further revision of the Code in accordance with the Treaty obligations by making the rules more explicit and easily implementable ensuring credibility, impartiality and lack of conflict of interest on a case by case basis; Encourages the Ombudsman to continue to oversee and assess the level of independence of the Commission's Ad Hoc Ethical Committee;

2017/07/19
Committee: PETI

2017/2126(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Welcomes the Ombudsman's practical recommendations for public officials' interaction with lobbyists; urges the Ombudsman to increase awareness about these recommendations among staff members in all EU institutions through educational training, seminars and related supportive measures and calls on all EU institutions to implement the Ombudsman's Code of Good Administrative Behaviour and the transparency measures from the UN Framework Convention for Tobacco control FCTC;

2017/07/19
Committee: PETI

2017/2126(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Recalls that whistle-blowers are crucial figures in unveiling cases of maladministration, and supports measures by the EU institutions to encourage whistle-blowing and protect whistle- blowers against retribution; reiterates its call for an horizontal directive on whistle- blowing which sets out appropriate channels and procedures for ~~denounc~~reporting all forms of maladministration, as well as minimum adequate guarantees and legal safeguards at all levels for the individuals involved; encourages a follow-up on the Ombudsman enquiries of 2015 related to the EU institutions internal whistleblowing rules ; welcomes the Ombudsman own rules in this field and encourages other European institutions to use them as guidance;

2017/07/19
Committee: PETI

2017/2126(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23a. Recalls that the European Network of Ombudsmen could play an important role in defending EU citizens' rights in the negotiations on the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union;

2017/07/19
Committee: PETI

2017/2089(INI)

Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Maria GRAPINI, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Calls on the Commission to be vigilant regarding full and consistent implementation of the Charter by the Member States; invites the European Institutions and Member states to reinforce the application of the Charter by broadening its scope of application.

2018/09/13
Committee: PETI

2017/2073(INI)

Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Maria GRAPINI, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Lucy ANDERSON, Arndt KOHN, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA, Kerstin WESTPHAL, Evelyne GEBHARDT

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. Whereas the EU framework should address disproportionate barriers while fully preserving the protection of public interest objectives, such as consumer protection, thus ensuring high quality of the service provided;

2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO

2017/2073(INI)

Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Maria GRAPINI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Arndt KOHN, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA, Kerstin WESTPHAL, Evelyne GEBHARDT

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)

Fa. Whereas professional mobility combined with a high level of protection of public interest objectives can significantly contribute to sustainable economic growth in the EU;

2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO

2017/2073(INI)

Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Maria GRAPINI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Arndt KOHN, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA, Kerstin WESTPHAL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that regulated professions play a fundamental role in the EU economy, representing a significant part of the occupation rate as well as an important share of the added value in the Union; believes, furthermore, that the quality of professional services is of paramount importance for preserving the EU economic, social and cultural model and to strengthen the competitiveness of the EU;

2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO

2017/2073(INI)

Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Maria GRAPINI, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Lucy ANDERSON, Arndt KOHN, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA, Evelyne GEBHARDT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Acknowledges the improvements to the database of regulated professions made by the Commission, including the creation of an interactive map, allowing citizens to check the professional access requirements across the EU and to visualise more easily which profession is regulated in a given Member State; calls on the Commission to further improve the database for regulated professions, in order to facilitate timely and accurate notification of the information by competent authorities and thus enhance transparency for EU citizens;

2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO

2017/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Takes note of the divergences across Member States, as to the number of regulated professions and scope of activities, covered by similar professions, which explains the different ways to regulate professions, chosen by each Member State; considers that even though the ISCO and the NACE classifications constitute useful tools, the EU should develop its own classification, based on the notified activities by the Member States; calls on the Commission to improve the comparability of different professions and to define a common set of activities for each profession notified in the database with a view to facilitate voluntary harmonisation across the EU;

2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO

2017/2073(INI)

Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Maria GRAPINI, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Lucy ANDERSON, Arndt KOHN, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA, Kerstin WESTPHAL, Evelyne GEBHARDT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Acknowledges that some Member States did not consult the relevant stakeholders in an appropriate manner while preparing the NAPs; believes that a transparent flow of information between public institutions and stakeholders is necessary to effectively address issues and challenges affecting professions; calls for a broader involvement of all interested parties in the future;

2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO

2017/2073(INI)

Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Maria GRAPINI, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Lucy ANDERSON, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Calls on the Member States to involve all interested parties and carry out broader public consultations not only in view of preparing NAPs but also before reforming regulation of professions, in order to allow citizens, consumers and professionals to express their views;

2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO

2017/2073(INI)

Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Maria GRAPINI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Lucy ANDERSON, Arndt KOHN, Marc TARABELLA, Evelyne GEBHARDT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Recognises the role of professional regulation in achieving a high level of protection of public interest objectives, ~~such as~~either explicitly mentioned in the Treaty, such as public policy, public security and public health, or recognized by the Court of Justice case-law, which may continue to evolve; among others, the protection of consumers, recipients of services and workers, the safeguarding of the proper administration of justice, combating fraud and prevention of tax evasion and avoidance, the protection of the environment, ~~and~~ the preservation of national historic and artistic heritage and social and cultural policy objectives; acknowledges the margin of appreciation of Member States in determining the ways to achieve this;

2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO

2017/2073(INI)

Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Maria GRAPINI, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Marc TARABELLA, Kerstin WESTPHAL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Points out that better comparability of the level of professional qualifications is needed in order to increase the homogeneity of the evidence of formal qualifications across the European Union and to create a level playing field for young Europeans entering the professions, as well as promote their mobility across the EU;

2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO

2017/2073(INI)

Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Marc TARABELLA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Arndt KOHN, Pina PICIERNO, Josef WEIDENHOLZER, Evelyne GEBHARDT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Points out that the Panama Papers and other recent scandals have revealed the role of European enablers and intermediaries, including lawyers, accountants, wealth managers and other professionals, in setting up offshore structures facilitating tax avoidance and evasion and money laundering; underlines the necessity to better regulate these actors at European and national level in order to effectively tackle these phenomena;

2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO

2017/2073(INI)

Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Nicola DANTI, Marc TARABELLA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Arndt KOHN, Pina PICIERNO, Evelyne GEBHARDT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)

14b. Calls for a shift in the regulatory framework for intermediaries and enablers advising on tax matters, including clear regulation, appropriate public supervision, effective sanctions and compulsory codes of conducts at EU level; calls on the European Commission to ensure that actors advising on tax matters are adequately regulated and to propose harmonised rules in this area, creating an EU framework regulating all professionals advising on tax matters;

2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO

2017/2073(INI)

Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Maria GRAPINI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Underlines that this indicator, based on numerical data and including merely an analysis of the barriers to free movement, ~~is to~~must be used solely as a purely indicative tool land ~~does not determine~~shall not automatically determine whether a possibly stricter regulation in some Member States is disproportionate; considers that in any event, such an assessment of the disproportionate nature of a regulation is a matter for the sovereign assessment of the Court of justice;

2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO

2017/2073(INI)

Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Maria GRAPINI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Lucy ANDERSON, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA, Evelyne GEBHARDT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Besides an effective regulatory framework in the EU and in the Member States, highlights the need for effective and coordinated policies to support professionals in the EU and to strengthen the competitiveness, the innovation capacity and the quality of professional services in the EU;

2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO

2017/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)

17b. Stresses the need to consider the professionals from both an entrepreneurial perspective and a professional point of view strictu sensu; in this light, is convinced that economic tools should be combined with policies aiming at strengthening the human capital in the professional services;

2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO

2017/2073(INI)

Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Maria GRAPINI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Lucy ANDERSON, Arndt KOHN, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)

17c. Highlights the importance of education, skills development and entrepreneurial training to ensure that professionals in the EU remain competitive and able to face the transformational changes that affect the liberal professions as a consequence of innovation, digitalization and globalization; stresses the close connection between the knowledge of a professional and the quality of service provided; notes the important role that should be played by higher education and research institutions in this regard;

2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO

2017/2073(INI)

Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Maria GRAPINI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Lucy ANDERSON, Arndt KOHN, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA, Kerstin WESTPHAL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 d (new)

17d. Calls on the Member States to properly analyse the needs of the market for professional services in future decades and to develop policies making EU professional services globally competitive;

2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO

2017/2073(INI)

Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Maria GRAPINI, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Lucy ANDERSON, Arndt KOHN, Marc TARABELLA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Stresses that new technologies will be unlikely to replace human beings in making ethical and moral decisions; points out, in this regard, that rules on the organization of professions, including rules on supervision by public bodies or professional associations could play an important role and help to share equitably the benefits of digitalisation;

2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO

2017/2073(INI)

Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Maria GRAPINI, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Lucy ANDERSON, Arndt KOHN, Pina PICIERNO, Marc TARABELLA, Kerstin WESTPHAL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)

19b. Calls on the Commission to continue keeping the Parliament regularly informed on the state of play in relation of the compliance with the Directive by the Member States;

2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO

2017/2069(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Sorin MOISĂ

Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 c (new)

- having regard to the Council conclusions of 29 February2017 on the Single Market strategy1cand especially to the document on the Outcome of the informal meeting of SOLVIT Centres held in Lisbon on 18 September 20151d _________________ 1c Council document 6622/16 1d Council document 14268/15

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Sorin MOISĂ

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6

– having regard to Articles 2, 6 and 9-12 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), to Articles 18-25 of the TFEU and to Articles 11 and 39-46 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights,

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Gabriele PREUSS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas the prospect of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU (Brexit) has highlighted the importance of EU citizenship rights and their crucial role in the everyday lives of millions of EU citizens, and has raised awareness in the EU about the potential loss of rights that Brexit would entail on both sides with special regard to the 3 million EU citizens resident in the UK and the 1.2million UK citizens resident in the EU;

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Gabriele PREUSS, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Marlene MIZZI, Sorin MOISĂ

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas as petitions and complaints addressed to the European Commission and to SOLVIT have shown, EU citizens face notable difficulties in exercising this right, owing to administrative burdens and bureaucracy in Member States, and to misinformation and/or a lack of cooperation by Member State authorities;

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Gabriele PREUSS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Sorin MOISĂ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas ~~the principle of~~Article 21 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights explicitly prohibits non- discrimination ~~on the basis of nationality, sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief~~based on any grounds such as sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation is as the primary expression of EU citizenship; whereas it forms at the same time a crucial component of the successful exercise of the freedom of movement, as evidenced in petitions;

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Gabriele PREUSS, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Marlene MIZZI, Sorin MOISĂ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Takes note of the Commission’s 2017 EU Citizenship Report, which contains an enumeration of priorities by field of activity; expresses its doubt as to whether these priorities will effectively answer citizens’ concerns; regrets the lack of well-defined, concrete commitments and actions for the next three years;

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Marlene MIZZI, Sorin MOISĂ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Takes note of the Commission’s willingness to increase its efforts in order to inform the European citizens of their rights whereas strongly recalls the predominant importance of a timely and effective enforcement of them ;reminds that the correct application of EU law is a shared responsibility of the Member States and the European institutions; underlines in that respect the crucial role the Commission has to play as the Guardian of the Treaties in the implementation of the articles 258-260 TFEU;

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Gabriele PREUSS, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Marlene MIZZI, Sorin MOISĂ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 d (new)

1d. Urges the Commission to speed up its EU law enforcement policy by using all available tools mechanisms in order to bring a correct application of EU law closer to the citizens.

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Gabriele PREUSS, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Expresses strong regret that for almost a decade now little progress has been made in the adoption of the EU-wide Anti- Discrimination Directive; calls upon all EU institutions and especially upon the Council of the European union to conclude the relevant negotiations as ~~soon as possible~~an utmost priority;

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Gabriele PREUSS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5c. Regrets the existing opt-outs from parts of the EU treaties by some Member States which undermine and generate de facto differences in citizens’ rights that are intended to be equal under the EU Treaties

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Gabriele PREUSS, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Marlene MIZZI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Invites the Commission to take more active steps against LGBTI discrimination and to combat homophobia by defining concrete action to be taken at national and European levels; calls at the same time for the EU institutions to monitor LGBTI rights closely and to promote the recognition of cross-border rights for LGBTI persons and their families in the EU; calls upon legislators to expedite their activities with regard to the adoption of a comprehensive directive on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States as regards the accessibility requirements for products and services including different modes of transportation;

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Soraya POST, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Expresses its deep concern about the number of Roma people in Europe, who are victims of discriminatory birth registration, have therefore no identity documents, are denied access to essential basic services in their countries of residence, which also lead to their denial of access to any rights in the EU; calls on Member States to take immediate corrective measures in this regard to safeguard the enjoyment of their fundamental human rights and all the rights provided by EU citizenship; calls on the Commission to assess and monitor the situation in Member States and initiate legally binding legislation on the identification and protection of people whose citizenship have not been recognised and have no access to identity documents

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Gabriele PREUSS, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Sorin MOISĂ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Notes with appreciation the Commission’s efforts to make multiple information and assistance outlets about the EU and ~~Citizenship right~~the rights it confers to its citizens, such as the Europe Direct network, the Your Europe portal and the e- justice portal, available and more accessible; urges the Commission to systematise the information and possibly plan for a single, EU-wide information window; at the same time, invites the Member States to promote the SOLVIT network and its services among EU citizens, as well as other redress mechanisms, both at EU level, such as the Committee on Petitions and the European Ombudsman and at national level, such as the local ombudsman;

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Gabriele PREUSS, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Marlene MIZZI, Sorin MOISĂ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Calls on the Commission to reinforce the SOLVIT network by improving the interaction between its services and national centres in order to ensure a better follow-up of unresolved and repetitive cases as well as a greater articulation between the different EU law enforcement tools such as EU PILOT and CHAP ;at the same time, invites the Member States to promote the SOLVIT network and its services among EU citizens, as well as other redress mechanisms, both at EU level, such as the Committee on Petitions and the European Ombudsman and at national level, such as the local ombudsman;

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Gabriele PREUSS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Sorin MOISĂ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8b. Calls on Member States to better inform EU citizens as to their rights and duties, and to facilitate entitlement to these rights being respected equally both in their country of origin and in any other Member State

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Gabriele PREUSS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Sorin MOISĂ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Points out that citizens should have access to all the necessary information, which should be presented in a clear and comprehensible way, in order to be able to make informed decisions on the exercise of their Treaty rights, and especially their right to free movement, which is one of the key elements of EU citizenship, and residence within the EU; recommends the promotion of transparency and proactive publishing as the most appropriate tools to that end;

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Gabriele PREUSS, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Marlene MIZZI, Sorin MOISĂ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)

9c. Recalls that access to health services, coordination of social security schemes and recognition of professional qualifications in other Member States are the areas where EU citizens are often facing difficulties and calls for a vigorous enforcement by the Commission in order to redress those situations ;

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Gabriele PREUSS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Sorin MOISĂ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 f (new)

9f. Encourages Member States to give more space to political education on EU affairs, inter alia on EU citizens’ rights, in their school curricula and to adapt teacher training accordingly; considers that Member States should promote school visits to EU institutions in their educational systems; emphasises that accessible education plays a vital role in informing future citizens

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Gabriele PREUSS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Calls on European political parties to effectively tackle the problem of decreasing levels of voters turnout and the widening gap between citizens and the EU institutions; considers the nomination of Europe wide candidates for Commission president by European political parties an important step towards building a genuine European public space, but is convinced that the prospect of a Europeanisation of the electoral campaign can only be achieved through pan-European activities and networks of local and national media, especially public ones in the fields of radio, TV, seminars and the internet

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Gabriele PREUSS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Believes that the reform of the Electoral Act on the basis of Parliament’s legislative initiative is an unmissable opportunity for the Union to become more democratic; highlights the fact that thousands of Europeans share this view, as evidenced by the ‘Let me Vote’ European Citizens’ Initiative, which aims to allow citizens to vote in their place of residence; commends the Commission for exploring the possibilities for non-national EU citizens who have exercised their right to free movement to vote in national elections in the country in which they reside; whereas various complaints have been received with regard to the exercise of the right to vote in European and municipal elections, and also with regard to disenfranchisement in relation to national elections after a period of time spent abroad; urges the Commission to devise a concrete action plan for the introduction of electronic voting with a view to the 2019 European Parliament elections;

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Gabriele PREUSS, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Marlene MIZZI, Sorin MOISĂ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. ERecalls the fundamental right to freedom of expression and information enshrined in article 11 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights ; expresses its conviction that free media and access to a plurality of voices in society and in the media are an indispensable part of a healthy democracy and constitutes therefore a constitutional foundation of EU membership as enshrined in Articles 2 and 6 of the TEU; underlines the need for a defined EU policy to tackle anti- European propaganda and false information; ~~proposes that EU institutions proceed with the creation of a European television channel broadcasting in all Member States~~underlines the need for a defined EU policy to tackle anti-European propaganda and false information;

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Gabriele PREUSS, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Marlene MIZZI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Maintains that transparency is a key tool for bringing citizens closer to the EU and involving them in its activities; notes that access to documents represents 30% of the inquiries closed by the European Ombudsman in 2016 and therefore recommends the promotion of the right to access documents and the translation of as many documents as possible into all EU languages; calls for an horizontal directive on whistle-blowing which sets out appropriate channels and procedures for reporting cases; supports the intensification of dialogue with citizens and the encouragement of public debates in order to improve EU citizens’ understanding of the impact of the EU on their daily lives and to allow them to take part in an exchange of views, through slots in television programmes for targeted audiences;

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Gabriele PREUSS, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Marlene MIZZI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Supports the promotion of a culture of service among EU and national institutions and considers that the EU should lead by example through the highest administrative and transparency standards, ~~as envisaged elsewhere in~~in accordance with Article 41 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights; proposes that local EU offices in the Member States be transformed into one- stop shops, offering comprehensive services for EU citizens, so as to reduce bureaucracy and the obstacles it poses to the exercise of EU citizenship rights; highlights the importance of the ‘once only’ project, which eliminates unnecessary burdens for European businesses that are asked to present the same data and documents repeatedly in their operations across borders;

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Gabriele PREUSS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ

14a. Recognises that the UK withdrawal from the EU will be the first instance in the history of the EU that citizens will have their rights, that have been acquired through the treaties, removed, and highlights the impact this loss of rights will have on citizens on both sides;

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Gabriele PREUSS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)

14b. Recommends to both the European Union and the UK that the acquired rights of citizens to live, work, have recognition of qualifications, and to own a business are maintained to the fullest possible extent following the UK’s withdrawal from the EU;

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Gabriele PREUSS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 e (new)

14e. To establish a European public holiday on May 9 in order to reinforce a European feeling of belonging to the European family; and the creation of a single European identity card

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Marlene MIZZI, Sorin MOISĂ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Urges the Member States to guarantee that their national legislation is sufficiently clear and detailed to ensure that the right to free movement of citizens and their families is respected; to proceed with the proper training of competent national authorities in this respect on the basis of an electronic learning tool and to disseminate accurate information to interested parties in a precise manner; to foster, furthermore, good cooperation and a swift exchange of information with other national administrations, especially where cross-border insurance and old age pensions are concerned; urges the Commission to submit a proposal for an act on the cross-border recognition of adoption orders;

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Jude KIRTON-DARLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 d (new)

15d. Regrets that the options for redress open to parents and children in the event of separation or divorce are not the same in each Member State, with the result that hundreds of parents in Europe have contacted the Committee on Petitions to urge it to be more active despite it having very limited competences in this area

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2069(INI)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Gabriele PREUSS, Jude KIRTON-DARLING, Marlene MIZZI, Sorin MOISĂ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 f (new)

15f. Welcomes the launch of the EU solidarity corps for young European citizens and asks for the initiative to be properly funded and that quality jobs are not replaced by unpaid volunteering;

2017/10/06
Committee: PETI

2017/2067(INI)

Marc TARABELLA, Nicola DANTI, Maria GRAPINI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Lucy ANDERSON, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the Commission’s Strategy on Cooperative Intelligent Transport Systems (C-ITS); recognises the potential in a smarter use of data in the transport sector; considers C-ITS a valuable contributor to making road transport safer, more efficient and sustainable, through higher energy efficiency, reduced emissions and reduced risks of accidents;

2017/10/25
Committee: IMCO

2017/2067(INI)

Marc TARABELLA, Nicola DANTI, Maria GRAPINI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Lucy ANDERSON, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Urges Europe to ~~maintain~~promote through higher standards its leading global position in the field of C- ITS; encourages all stakeholders to speed up the deployment of C-ITS technologies; underlines, in this respect, the need for affordable, high-quality, safe, continuous and reliable services throughout the Union;

2017/10/25
Committee: IMCO

2017/2067(INI)

Marc TARABELLA, Maria GRAPINI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Lucy ANDERSON, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Deems it ~~necessary~~fundamental to ensure that consumers’ rights to privacy and to the protection of their personal data be fully upheld in accordance with the EU legal framework on data protection; urges the Commission to ensure the correct implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation; calls on car manufacturers to inform consumers ~~adequately~~in a clear manner about their rights and never to sell in-car data without explicit consent;

2017/10/25
Committee: IMCO

2017/2067(INI)

Marc TARABELLA, Nicola DANTI, Maria GRAPINI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Arndt KOHN, Lucy ANDERSON, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Stresses the importance of the application of high standards of cyber- security in all Member States in order to prevent cyber-attacks and hacking;

2017/10/25
Committee: IMCO

2017/2067(INI)

Marc TARABELLA, Maria GRAPINI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Lucy ANDERSON, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Underlines the need to consider the effects of C-ITS on employment and working conditions; encourages, in this respect, to foster the dialogue with social partners at an early stage;

2017/10/25
Committee: IMCO

2017/2067(INI)

Marc TARABELLA, Maria GRAPINI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Lucy ANDERSON, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses the importance of technical harmonisation and standardisation of data and definitions regarding C-ITS, including backward compatibility, so as to ensure a successful roll-out and cross border interoperability at all levels;

2017/10/25
Committee: IMCO

2017/2067(INI)

Marc TARABELLA, Maria GRAPINI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Lucy ANDERSON, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Welcomes the strategy’s focus on user involvement; encourages the Commission to facilitate the exchange of best practices; underlines the need for dedicated cross-border C-ITS pilots, including C-Roads, supported by adequate funding; encourages Member States to join urgently this Platform;

2017/10/25
Committee: IMCO

2017/2043(BUD)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Javi LÓPEZ, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, Marc TARABELLA, Pilar AYUSO, Luis de GRANDES PASCUAL, Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO, Pilar del CASTILLO VERA, Rosa ESTARÀS FERRAGUT, Agustín DÍAZ DE MERA GARCÍA CONSUEGRA, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Carlos ITURGAIZ, Teresa JIMÉNEZ-BECERRIL BARRIO, Verónica LOPE FONTAGNÉ, Antonio LÓPEZ-ISTÚRIZ WHITE, Gabriel MATO, José Ignacio SALAFRANCA SÁNCHEZ-NEYRA, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, Hannu TAKKULA, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Heinz K. BECKER, María Teresa GIMÉNEZ BARBAT, Inés AYALA SENDER, José BLANCO LÓPEZ, Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Iratxe GARCÍA PÉREZ, Enrique GUERRERO SALOM, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO, Elena VALENCIANO, Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ, Karoline GRASWANDER-HAINZ, Silvia COSTA, Francisco de Paula GAMBUS MILLET, Ernest URTASUN, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Javier NART, Jordi SOLÉ, Josep-Maria TERRICABRAS, Milan ZVER, Julie GIRLING

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)

Calls for maintaining the EU support to sports policy, the sports chapter of the Erasmus+ programme and the financing of Special Events, such as the Special Olympics in 2017;

2017/05/04
Committee: CULT

2017/2024(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 a (new)

-1a. Recalls that of the 66 submitted European Citizens’ initiative (ECI), only 47 were registered by the Commission, of which only 3 collected the required 1 million signatures and none led to a new legislative proposal;

2017/07/27
Committee: PETI

2017/2024(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 b (new)

-1b. Believes that the difficulties encountered by the organisers of European Citizens’ initiatives and the limited legislative impact of successful initiatives have undermined the credibility of the ECI leading to a decline in registered initiatives;

2017/07/27
Committee: PETI

2017/2024(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 c (new)

-1c. Considers that the European Citizens Initiative still has a lot of untapped potential that could improve the functioning of the EU on behalf of its citizens; calls for a comprehensive revision and simplification of the ECI aimed at overcoming the existing barriers and bureaucratic hurdles, making it more user-friendly and accessible to citizens;

2017/07/27
Committee: PETI

2017/2024(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 d (new)

-1d. Underlines that the ECI complements the citizens' right to submit petitions to the European Parliament and their right of appeal to the European Ombudsman; Calls on the Commission to take into account the recommendations of the European Ombudsman and the Committee of Petitions in improving the functioning of the ECI;

2017/07/27
Committee: PETI

2017/2024(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 f (new)

-1f. Is aware of the rigid application of the ECI eligibility criteria and the potential conflict of interest within the Commission, which makes an assessment on the admissibility of the initiative, while also being the recipient of that same initiative; Invites the Commission to revise the procedure for the application of the legal admissibility criteria by following a more transparent and consistent approach on the nature and scope of the ECI;

2017/07/27
Committee: PETI

2017/2024(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Encourages the Commission to take a more flexible approach on the registration process and welcomes its new practice to allow for partial ECI registration; Calls on the Commission to ensure that the registration process is transparent, clear and straightforward and to provide detailed answers and possible solutions when initiatives are declared inadmissible, enabling citizens to amend and resubmit them;

2017/07/27
Committee: PETI

2017/2024(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Calls for the simplification of online signature collection (“OCS”) and verification and for a progressive approach to countering the technological barriers to OCS and ensure accessibility for citizens with disabilities; invites the Commission to address data requirement divergences in national systems, especially regarding nationality and place of residence; welcomes the AFCO proposal that the Commission run a free, centralised OCS system; suggests that this system make use of existing, proven online platform technologies and enable synergies with social media tools to galvanize more widespread signature collection, after a thorough analysis on preventing potential illegal abuse of these online tools; welcomes the Commission’s public survey on creating a “Collaborative ECI Platform”; invites the Commission to prolong the collection period such that the clock for collection starts running from the date of ECI registration; calls for greater transparency measures for ascertaining ECI financing and making this information directly available online to the public;

2017/07/27
Committee: PETI

2017/2024(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Calls upon the Commission to create a one-stop shop for ECI information dissemination and citizen advisory services, in particular the provision of support in defining a compliant legal basis for an initiative; welcomes the AFCO proposal for a provision in the new Regulation on ECI communication activities at EU level; recalls the importance to involve local and regional authorities for communication strategies around the ECI; asks for a specific campaign reminding the existence and the differences with the petitions submitted to the European Parliament; urges the Commission to link such efforts to the principles set out in the EU eGovernment Action Plan 2016-2020;

2017/07/27
Committee: PETI

2017/2024(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

~~4. Supports the AFCO proposal to 4. ensure th~~Considers that appropriate follow- up ~~of successful ECIs, in terms of concrete legislative proposals from~~must be guaranteed for successful initiatives and calls upon the Commission, while using the whole potential of the European Parliament as a co-legislator, to prepare a legislative proposal within 12 months after the end of the campaign or provide appropriate justification for not doing so; calls for maintaining the current system of designating lead committees thematically according to competence, with PETI as associated committee; recalls the importance of public hearings in ensuring that an inclusive approach is taken to increasing attendance by various stakeholders;

2017/07/27
Committee: PETI

2017/2024(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Supports the AFCO proposal to ensure the follow-up of successful ECIs, in terms of concrete legislative proposals from the Commission, while using the whole potential of the European Parliament as a co-legislator; calls for maintaining the current system of designating lead committees thematically according to competence, with PETI as associated committee; recalls the importance of balanced public hearings in ensuring that an inclusive approach is taken to increasing attendance by various stakeholders;

2017/07/27
Committee: PETI

2017/2024(INL)

Lucy ANDERSON, Rory PALMER, Theresa GRIFFIN, Biljana BORZAN, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Christine REVAULT D'ALLONNES BONNEFOY, István UJHELYI, Francisco ASSIS, Kostadinka KUNEVA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Merja KYLLÖNEN, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Marc TARABELLA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Asks the Commission to provide regular legislative improvements to the ECI, including by using the mandatory regular review on its implementation;

2017/07/27
Committee: PETI

The body shall acknowledge receipt of the complaint within two weeks of receiving it. The complaint-handling procedure shall take a maximum of three months. For complex cases, the body may, at its discretion, extend this period to six months. In such a case, it shall inform the passenger or organisation representing passengers of the reasons for the extension and of the expected time needed to conclude the procedure. Only cases that involve legal proceedings may take longer than six months. Where the body is also an alternative dispute resolution body within the meaning of Directive 2013/11/EU, the time limits laid down in that Directive shall prevail and the use of online dispute resolution in accordance with Regulation 524/2013/EU2b may be made available with the agreement of all parties involved. __________________ 2bRegulation 524/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on online dispute resolution for consumer disputes and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive2009/22/EC (OJ L 165, 18.6.2013, p.1).

2018/04/17
Committee: IMCO

Lucy ANDERSON, Rory PALMER, Theresa GRIFFIN, Karoline GRASWANDER-HAINZ, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Francisco ASSIS, Kostadinka KUNEVA, John HOWARTH, Julia REDA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Merja KYLLÖNEN, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Marc TARABELLA, Kathleen VAN BREMPT

(da) involve organisations representing persons with disabilities and with reduced mobility in the design and delivery of disability-related training;

2018/04/03
Committee: TRAN

2017/0237(COD)

Lucy ANDERSON, Rory PALMER, Theresa GRIFFIN, Karoline GRASWANDER-HAINZ, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Francisco ASSIS, Kostadinka KUNEVA, John HOWARTH, Julia REDA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Merja KYLLÖNEN, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Disability-related training courses mentioned in paragraphs (a) to (e) of this Article shall meet the specifications set out in Annex VI.

2018/04/03
Committee: TRAN

2017/0237(COD)

Lucy ANDERSON, Rory PALMER, Theresa GRIFFIN, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Francisco ASSIS, Kostadinka KUNEVA, John HOWARTH, Georges BACH, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Merja KYLLÖNEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2

2. Passengers may submit a complaint to any railway undertaking, ticket vendor, ~~railway station~~station manager or infrastructure manager involved. Complaints shall be submitted within six months of the incident that is the subject of the complaint. Within one month of ~~receiv~~submitting the complaint, the addressee shall either give a reasoned reply or, in justified cases, inform the passenger by what date within a period of less than three months from the date of receipt of the complaint a reply can be expected. Railway undertakings, ticket vendors, station managers and infrastructure managers shall keep the incident data necessary to assess the complaint for two years and make them available to national enforcement bodies upon request.

2018/04/03
Committee: TRAN

2017/0237(COD)

Lucy ANDERSON, Rory PALMER, Theresa GRIFFIN, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Francisco ASSIS, Kostadinka KUNEVA, John HOWARTH, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 3

3. Details of the complaint handling procedure shall be accessible to persons with disabilities and with reduced mobility. This information shall be made freely available in writing upon request in the domestic language of the railway undertaking.

2018/04/03
Committee: TRAN

2017/0237(COD)

Lucy ANDERSON, Rory PALMER, Theresa GRIFFIN, Francisco ASSIS, Kostadinka KUNEVA, John HOWARTH, Julia REDA, Georges BACH, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Merja KYLLÖNEN, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2

2. The national enforcement bodies shall ~~publish statistics on their activity~~each year publish reports with statistics on their websites detailing the number and type of complaints that they have received, detailing the outcome of their enforcement actions, including onthe sanctions ~~applied, every year, at the latest at the end of April of the following calendar year.~~ that they have applied. This shall be done for each year by no later than the first day of April of the succeeding year. In addition, these reports shall be made available on the website of the European Union Agency for Railways.

2018/04/03
Committee: TRAN

2017/0237(COD)

Lucy ANDERSON, Rory PALMER, Theresa GRIFFIN, Kathleen VAN BREMPT, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Christine REVAULT D'ALLONNES BONNEFOY, Francisco ASSIS, Kostadinka KUNEVA, John HOWARTH, Julia REDA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Merja KYLLÖNEN, Marc TARABELLA

3a. The national enforcement bodies, in collaboration with organisations representative of persons with disabilities and with reduced mobility, shall conduct regular audits of the assistance services provided in accordance with this Regulation and publish the results in accessible formats.

2018/04/03
Committee: TRAN

2017/0237(COD)

Lucy ANDERSON, Rory PALMER, Theresa GRIFFIN, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Francisco ASSIS, Biljana BORZAN, Kostadinka KUNEVA, John HOWARTH, Julia REDA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Peter KOUROUMBASHEV, Merja KYLLÖNEN, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1

1. Without prejudice to the rights of consumers to seek alternative redress pursuant to Directive 2013/11/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council32, after having complained unsuccessfully to the railway undertaking, ticket vendor, station or infrastructure manager pursuant to Article 28, the passenger may complain to an enforcement body. Enforcement bodies shall inform complainants about their right to complain to alternative dispute resolution bodies to seek individual redress. Member States shall ensure that enforcement or complaint-handling bodies are recognised for the purposes of alternative redress schemes pursuant to Directive 2013/11/EU, and that where passengers seek alternative redress, the railway undertaking, ticket vendor, station or infrastructure manager concerned is required to participate and the outcome shall be binding on and effectively enforceable against them. _________________ 32 Directive 2013/11/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive 2009/22/EC (OJ L 165, 18.6.2013, p. 14).

2018/04/03
Committee: TRAN

2017/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2

2. Any passenger may complain to the national enforcement body, or any other body designated by a Member State for that purpose, about an alleged infringement of this Regulation. Complaints may also be made by organisations representing groups of passengers.

2018/04/03
Committee: TRAN

2017/0237(COD)

Lucy ANDERSON, Rory PALMER, Theresa GRIFFIN, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Francisco ASSIS, István UJHELYI, Kostadinka KUNEVA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Merja KYLLÖNEN, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

The body shall acknowledge receipt of the complaint within two weeks of receiving it. The complaint-handling procedure shall take a maximum of three months. For complex cases, the body may, at its discretion, extend this period to six months. In such a case, it shall inform the passenger or organisation representing passengers of the reasons for the extension and of the expected time needed to conclude the procedure. Only cases that involve legal proceedings may take longer than six months. Where the body is also an alternative dispute resolution body within the meaning of Directive 2013/11/EU, the time limits laid down in that Directive shall prevail and the use of online dispute resolution in accordance with Regulation 524/2013/EU1a may be made available with the agreement of all parties involved. _________________ 1aRegulation 524/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on online dispute resolution for consumer disputes and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive2009/22/EC (OJ L 165, 18.6.2013, p.1).

2018/04/03
Committee: TRAN

2017/0237(COD)

Lucy ANDERSON, Rory PALMER, Theresa GRIFFIN, István UJHELYI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Francisco ASSIS, Kostadinka KUNEVA, John HOWARTH, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part I – indent 1

- General conditions applicable to the contract or contracts that form part of the journey or combined journey

2018/04/03
Committee: TRAN

2017/0237(COD)

Lucy ANDERSON, Rory PALMER, Theresa GRIFFIN, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Francisco ASSIS, Kostadinka KUNEVA, John HOWARTH, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Merja KYLLÖNEN, István UJHELYI

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part I – indent 2

- Time schedules and conditions for the fastest trip and best connections

2018/04/03
Committee: TRAN

2017/0237(COD)

Lucy ANDERSON, Rory PALMER, Theresa GRIFFIN, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Francisco ASSIS, Kostadinka KUNEVA, John HOWARTH, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Merja KYLLÖNEN, István UJHELYI

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part I – indent 3

- Time schedules and conditions for the lowest and all available fares

2018/04/03
Committee: TRAN

2017/0237(COD)

Lucy ANDERSON, Rory PALMER, Theresa GRIFFIN, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Francisco ASSIS, Kostadinka KUNEVA, John HOWARTH, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Merja KYLLÖNEN, István UJHELYI

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part I – indent 5

- Access ~~condition~~arrangements for bicycles

2018/04/03
Committee: TRAN

2017/0237(COD)

Lucy ANDERSON, Rory PALMER, Theresa GRIFFIN, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Francisco ASSIS, Kostadinka KUNEVA, John HOWARTH, Merja KYLLÖNEN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, István UJHELYI

Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part II – paragraph 1 – point 4 – indent 1 – point vii

(vii) accessibility of station and station facilities. , including step-free access, escalators, elevators and luggage ramps.

2018/04/03
Committee: TRAN

2017/0237(COD)

Lucy ANDERSON, Rory PALMER, Theresa GRIFFIN, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Francisco ASSIS, Kostadinka KUNEVA, John HOWARTH, Merja KYLLÖNEN, Virginie ROZIÈRE, István UJHELYI

Proposal for a regulation
Annex IV – paragraph 1

In complex cases such as cases involving multiple claims or a number of operators, cross-border travel or accidents on the territory of a Member State other than that which granted the undertaking’s licence, in particular where it is unclear which national enforcement body is competent, or where it would facilitate or accelerate the resolution of the complaint, national enforcement bodies shall cooperate to identify a ‘lead’ body, which shall serve as single point of contact for passengers. All national enforcement bodies involved shall cooperate to facilitate the resolution of the complaint (including by sharing information, assisting with the translation of documents and providing information on the circumstances of incidents). Passengers shall be informed which body is acting as ‘lead’ body. In addition, in all cases, national enforcement bodies shall in any event ensure compliance with Regulation 2017/2394/EU 1a of the European Parliament and of the Council. _________________ 1aRegulation (EU) 2017/2394 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2017 on cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004, OJ L 345, 27.12.2017.

2018/04/03
Committee: TRAN

2017/0237(COD)

Lucy ANDERSON, Rory PALMER, Theresa GRIFFIN, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Francisco ASSIS, István UJHELYI, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Kostadinka KUNEVA, John HOWARTH, Julia REDA, Merja KYLLÖNEN, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Annex V a (new)

ANNEX Va DISABILITY-RELATED TRAINING SPECIFICATIONS (a) Disability-awareness training Training of all staff, including those employed by any other performing party, includes: - awareness of and appropriate responses to passengers with physical, sensory (hearing and visual), hidden or learning disabilities, including how to distinguish between the different abilities of persons whose mobility, orientation, or communication may be reduced, - barriers faced by disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility, including attitudinal, environmental/physical and organisational barriers, - service animals, including their role and needs, - dealing with unexpected occurrences, - interpersonal skills and methods of communication with deaf people and people with hearing impairments, people with visual impairments, people with speech impairments, and people with a learning disability, - how to handle wheelchairs and other mobility aids carefully so as to avoid damage (if any, for all staff who are responsible for luggage handling); (b) Disability-assistance training Training of all staff, including those employed by any other performing party, directly assisting disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility includes: - how to help wheelchair users make transfers into and out of a wheelchair, - skills for providing assistance to disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility travelling with a service animal, including the role and the needs of these animals, - techniques for escorting visually impaired passengers and for the handling and carriage of service animals, - an understanding of the types of equipment which can assist disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility and a knowledge of how to handle such an equipment, - the use of boarding and alighting assistance equipment used and knowledge of the appropriate boarding and alighting assistance procedures that safeguard the safety and dignity of disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility, - understanding of the need for reliable and professional assistance. Also awareness of the potential of certain disabled passengers to experience feelings of vulnerability during travel because of their dependence on the assistance provided, a knowledge of first aid.

2018/04/03
Committee: TRAN

2017/0228(COD)

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Nicola DANTI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Arndt KOHN, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Pina PICIERNO, Lucy ANDERSON, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Marc TARABELLA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Eva KAILI, Catherine STIHLER, Evelyne GEBHARDT

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1

(1) The digitisation of the economy is accelerating. Information and Communications Technology (ICT) is no longer a specific sector but the foundation of all modern innovative economic systems and societies. Electronic data is at the centre of those systems and can generate great value when analysed or combined with services and products. At the same time, cybersecurity represents one of the major threats to our societies. Securing network and information systems in the European Union is essential for the further development of the online economy, as well as for ensuring that there is trust in the digital economy as a whole. Consequently, this Regulation and the ENISA Regulation [2017/0225(COD)] need to be fully consistent with one another.

2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO

2017/0228(COD)

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Arndt KOHN, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Lucy ANDERSON, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Marc TARABELLA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Eva KAILI, Catherine STIHLER, Evelyne GEBHARDT

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)

(8a) The organisation and preservation of archives is carried out in the public interest and constitute a non-market service. It falls therefore within the scope of Protocol No 26 on services of general interest annexed to the Treaties. This regulation should therefore not apply to the storage or processing of non-personal data which are related to an activity which is necessary to the fulfilment of a task carried out in the public interest or in the exercise of official authority and which fall within the scope of public archives activity pursuant to the Union or national law.

2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO

2017/0228(COD)

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Arndt KOHN, Lucy ANDERSON, Marc TARABELLA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Eva KAILI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10

(10) Under Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Member States may neither restrict nor prohibit the free movement of personal data within the Union for reasons connected with the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data. This Regulation establishes the same principle of free movement within the Union for non-personal data except when a restriction or a prohibition would be justified for security reasons. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and this Regulation provide a coherent set of rules that cater for free movement of different types of data. In the case of mixed data sets, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should apply to the personal data part of the set, and this Regulation should apply to the non-personal data part of the set. Where non-personal and personal data are inextricably linked, this Regulation should not prejudice the application of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. The protection of the privacy of natural and legal persons as well as the protection of the processing of personal data, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Directive (EU) 2016/680 and Directive 2002/58/EC shall not be affected by this. Furthermore, this Regulation does not impose an obligation to store the different types of data separately.

2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 a (new)

(10a) Whereas data that is neither personal nor non-personal does not exist by definition, new technological advancements in big data analytics have opened up for the possibility to turn anonymised non-personal data into personal data by comparing and aggregating large quantities of non- personal data. In this case, the line between personal data and non-personal data is not fixed but rather depends upon technological developments and new uses of technologies. In these instances, where non-personal data has become personalised, the data should be treated as such and the provisions laid down in Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should apply accordingly.

2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO

2017/0228(COD)

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Arndt KOHN, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Lucy ANDERSON, Marc TARABELLA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Eva KAILI, Catherine STIHLER, Evelyne GEBHARDT

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 b (new)

(10b) The growing availability of Internet of Things (IoT) and the development of machine learning and Artificial Intelligence (AI) goes hand in hand with the proliferation of devices that collect non-personal data. These new technologies are already used in farm productivity, translation, manufacturing robots and navigation systems among others. However, data collected within certain industries could contain both personal and non-personal data and should be treated under the Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and this regulation respectively.

2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO

2017/0228(COD)

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Arndt KOHN, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Lucy ANDERSON, Marc TARABELLA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Eva KAILI, Catherine STIHLER

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 c (new)

(10c) The Commission should provide clear and easily accessible guidelines on the legal treatment of mixed data sets in order for especially SMEs to handle the interaction between this Regulation and Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO

2017/0228(COD)

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Lucy ANDERSON, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) In order to take full advantage of the competitive environment, professional users should be able to make informed choices and easily compare the individual components of various data storage or other processing services offered in the internal market, including as to the contractual conditions of porting data upon the termination of a contract. In order to align with the innovation potential of the market and to take into account the experience and expertise of the providers and professional users of data storage or other processing services, the detailed information and operational requirements for data porting should be defined by ~~market players through self-regulation, encouraged and facilitated by~~ the Commission, in the form of ~~Union codes of conduct~~implementing acts which may entail model contract terms. ~~Nonetheless, if such codes of conduct are not put in place and effectively implemented within a reasonable period of time, the Commission should review the situation.~~

2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO

2017/0228(COD)

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Arndt KOHN, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Lucy ANDERSON, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Marc TARABELLA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Eva KAILI, Catherine STIHLER

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28

(28) The Commission should periodically review this Regulation, in particular with a view to determining the need for modifications in the light of technological or market developments, especially with regards to the development of artificial intelligence, machine learning, Internet of Things, big data analysis among others.

2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO

2017/0228(COD)

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Arndt KOHN, Lucy ANDERSON, Marc TARABELLA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Eva KAILI, Catherine STIHLER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. In the case of mixed data sets, this Regulation shall apply to the non- personal data part of the set. Where personal and non-personal data are inextricably linked, this Regulation shall apply without prejudice to Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO

2017/0228(COD)

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Lucy ANDERSON, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Marc TARABELLA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Eva KAILI, Catherine STIHLER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2

2. This Regulation shall not apply: a) to an activity which falls outside the scope of Union law or b) to an activity which is necessary to the fulfilment of a task carried out in the public interest or in the exercise of official authority and which fall within the scope of public archives activity pursuant to the Union or national law.

2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO

2017/0228(COD)

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Arndt KOHN, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Lucy ANDERSON, Marc TARABELLA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Eva KAILI, Catherine STIHLER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)

1a. ‘mixed data set’ means a data set composed of both personal and non- personal data.

2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2

2. Where a competent authority ~~has exhausted all applicable means to obtain access to the data~~does not receive access to the data after having contacted the provider of the data storage or processing service, it may request the assistance of a competent authority in another Member State in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 7, and the requested competent authority shall provide assistance in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 7, unless it would be contrary to the public order of the requested Member State.

2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO

2017/0228(COD)

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Lucy ANDERSON, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. The Commission ~~shall encourage and facilitate the development of self- regulatory codes of conduct at Union level, in order to define guidelines on best practices in~~may adopt implementing acts in order to specify requirements to facilitat~~ing~~e the switching of providers and to ensure that they provide professional users with sufficiently detailed, clear and transparent information before a contract for data storage and processing is concluded, as regards the following issues:

2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO

2017/0228(COD)

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Nicola DANTI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Arndt KOHN, Pina PICIERNO, Lucy ANDERSON, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Marc TARABELLA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Eva KAILI, Catherine STIHLER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3

3. The Commission shall ~~review~~submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the development and effective implementation of such codes of conduct and the effective provision of information by providers no later than two years after the start of application of this Regulation. The report shall be accompanied, if appropriate, by legislative proposals.

2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO

2017/0228(COD)

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Arndt KOHN, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Lucy ANDERSON, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Marc TARABELLA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Eva KAILI, Catherine STIHLER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1

1. No later than [53 years after the date mentioned in Article 10(2)], the Commission shall carry out a review of this Regulation and present a report on the main findings to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee. The Commission shall review the implementation of this Regulation in particular in respect of:

2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO

2017/0228(COD)

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Arndt KOHN, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Lucy ANDERSON, Marc TARABELLA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Eva KAILI, Catherine STIHLER, Evelyne GEBHARDT

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point a (new)

(a) The application of this Regulation to mixed data sets especially taking into account the development of new technologies such as Internet of Things, artificial intelligence, big data analysis and the process of deanonymising data.

2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO

2017/0228(COD)

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Arndt KOHN, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Lucy ANDERSON, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Marc TARABELLA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Eva KAILI, Catherine STIHLER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b (new)

(b) The use of the public security exception by Member States as defined in Article 4(1).

2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO

2017/0228(COD)

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Arndt KOHN, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Lucy ANDERSON, Marc TARABELLA, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Eva KAILI, Catherine STIHLER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. By 6 months after the date of publication of this Regulation the Commission shall provide guidelines on the legal treatment of mixed data sets and the interaction between this Regulation and Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO

2017/0220(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Citation 1

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 24 and 298(1) thereof,

2018/03/06
Committee: PETI

2017/0220(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Citation 1 a (new)

Having regard to the Treaty on the European Union, and in particular Articles 1, 2, 9, 10 and 11 thereof,

2018/03/06
Committee: PETI

2017/0220(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Citation 1 b (new)

Having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European union and in particular Article 41 thereof,

2018/03/06
Committee: PETI

2017/0220(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 a (new)

(15 a) In order to promote an impartial and fair handling of the ECI, it is appropriate to establish a scrutiny board within the Commission. This board should be constituted by competent and experienced staff from the Commission, the European Parliament, the Council and the European Ombudsman. This board could be seized by the promoters of an ECI or by the European Parliament, the Council or the Ombudsman in case the Commission refuses to register an ECI. This board should have the capabilities and the competences to assess whether the refusal to register the ECI complies with the Regulation and, if not, invite the Commission to overturn its decision and register the ECI.

2018/03/06
Committee: PETI

2017/0220(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) It is appropriate for Member States to verify the conformity of the individual online collection systems set up by the group of organisers with the requirements of this Regulation and issue a document certifying such conformity before statements of support are collected. The certification of the individual online collection systems should be carried out by the competent national authority of the Member States in which the data collected through the individual online collection system is stored. These actions should be carried out free of charge. Without prejudice to the powers of the national supervisory authorities under the General Data Protection Regulation, Member States should designate the competent national authority responsible for the certification of the systems. Member States should mutually recognise the certificates issued by their competent authorities.

2018/03/06
Committee: PETI

2017/0220(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23

(23) In order to promote participation and public debate on the issues raised by the initiatives, where an initiative supported by the required number of signatories and fulfilling the other requirements of this Regulation is submitted to the Commission, the group of organisers should have the right to present that initiative at a public hearing at Union level. The public hearing should be co- organised by the Commission and the European Parliament within three months from the submission of the initiative and ensure a balanced representation of relevant public and private interests well as the representation at an appropriate level of the Commission and the Council. Other institutions and advisory bodies of the Union as well as interested stakeholders should have the opportunity to participate in the hearing.

2018/03/06
Committee: PETI

2017/0220(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24

(24) To ensure the effective participation of citizens in the democratic life of the Union, the Commission should examine a valid initiative and respond to it. The Commission should therefore set out its legal and political conclusions as well as the action it intends to take within a period of five months from the receipt of the initiative. The Commission should explain in a clear, comprehensible and detailed manner the reasons for its intended action, and should ~~likewise give~~give in an even more developed way its reasons if it does not intend to take any action.

2018/03/06
Committee: PETI

2017/0220(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24 a (new)

(24 a) In order to promote the political debate that ECI might initiates at European level and in order to increase the political responsibility of the Commission before the co-legislators and European citizens, the Council and the European Parliament should be able to organize an hearing of the Commission once it has decide to intend or not to intend an action after a valid ECI ;

2018/03/06
Committee: PETI

2017/0220(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

The Commission shall make available an online collaborative platform providing citizens and groups of organisers with a discussion forum and information ~~and advice~~ about the European citizens’ initiative. The Commission provides citizens and groups of organisers with advice.

2018/03/06
Committee: PETI

2017/0220(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)

Within 3 months after the publication of this Regulation, the Commission shall issue an user guide in order to facilitate the understanding of the European citizens' initiative. This user guide shall be issued after consultation of the committee established by Article 21 and the scrutiny board established by Article 21a.

2018/03/06
Committee: PETI

2017/0220(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 6

6. Each Member State shall establish one or more contact points to provide information and assistance to groups of organisers in setting up a European citizens’ initiative. This assistance shall be free of charge.

2018/03/06
Committee: PETI

2017/0220(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

The group of organisers may also designate a maximum of twohree other natural persons, chosen from among its members or otherwise, who are mandated to act on behalf of the contact persons for the purpose of liaising with the institutions of the Union throughout the procedure.

2018/03/06
Committee: PETI

2017/0220(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2

In that case, the group of organisers may either amend the initiative to take into account the Commission's assessment to ensure that the initiative is in conformity with the requirement laid down in paragraph 3(c) or maintain or withdraw the initial initiative.The group of organisers may alternatively seize the scrutiny board established by Article 21a. to review the assessment of the Commission. The group of organisers shall inform the Commission of its choice within one month of the receipt of the Commission's assessment giving the reasons thereof, and shall, as the case may be, transmit amendments to the information referred to in Annex II to replace the initial initiative.

2018/03/06
Committee: PETI

2017/0220(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 7

7. Where it refuses to register or only partially registers an initiative in accordance with paragraph 4, the Commission shall ~~inform the group of organisers of the reasons for its decision and of all possible judicial and extrajudicial remedies available to them~~duly substantiate the reasons of its decision and inform the group of organisers and of all possible judicial and extrajudicial remedies available to them. This information includes the recourse to the scrutiny board established by Article 21a.

2018/03/06
Committee: PETI

2017/0220(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

The Commission and the European Parliament shall co-organize the public hearing at the European Parliament. Representatives of the Council assist and participate in the hearing. Representatives of the other institutions and advisory bodies of the Union, as well as interested stakeholders, shall be given the opportunity to participate in the hearing.

2018/03/06
Committee: PETI

2017/0220(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

In conformity of the principle of good administration, the Commission substantiates its decision.

2018/03/06
Committee: PETI

2017/0220(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 a (new)

Article 15 a Political hearing The European Parliament and the Council can organise, jointly or separately, a hearing of the Commission on its decision to intend or not to intend an action after a valid initiative.

2018/03/06
Committee: PETI

2017/0220(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 a (new)

Article 21 a Scrutiny board 1. For the purpose of implementing Article 6, a scrutiny board is established within the Commission. 2.The scrutiny board is composed of experienced and competent members of the Commission, the Council, the European Parliament and the Ombudsman. 3. The number of members and the rules of functioning of the scrutiny board are defined in accordance with the procedure defined by Article 23.

2018/03/06
Committee: PETI

2017/0220(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Pina PICIERNO, Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1

The Commission shall periodically review the functioning of the European citizens' initiative and present a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Regulation no later than ~~five~~two years from the date of application of this Regulation, and every five years thereafter. The reports shall be made public.

2018/03/06
Committee: PETI

2017/0125(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1

(1) Despite the Union being the second largest global defence spender, the lack of economies of scale in the defence industry translates into a reduced quality and quantity of the defence output. 80% of defence procurement in Europe is still done nationally. An integrated European defence market must cater for all the different security needs of all Member States simultaneously and affordably. In the European Defence Action Plan, adopted on 30 November 2016, the Commission committed to complement, leverage and consolidate collaborative efforts by Member States in developing defence capabilities to respond to security challenges, as well as to foster a competitive and innovative European defence industry. It proposed in particular to launch a European Defence Fund to support investment in joint research and the joint development of defence equipment and technologies. The Fund would support cooperation during the whole cycle of defence product and technology development.

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Pina PICIERNO, Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Arndt KOHN

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2

(2) In order to contribute to the enhancement of the competitiveness and innovation capacity of the Union's defence industry, a European Defence Industrial Development Programme (hereinafter referred to as the Programme) should be established. The Programme should aim at enhancing the competitiveness of the Union's defence industry, inter alia the cyber defence industry, which is a priority of the defence industry, taking into account developments in the speed and sophistication of cyber-attacks, by supporting the cooperation between undertakings in the development phase of defence products and technologies. The development phase, which follows the research and technology phase, entails significant risks and costs that hamper the further exploitation of the results of research and adversely impact the competitiveness of the Union's defence industry. By supporting the development phase, the Programme would contribute to a better exploitation of the results of defence research and it would help to cover the gap between research and production as well as to promote all forms of innovation. The Programme should complement activities carried out in accordance with Article 182 TFEU and it does not cover the production of defence products and technologies.

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Pina PICIERNO, Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3

(3) To better exploit economies of scale in the defence industry and reinforce the single market for defence, the Programme should support the cooperation between undertakings in the development of defence products and technologies.

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Pina PICIERNO, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Liisa JAAKONSAARI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)

(4a) The budget of the Programme should not affect negatively the implementation of the programmes from which redeployments are taken and should therefore primarily be funded from the Global Margin for Commitments, the Global Margin for Payments, and the Flexibility Instrument.

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Liisa JAAKONSAARI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5

(5) The Programme should be implemented in full compliance with Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council6. Funding may take in particular the form of grants. Financial instruments or public procurement, in full respect of the requirements of the Directive 2009/81/EC on defence and security procurement, may be used where appropriate. _________________ 6 Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1).

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)

(5a) In line with the objective of fostering the strategic autonomy of the Union, when financial support of the Union is provided through the Programme, priority should be given to the products and technologies developed through the Programme when Member States intend to acquire products or technologies available on the European market.

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Pina PICIERNO, Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10

(10) As the objective of the Programme is to support the competitiveness and integration of the Union defence industry by de-risking the development phase of cooperative projects, actions related to the development of a defence product or technology, namely definition of common technical specifications, standards, design, prototyping, testing, qualification, certification as well feasibility studies and other supporting measures, should be eligible to benefit from it. This will also apply to the upgrade of existing defence products and technologies, as well as actions aimed at the skills development of workers of the defence industry.

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Pina PICIERNO, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Liisa JAAKONSAARI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12

(12) Cross-border collaboration in the development of defence products and technologies has often been hampered by the difficulty to agree on common technical specifications and/or standards. The absence or limited level of common technical specifications and/or standards have led to increased complexity, delays and inflated costs in the development phase. The agreement on common technical specifications and/or standards should be a condition in order to benefit from the Union's support under this Programme. Actions aiming at supporting the creation of a common definition of technical specifications and/or standards should also be eligible for support under the Programme.

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) The promotion of innovation and technological development in the Union defence industry should take place in a manner coherent with the security interests of the Union and in compliance with international law, also taking into consideration the concerns about Lethal Automated Weapons systems in the context of the UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons and the European Parliament's resolution of 27 February 2014 on the use of armed drones. Accordingly, the action's contribution to those interests and to the defence capability priorities commonly agreed by Member States should serve as an award criterion. Within the Union, common defence capability priorities are identified notably through the Capability Development Plan. Other Union processes such as the Coordinated Annual Review on Defence (CARD) and the Permanent Structured Cooperation will support the implementation of relevant priorities through enhanced cooperation. Where appropriate regional or international cooperative initiatives, such as in the NATO context, and serving the Union security and defence interest, may also be taken into account.

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Liisa JAAKONSAARI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) The Commission should establish a multiannual work programme in line with the objectives of the Programme. The Commission should be assisted in the establishment of the work programme by a committee of Member States (hereinafter referred to as Programme Committee). In light of the Union policy on Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) as key to ensuring economic growth, innovation, job creation, and social integration in the Union and the fact that the supported actions will typically require trans-national collaboration, it is of importance that the work programme will reflect and enable such cross-border participation of SMEs and that therefore a proportion of at least 10% of the overall budget will benefit such action.

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Pina PICIERNO, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Liisa JAAKONSAARI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25

(25) The Commission should draw up an implementation reports at the end of the first year and at the end of the Programme, examining the financial activities in terms of financial implementation results and where possible, impact. This report should also analyse the cross border participation of SMEs in projects under the Programme as well as the participation of SMEs to the global value chain.

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Pina PICIERNO, Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) to foster the integration, competitiveness and innovation capacity of the Union defence industry by supporting actions in their development phase and by supporting the development and acquisition of new skills of the workers in the defence sector that will allow the European defence industry to deliver high-tech solutions in a global setting;

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Pina PICIERNO, Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Arndt KOHN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) to support and leverage the cooperation between undertakings, including small and medium-sized enterprises, in the development of technologies or products in line with defence capability priorities commonly agreed by Member States within the Union including the development of cyberdefence capabilities and cybersecurity solutions for the defence industry;

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Pina PICIERNO, Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

(ca) to foster the strategic autonomy of Union defence industry;

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Pina PICIERNO, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Liisa JAAKONSAARI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. The contribution from the Union budget should be progressively authorised by the European Parliament and the Council in the framework of the annual budgetary procedures. For this purpose, the budgetary authority shall make use, where appropriate, of all means available under Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 of 2 December 2013 laying down the Multiannual Financial Framework for the years 2014-2020, with particular recourse to the Global Margin for Commitments, the Global Margin for Payments, and the Flexibility Instrument.

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) public procurement, in full respect of the requirements of Directive 2009/81/EC on defence and security procurement. The use of exemptions provided for by that Directive shall be duly justified.

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Pina PICIERNO, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Liisa JAAKONSAARI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) the design of a defence product, tangible or intangible component or technology as well as the technical specifications and/or standards on which such design has been developed;

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Arndt KOHN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1

1. Beneficiaries shall be undertakings established in the Union, in which Member States and/or nationals of Member States own more than 50% of the undertaking and effectively control it within the meaning of Article 6(3), whether directly or indirectly through one or more intermediate undertakings. In addition, all infrastructure, facilities, assets and resources used by the participants, including subcontractors and other third parties, in actions funded under the Programme shall ~~not~~ be located on the territory of ~~non-~~the Member States during the entire duration of the action.

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Pina PICIERNO, Nicola DANTI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) contribution to the innovation and technological development of defence industries and thus to fostering the industrial autonomy of the Union in the field of defence technologies as well as contribution to the reinforcing of the single market for defence; and,

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point e

(e) for actions described in points (b) to (e) of Article 6(1), the contribution to the competitiveness of the European defence industry and to the reinforcement of the European single market for defence through the demonstration by the beneficiaries that Member States have committed to jointly produce and procure the final product or technology in a coordinated way, including joint procurement where applicable. In order to provide a more flexible, open and competitive procurement suitable for defence equipment and markets, it is imperative to better implement Directive 2009/81/EC on defence and security procurement; the use of exemptions foreseen in that Directive shall be duly justified;

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Arndt KOHN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2

2. The work programme shall set out in detail the categories of projects to be funded under the Programme, with a specific project category focusing on the cross-border participation of SMEs;

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Liisa JAAKONSAARI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3

3. The work programme shall ensure that a ~~credible proportion~~t least 10% of the overall budget will benefit actions enabling the cross-border participation of SMEs.

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0125(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Pina PICIERNO, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Liisa JAAKONSAARI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2

2. To support greater efficiency and effectiveness of future Union policy actions, the Commission shall draw up a ~~retrospective evaluation report and send it~~n interim evaluation report after the first year of the Programme and a retrospective evaluation report at the end of the Programme. Those reports shall be submitted to the European Parliament and to the Council within reasonable time. The reports - building on relevant consultations of Member States and key stakeholders - shall notably assess the progress made towards the achievement of objectives set out in Article 2. It shall also analyse cross border participation of SMEs in projects implemented under the programme as well as the participation of SMEs to the global value chain.

2017/12/01
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Lucy ANDERSON, Nicola DANTI, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Citation 1

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article~~s 43(2), 91, 100, 114, 192, 194(2) and~~ 337 thereof,

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1

(1) In accordance with Article 3(3) of Treaty on European Union (TEU), the establishment of an internal market is one of the main objectives to be reached by the Union ~~in cooperation~~jointly with the Member States. Pursuant to Article 26(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the Union shall adopt measures with the aim of establishing or ensuring the functioning of the internal market. Under Article 26(2) TFEU, the internal market shall comprise an area without internal frontiers in which the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital is ensured. The internal market has generated new opportunities and economies of scale for European undertakings, has created jobs, has offered greater choice at lower prices for consumers and has enabled European citizens to live, study and work in the Union. Despite all the progress made, significant difficulties in the establishment and functioning of the internal market remain and European citizens and undertakings are unable to reap the full benefits of the internal market. In certain cases, suboptimal information affecting the action by the ~~Commiss~~European Union on the application of Union law in the area of the internal market increases the risk of the emergence of difficulties to trade in the internal market resulting from uncoordinated national enforcement activities or multifarious development of national regulatory solutions to those problems.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Lucy ANDERSON, Nicola DANTI, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2

(2) Article 337 TFEU provides for the Commission's power, within the limits and under the conditions which the Council may lay down acting by a simple majority, to collect any information required for the performance of its tasks. However, in Case C-490/10 European Parliament v Council, the Court has clarified that where the collection of information contributes directly to the achievement of the objectives of a given European Union policy, the act laying down the conditions for such collection must be based on the legal basis which relates to that policy. This Regulation provides not only for a framework in which the Commission can collect information from undertakings and associations of undertakings, but also for measures to enforce the requests for information. Therefore, while taking fully into account the fact that the Commission derives its power to collect information directly from the Treaty, this Regulation should be based, in addition to Article 337 TFEU, on the provisions of Articles 43(2), 91, 100, 192 and 194(2) TFEU and also of Article 114 TFEU, which provides for the adoption of measures necessary for the establishment and functioning of the internal market, including where differences between national rules are such as to obstruct the fundamental freedoms or where it is necessary to prevent the emergence of difficulties in the establishment and functioning of the internal market.deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3

(3) Articles 4 and 17 TEU assign certain roles to the Commission and the Member States. Articles 258 and 279 TFEU provide for procedures for the enforcement by the Union institutions of obligations arising under the Treaties. Detecting and, where appropriate, addressing ~~such~~ difficulties in the establishment and functioning of the internal market in an efficient and effective manner requires timely access to comprehensive, accurate and reliable quantitative and qualitative market information. This is particularly the case whenre the Commission acts as guardian of the Treaties, pursuant to Article 17(1) TEU, which entrusts the Commission with the tasks tof ensureing the application of the Treaties, and of ~~the~~ measures adopted by the institutions pursuant to them, and tof overseeing the application of Union law. As established by the Court of Justice on numerous occasions in the context of infringement proceedings under Article 258 TFEU, it is the Commission’s responsibility to place before the Court of Justice all the relevant factual information to prove the existence of an infringement. Such information may include in certain instances market information, needed to enable the Court of Justice to establish whether the Union law has been breached.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4

(4) ~~The Commission does not have general investigative powers of its own to help it enforce Union law in the area of the internal market~~As regard its role of the Guardian of the Treaties laid down by Article17 TEU and its prominent role in the procedure for failure to comply laid down by Article 258 TFEU, the Commission has general powers of its own to help it enforce Union law in the area of the internal market. As provided by Article 4of the TEU, Member States are extensively bound by duties to cooperate loyally with the European Union and to assist the European institutions in the accomplishment of their missions. The existing investigative powers related to the competition rules, as prescribed by Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003,26 Council Regulation (EC) No 139/200427 and Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589,28 are limited by their legal basis to defined areas and do not allow the collection and use of the gathered information for other internal market- related policy purposes. __________________ 26 Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (OJ L 1, 4.1.2003, p. 1). 27 Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (OJ L 32, 5.2.2004, p. 1). 28 Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 of 13 July 2015 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (OJ L 248, 24.9.2015, p. 9).

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Lucy ANDERSON, Nicola DANTI, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5

(5) As recognised by the Court of Justice, when enforcing Union law, the Commission, whereas it may rely on indicia, is largely reliant on the information provided by complainants, by public and private bodies, and by the Member States concerned. Pursuant to Article 4(3) TEU, Member States are under the duty, as recalled several times by the Court of Justice, to facilitate the Commission’s tasks, including in particular its role as guardian of the Treaties. However, Member States may not always have access to the relevant market information that the Commission would need to perform its tasks or their national rules on information collection may prevent them from disclosing the information collected.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10

(10) Such empowerment does not aim at creating new enforcement powers for the Commission such as, in particular, the powers to pursue infringements of Union law in the internal market area against individual market participants. Its purpose is rather to provide the Commission with additional fact-finding ability where this is strictly required for performing the task entrusted to the Commission by the TFEU to ensure the application of Union law in relation to the aim of establishing and ensuring the functioning of the internal market. In the interest of the establishment of a fully functioning internal market, it is appropriate to clarify that such empowerment covers also those economic sectors within the internal market for which TFEU has foreseen common policies: agriculture and fisheries (excluding the conservation of marine biological resources), transport, environment and energy.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11

(11) For this in~~vestig~~formative tool to be effective, the information sought should relate to the application of relevant Union law. This may consist, for example, of factual market data, including cost structure, pricing policy, products or services characteristics or geographical distribution of customers and suppliers. It may also consist of undertakings’ or associations of undertakings’ fact-based analysis of the functioning of the internal market, such as in relation to perceived regulatory and entry barriers or to costs of cross-border operations. In order to minimise costs of replying to requests for information, such requests should only cover information that is likely to be at the disposal of the undertaking or association of undertakings concerned.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Lucy ANDERSON, Nicola DANTI, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12

(12) When issuing requests for information to Member States relative to undertakings and associations of undertakings, the Commission is required to undertake a careful selection of addressees of the requests, so that requests are only addressed to undertakings and associations of undertakings that are capable of providing sufficiently relevant information, notably larger undertakings in the relevant Member States. These requests for information are aimed at solving a presumed, i.e. based on the available information, serious problem with the application of Union law in the areas of the internal market, agriculture and fisheries (excluding the conservation of marine biological resources), transport, environment and energy. Their aim is not to prosecute undertakings for the underpinning behaviour, if any. Accordingly, sanctions provided for in the instrument are designed to address exclusively two instances. They only cover an intentional or through gross negligence lack of a response to a request for information and an intentionally or through gross negligence incorrect, incomplete, or misleading reply. The collected information, if relevant, could also be used to provide insight into situations where undertakings find it difficult to comply with the legislation, with a view to improving the proper application of the internal market rules. Their aim is not to prosecute undertakings for the underpinning behaviour, if any. With a view to avoid disproportionate administrative burden for micro- undertakings, which are anyway unlikely to be in a position to provide sufficiently relevant information, the Commission should be precluded from issuing requests for information to this category of undertakings. When issuing requests for information to small and medium-sized undertakings, the Commission should take due account of the principle of proportionality. While SMEs are unlikely to operate at a larger scale enabling them to significantly affect market outcomes, the information gathered from SMEs could prove valuable in informing the Commission on difficulties in establishment and functioning of the internal market. Information readily available to SMEs might be of anecdotal nature but it could still alert the Commission about single market difficulties SMEs might suffer from. SMEs would normally not and should not incur any significant additional costs of data gathering in response to this tool. Given their relatively weaker bargaining position in value chains, SMEs might be more forthcoming with information when granted a procedure duly respecting confidentiality and anonymity. Resolving a difficulty in the single market establishment and functioning could in particular benefit SMEs as it is often the small innovative firms which face the greatest barriers when trying to start up and scale up across the single market. For reasons of consistency and legal certainty, the definitions of ‘micro-undertaking’, ‘small undertaking’ and ‘medium-sized undertaking’ of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council29 should apply. __________________ 29 Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p.19).

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

(13) In the interest of the consistency in the application of Union law in the area of the internal market ~~as well as agriculture, fisheries (excluding the conservation of marine biological resources), transport, environment and energy~~, it is necessary to establish mechanisms for the sharing of information between the Commission and the Member States in relation to the requests for information and, where appropriate, to the replies to such requests, without prejudice to professional secrecy obligations.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14

(14) The in~~vestig~~formative tool provided for in this Regulation is particularly useful for ensuring the application of Union law in the area of the internal market by the Commission. It is also useful, for any subsequent enforcement action by the Member States concerned that would require the use of the relevant information collected using this power and disclosed by the Commission to the Member States concerned. Moreover, where difficulties in the application of existing rules are experienced, including situations where undertakings are not able to comply with the legislation due to lack of legal clarity, this investigative tool could also be useful after the use of other tools and sources of relevant information have proven inadequate, for contributing to the conception or design of regulatory solutions. It is also appropriate not to allow the use of such information for other purposes, in particular the application of the competition rules of the TFEU, without prejudice to the reuse of information made public.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) ~~The Commission~~Member States should be able to enforce compliance with ~~the~~ requests for information it addressesd by the Commission to any undertaking or association of undertakings, as appropriate, by means of proportionate fines and periodic penalty payments imposed ~~by way of decision~~in conformity with their national law. In setting the amounts of fines and periodic penalty payments, ~~the Commission~~Member States should take due account of the principle of proportionality (including the aspects of appropriateness), in particular as regards small and medium- sized undertakings that should be excluded from such penalties. The rights of the parties requested to provide information should be safeguarded by giving them the opportunity to make known their views before any decision imposing fines or periodic penalty payments is taken.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) Taking due account of the principle of proportionality (including the aspects of appropriateness), the Commission should be able to reduce the periodic penalty payments or waive them entirely, when addressees of requests provide the information requested, albeit after the expiry of the deadline. For reasons of legal certainty, it is also appropriate to provide for limitation periods for the imposition and enforcement of fines and periodic penalty payments.deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) The Court of Justice should, in accordance with Article 261 TFEU, have unlimited jurisdiction in respect of decisions by which the Commission imposes fines or periodic penalty payments under this Regulation, which means that it may cancel, reduce or increase the fine or periodic penalty payment imposed by the Commission.deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19

(19) The disclosure of information about an undertaking’s business activity could result in a serious harm to the same undertaking. Therefore, the Commission and the Member States should take due account of the legitimate interests of undertakings, in particular the protection of their business secrets. To ensure that business secrets and other confidential information provided to the Commission and the Member States are treated in compliance with Article 339 TFEU, any undertaking or association of undertaking submitting information should clearly identify which information it considers to be ~~confidential and why it is~~ confidential. The Commission and Member States should not be able to disclose confidential information provided by such respondents ~~to the Member State~~ concerned by the request unless it has previously obtained their agreement to disclose that information to that effect. The respondent concerned should be required to provide the ~~Commission~~Member States with a separate non-confidential version of the information that could be disclosed ~~to the relevant Member State~~. In cases where information marked as confidential does not seem to be covered by obligations of professional secrecy, it is appropriate to have a mechanism in place according to which ~~the Commission~~Member States can decide the extent to which such information can be disclosed. Any such decision to reject a claim that a piece of information is confidential should indicate a period at the end of which it may be disclosed, so that the respondent can make use of any judicial protection available to it, including any interim measure. The rights of the respondent should be safeguarded by giving it the opportunity to make known its views before any decision to reject the confidentiality claim is taken in accordance with their national laws.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23

(23) Since the objectives of this Regulation, namely facilitating the ~~Commission’s acces~~access of the Commission and the Member States to market information necessary for carrying out its tasks in order to achieve a smooth- functioning of the internal market cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States but can rather, by reason of its scale and effects, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 TEU. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24

(24) This Regulation should ~~not affect~~be based on the investigative powers of the Member States. This Regulation does not aim to amend, restrict or annul the investigative powers that the Commission or bodies, offices or agencies of the Union have already received pursuant to other Union legal instruments. In particular, this Regulation should not affect the investigative powers of the Commission related to the application of the competition rules necessary for the functioning of the internal market.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Lucy ANDERSON, Nicola DANTI, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) the conditions under which the Commission may request Member States to require undertakings and associations of undertakings to provide information required for the performance of tasks entrusted to the Commission in relation to the areas referred to in Article 2;

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2

~~(2) agriculture and fisheries, other than the conservation of marine biological resources;~~deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Lucy ANDERSON, Nicola DANTI, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3

~~(3) transport;~~deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Lucy ANDERSON, Nicola DANTI, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4

~~(4) environment;~~deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Lucy ANDERSON, Nicola DANTI, Marc TARABELLA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5

~~(5) energy.~~deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – title

Power to request information from Member States regarding undertakings and associations of undertakings

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1

Where a serious difficulty with the application of Union law risks undermining the attainment of an important Union policy objective, the Commission may request information from Member States relating to undertakings or associations of undertakings, as provided for in Chapter II, for the purpose of addressing the above- mentioned difficulty.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. The Commission shall only use the power to request information from Member States relating to undertakings and associations of undertakings provided for in Article 4 when an infringement procedure under Article 258 TFEU has been launched and where the information available to the Commission, required for the purpose referred to in Article 4, is not sufficient or adequate and cannot be obtained in a timely manner due to the following reasons:

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b

~~(b) the information has not been provided by a Member State upon request by the Commission; or~~deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2

2. Prior to requesting information in accordance with Article 6, the Commission shall adopt a decision stating its intention to use the power to request information from undertakings or associations of undertakings under this Regulation. This decision shall include the following: (a) alleged serious difficulty of a cross-border dimension with the application of Union law and why such difficulty risks undermining the attainment of an important Union policy objective; (b) a summary description of the information to be requested; (c) a reasoned explanation of why such information is necessary for the purposes referred to in Article 4; (d) a reasoned explanation of why other means to obtain such information have proven insufficient or inadequate or cannot be obtained in a timely manner to date; (e) the criteria for selecting the addressees of the requests for information. The decision shall be addressed to the Member State or Member States concerned. The Commission shall notify the Member State or Member States concerned without delay.deleted a summary description of the

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3

3. The undertakings or association of undertakings concerned by the request as referred to in Article 4 are obliged to provide only information that is at their disposal. The Commission shall take due account of the principle of proportionality, in particular with regard to small and medium-sized undertakings.deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – title

~~Request for~~Decision to request Member States to provide information ~~mad~~relative to undertakings and associations of undertakings

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1

1. In the cases provided for in Article 4 and under the conditions laid down in Article 5, the Commission may, by simple request or by decision, require undertakings and associations of undertakings to provide information. When selecting the recipients of the requests for information, the Commission shall aim at ensuring that such requests are only addressed to undertakings and associations of undertakings that are capable of providing relevant information. The Commission shall not issue requests for information in accordance with this Regulation to micro-undertakings, unless they are part of a group of undertakings which qualifies at least as small group as defined in Article 6(5) of Directive 2013/34/EU.deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. In the cases provided for in Article 4 and under the conditions laid down in Article 5, the Commission may adopt a decision requesting Member States to require undertakings and associations of undertakings to provide information. This decision shall include the following: (a) a description of the alleged serious difficulty of a cross-border dimension with the application of Union law and why such difficulty risks undermining the attainment of an important Union policy objective; (b) a description of the information to be requested; (c) a reasoned explanation of why such information is necessary for the purposes referred to in Article 4; (d) a reasoned explanation of why other means to obtain such information have proven insufficient or inadequate or cannot be obtained in a timely manner to date; (e) the criteria for selecting the addressees of the requests for information. When selecting the recipients of the requests for information, the Commission shall aim at ensuring that such requests are only addressed to undertakings and associations of undertakings that are capable of providing relevant information. The decision shall be addressed to the undertaking or associations of undertakings concerned. The Commission shall notify the undertaking or associations of undertakings concerned without delay. The Commission shall not issue decision for information in accordance with this Regulation to micro-undertakings and small undertakings, unless they are part of a group of undertakings which qualifies at least as small group as defined in Article 6(5) of Directive 2013/34/EU.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2

2. The ~~simple request~~decision referred to in paragraph 1 shall state the legal basis and its purpose, specify what information is required and prescribe a proportionate time limit within which the information is to be provided. ~~It shall also refer to the fines provided for in Article 9(1) for supplying incorrect or misleading information.~~

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. The undertakings or association of undertakings concerned by the request as referred to in Article 4 are obliged to provide only information that is at their disposal.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3

3. The decision referred to in paragraph 1 shall state the legal basis, the purpose of the request, specify what information is required and prescribe a proportionate time limit within which the information is to be provided. It shall also indicate the fines provided for in Article 9(1) and the periodic penalties payments provided for in Article 9(2), as appropriate. In addition, it shall indicate the right of the undertaking or association of undertakings to have the decision reviewed by the Court of Justice of the European Union. The undertaking and association of undertakings concerned may request an extension of the time-limit, in accordance with Article 14.deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4

4. The Commission shall simultaneously provide a copy of the simple request or of the decision referred to in this Article to the Member State in whose territory the registered seat of the undertaking or association of undertakings is situated. Where the Commission has launched a formal infringement procedure pursuant to Article 258 TFEU, the Commission shall provide the Member State concerned by the procedure with a copy of all simple requests or decisions referred to in this Article issued in the context of that procedure, irrespective of where the registered seat of the undertaking or association of undertakings is situated.deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5

~~5. The decisions referred to in paragraph 1 shall be addressed to the undertaking or association of undertakings concerned. The Commission shall notify the decision to the addressee without delay.~~deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – title

Answers to decisions request~~s for~~ing information and protection of confidential information

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1

1. The undertakings or associations of undertakings providing information following a Commission’s ~~request~~decision for information based on Article 5 shall submit their answers to ~~the Commission~~Member States in a clear, complete and accurate manner.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

~~The Commission~~Member States shall give the addressee the opportunity to indicate which information it considers to be covered by the obligation of professional secrecy.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

The undertaking or association of undertakings submitting information pursuant to Article 5 shall clearly indicate which information it considers to be confidential~~, stating the reasons for such confidentiality claim, and provide the Commission~~ and provide Member States with a separate non- confidential version of the submission. When information is to be provided by a certain deadline, the same deadline shall apply for providing the non- confidential version.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3

3. The Commission shall forward the answers received to the Member State concerned by the request where they are relevant for a formal infringement procedure pursuant to Article 258 TFEU against the Member State concerned. Where an answer under this article includes information that is confidential vis-à-vis that Member State, the Commission shall only forward the non- confidential version of the submission.deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1

~~The Commission~~Member States shall verify whether the confidentiality claim of the information transmitted made by the respondent undertakings or associations of undertakings under subparagraph 2 of paragraph 2 is well-founded and proportionate.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2

After giving the undertaking or association of undertakings concerned the opportunity of making known its views, ~~the Commission~~Member States may take a decision finding that the information claimed to be confidential is not protected, and setting a date after which the information is to be disclosed in accordance with national rules. That period shall however not be less than 1 month.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c

(c) where the disclosure of such information to a Member State is necessary to substantiate an infringement of Union law within the scope of this Regulation provided that the respondent has had the opportunity to make his views known before a decision is taken and to make use of available judicial remedies before disclosure.deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. ~~The Commission may, by decision~~Member States may, where deemed necessary and proportionate, impose on undertakings or association of undertakings fines not exceeding 1 % of their total turnover in the preceding business year where they intentionally or through gross negligence:

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

~~The Commission may, by decision,~~Member States may impose on undertakings or associations of undertakings periodic penalty payments where an undertaking fails to supply complete, accurate and not misleading information within the prescribed deadline as requested by the Commission by a decision adopted pursuant to Article 6(3).

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3

3. Where the undertaking or association of undertakings provides no or incomplete information, ~~the Commission~~Member States shall prior the imposition of a fine or penalty, set a final deadline of two weeks to receive the missing information.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4

4. ~~The Commission~~Member States shall take into account the nature, gravity and duration of the breach of Article 6(1), as well as the principle of proportionality in particular with regard to small and medium-sized undertakings when fixing the amount of the fine or periodic penalty payment.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 5

5. Where the undertakings or associations of undertakings have satisfied the obligation which the periodic penalty payment was intended to enforce, ~~the Commission~~Member States may reduce or waive the amount of the periodic penalty payment.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 6

6. Before adopting any decision in accordance with paragraph 1 or 2, ~~the Commission~~Member States shall give the concerned undertakings or associations of undertakings the opportunity of making known their views.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1

1. The powers conferred on ~~the Commission~~Member States by Article 9 shall be subject to a limitation period of three years.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3

3. Any action taken by ~~the Commission~~Member States for the purpose of investigating or pursuing a possible breach of Article 6(1) shall interrupt the limitation period for the imposition of fines or periodic penalty payments, with effect from the date on which the action is notified to the undertaking or association of undertakings concerned.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4

4. After each interruption, the limitation period shall start running afresh. However, the limitation period shall expire at the latest on the day on which a period of six years has elapsed without ~~the Commission~~Member States having imposed a fine or a periodic penalty payment. That period shall be extended by the time during which the limitation period is suspended in accordance with paragraph 5.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1

1. The powers of ~~the Commission~~Member States to enforce decisions adopted pursuant to Article 9 shall be subject to a limitation period of five years.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 5 – point b

(b) the enforcement of payment is suspended pursuant to a decision of ~~the Court of Justice of the European Union~~a national court.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1

The decisions taken pursuant to Article 9(1) and (2) shall be addressed to the ~~undertaking or association of undertaking~~Member State or group of Member States concerned. The Commission shall notify the decision to the addressee without delay.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13

The Court of Justice of the European Union shall have unlimited jurisdiction within the meaning of Article 261 TFEU to review fines or periodic penalty payments imposed by the Commission. It may cancel, reduce or increase the fine or periodic penalty payment imposed.Article 13 deleted Review by the Court of Justice

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

2017/0086(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28

(28) In order to further facilitate the use of online procedures, this Regulation should, in line with the “once-only” principle, provide the basis for the exchange of evidence ~~directly~~ between the ~~competent authorities concerned from different Member States, at the request of citizens and businesses~~actors involved in the procedure and across Member States, at the explicit request of citizens and businesses. Where the exchange of evidence includes the processing personal data, the request should be considered as explicit if it contains a freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous indication of the individual’s wish to have the relevant personal data exchanged, either by statement or by clear affirmative action. If the user is not the data subject, the online procedure should not affect his or her rights under Regulation (EU) 2016/679. The “'once-only' principle means that citizens and businesses should not have to supply the same ~~information~~data to public authorities more than once for the cross-border ~~exchange of evidence~~online procedures. Any exchange of evidence should have an appropriate separate legal basis for the technical system, such as in Directives 2005/36/EC, 2006/123/EC, 2014/24/EU and 2014/25/EU or for the procedures listed in Annex II, other applicable Union acts or national law. Where the exchange of evidence in accordance with these legal bases includes the processing of personal data, such processing shall be performed in accordance with Regulations (EU) 2016/679 and (EC) No 45/2001.

2017/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2017/0086(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Lucy ANDERSON, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30

(30) Such a system should be available in addition to other systems providing mechanisms for cooperation between authorities, such as IMI or [e-Services Card] and should not affect other systems, including the system foreseen in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 987/2009, the European Single Procurement Document under Directive (EU) 2014/24 of the European Parliament and of the Council33 , the Electronic Exchange of Social Security Information (EESSI), the interconnection of national registers, the interconnection of central, commercial and company registers under Directive 2009/101/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34 and of insolvency registers under Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council35 . _________________ 33 Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 65–242). 34 Directive 2009/101/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 on coordination of safeguards which, for the protection of the interests of members and third parties, are required by Member States of companies within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 48 of the Treaty, with a view to making such safeguards equivalent (OJ L 258, 1.10.2009, p. 11– 19). 35 Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on insolvency proceedings (OJ L 141, 5.6.2015, p. 19–72).

2017/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2017/0086(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31 a (new)

(31a) With a view to ensuring a high level of security of the technical system for the cross-border application of the ‘once-only’ principle, when adopting implementing acts setting out the specification for such a technical system, the Commission should take due account of the standards and technical specifications drawn up by European and international standardisation organisations and bodies, in particular the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN), the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), in accordance with Article 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 22 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

2017/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2017/0086(COD)

Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Pina PICIERNO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32

(32) The compliance with the quality criteria should be the responsibility of the competent authorities and the Commission in relation to the information, procedures and services which they are responsible for. The national coordinators and the Commission should supervise compliance with the quality criteria at national and Union level respectively, and address any problems that arise. In order to obtain adequate information for measuring the performance of the single digital gateway and to obtain the fullest possible overview of compliance with the quality criteria, the national coordinators should consult with all relevant national stakeholders and social partners. This Regulation should give the Commission a wide range of means to address any deterioration in the quality of services offered through the gateway, depending on the seriousness and persistence of such deterioration, which would include involving the gateway coordination group. This should not prejudge the overall responsibility of the Commission regarding the monitoring of the compliance with this Regulation.

2017/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2017/0086(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Where the provisions of this Regulation conflict with a provision of another Union act governing specific aspects of the subject matter covered by this Regulation, the provision of the other Union act shall prevail.

2017/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2017/0086(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Lucy ANDERSON

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. This Regulation shall not affect the substance of nor the rights granted through any procedure laid down at the Union or national level in any of the areas covered by this Regulation.

2017/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2017/0086(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1

1. For the purpose of the exchange of evidence for online procedures listed in Annex II and procedures provided for in Directives 2005/36/EC, 2006/123/EC, 2014/24/EU and 2014/25/EU, a technical system for the electronic exchange of evidence between competent authorities in different Member States ("the technical system") shall be established by the Commission in cooperation with the Member States. The technical system shall ensure the interoperability with the national systems. The Commission shall not process personal data in the framework of the technical system.

2017/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2017/0086(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Lucy ANDERSON

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point d

(d) it shall en~~sure the confidentiality and integrity of the evidence;~~able the user to preview the evidence to be processed by the requesting authority; this preview shall be without prejudice to the information to be provided in accordance with Articles 13 and 14 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

2017/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2017/0086(COD)

Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Pina PICIERNO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4

4. The competent authorities responsible for online procedures referred to in paragraph 1 shall, upon an explicit request of the user, request evidence directly from competent authorities issuing evidence in other Member States through the technical system. The issuing authorities shall, ~~subject to~~in accordance with paragraph 2(d), make such evidence available through the same system. Where the consent of the user is necessary, Article 7 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Regulation (EU) No 45/2001 shall apply. If the user is not the data subject, the online procedure shall not affect his or her rights under Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

2017/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2017/0086(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

(aa) consult with all relevant national stakeholders and social partners;

2017/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2017/0086(COD)

Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Pina PICIERNO

Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – point 7 a (new)

(7a) European Consumer Centres Network

2017/11/30
Committee: IMCO

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 2

(2) Equality between men and women is a fundamental principle of the Union. According to Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union the promotion of equality between women and men is one of the Union's aims. Similarly, Article 23 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union requires equality between women and men to be ensured in all areas, including employment, work and pay and expressly prohibits any discrimination based on gender, even in pursuit of a work-life balance.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 5

(5) Work-life balance policies should contribute to the achievement of gender equality by promoting the participation of women in the labour market~~, making it easier for men to share c~~ and encouraging the participation and role of men in family life (as mentioned in Article 24 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights: 'Every child shall have the right to maintain on a regular basis a personal relationship and direct contact with both his or her parents, unless that is contrary to his or her interests') in favour of a fair sharing of responsibilities ~~on an equal basis with women, and closing~~for bringing up and caring for children, thereby helping to close the gender gaps in earnings, pay and payensions. Such policies should take into account demographic changes including the effects of an ageing population: promoting a better work-life balance could in fact represent an important incentive for increasing the birth-rate.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6

(6) At Union level, several Directives in the fields of gender equality and working conditions already address certain issues that are relevant for work-life balance, in particular Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council16, Directive 2010/41/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council17, Council Directive 92/85/EEC18, Council Directive 97/81/EC19, Council Directive 2010/18/EU20 and Council Directive 20100/178/E~~U20~~C. For the purposes of proposals to achieve a better work-life balance, it is also important to refer also to more recent EU actions, in particular the 'Women's Charter' and the 'Strategic Engagement for Gender Equality 2016- 2019'; the Gender Action Plan 2016- 2020; and Commission Communication COM/2016/0127 launching a consultation on the gender-based fragmentation of the labour market to contribute to the construction of a European Pillar of Social Rights. _________________ 16 Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation (OJ L 204, 26.7.2006, p. 23). 17 Directive 2010/41/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 7 July 2010, on the application of the principle of equal treatment between men and women engaged in an activity in a self-employed capacity and repealing Council Directive 86/613/EEC (OJ L 180, of 15.07.2010, p. 1). 18 Council Directive 92/85/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health at work of pregnant workers and workers who have recently given birth or are breastfeeding (tenth individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16 (1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) (OJ L 348, 28.11.1992, p. 1). 19 Council Directive 97/81/EC of 15 December 1997 concerning the Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC - Annex: Framework agreement on part-time work (OJ L 14, 20.1.1998, p. 9). 20 Council Directive 2010/18/EU, of 8 March 2010, implementing the revised Framework Agreement on parental leave concluded by BUSINESSEUROPE, UEAPME, CEEP and ETUC and repealing Directive 96/34/EC (OJ L 68, of 18.03.2010, p. 13).

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 a (new)

(6a) According to the data for October 2017 (Commission statistics), the male employment rate in the EU was 71.9%, compared to a female employment rate of 61.4%, despite the fact that women have a higher level of education.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7

(7) Work-life balance remains however a considerable challenge for many parents and workers with caring responsibilities, with a negative impact on female employment. A major factor contributing to the underrepresentation of women in the labour market is the difficulty of balancing work and family obligations. When they have children, women ~~ten~~are obliged to work ~~less~~fewer hours in paid employment and spend more time fulfilling unpaid care responsibilities. Having an ill or dependent relative has also been shown to have a negative impact on female employment, leading some women to drop out of the labour market partly or entirely.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)

(7a) According to Eurofound data, over three million people have left full-time employment because they lack facilities for childcare or for caring for dependent family members.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8

(8) The current Union legal framework provides limited incentives for men to assume an equal share of caring responsibilities. Lack of paid paternity and parental leave in many Member States contributes to the low take-up of such leave by fathers. The imbalance or inadequacy in the design of work-life balance policies between women and men slows down growth, leads to a departure from the objectives of social inclusion, puts women at greater risk of poverty, especially in old age, and reinforces gender differences between work and care. Conversely, use of work-life balance arrangements by fathers, such as leave or flexible working arrangements, has been shown to have a positive impact in reducing the relative amount of unpaid family work undertaken by women and leaving them more time for paid employment and their social, economic and professional emancipation.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)

(9a) It is important to achieve a balance between professional, private and family life through a broad approach which includes legislative and non- legislative actions, including effective incentives and measures, such as tax credits for childcare and for caring for people in need.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10

(10) It is appropriate to repeal and ~~replace~~go beyond Directive 2010/18/EU which currently regulates parental leave by putting into effect a framework agreement concluded between the social partners. This Directive builds, in particular, upon the rules laid down in Directive 2010/18/EU and complements them by strengthening existing rights and by introducing new rights.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11

(11) This Directive lays down minimum requirements related to paternity, parental and carers' leave and to flexible working arrangements for parents and workers with caring responsibilities. By facilitating the reconciliation of work and family life for both parents and for carers, this Directive s~~hould~~eeks to contribute to the Treaty-based goals of equality between men and women with regard to social inclusion, labour market opportunities, equal treatment as regards social rights and pay (Article 157 TFEU) at work and the promotion of a high level of employment in the Union.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12

(12) This Directive should apply to all workers who have employment contracts or other employment relationships. As is currently the case under Clause 2(3) of the Annex to Directive 2010/18/EU, this should include contracts relating to employment or employment relationships of part-time workers, fixed-term or open- ended contract workers or persons with a contract of employment or employment relationship with a temporary agency.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12 a (new)

(12a) The Directive will have to confirm the priority of establishing a good work- life balance without resorting to the introduction of precarious and atypical working conditions,

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12 b (new)

(12b) The Directive also aims to improve and strengthen the provisions concerning admissibility and regulatory certainty for the granting of parental leave to those with children with disabilities or serious long-term illnesses, especially in order to avoid arbitrary treatment regarding the granting of leave for the relevant age groups going beyond the provisions of current regulations, the introduction of vouchers or special contributions to meet the costs of child care services.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13

(13) In order to encourage a more equal sharing of caring responsibilities between women and men, the right to paid and mandatory paternity leave for fathers to be taken on the occasion of the birth or adoption of a child should be introduced. In order to take account of differences among Member States, the right to paternity leave should be irrespective of marital or family status as defined in national law.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15

(15) In order to provide greater possibility for parents to use parental leave as their children grow up, the right to parental leave should be granted until the child is at least t~~welve~~hirteen years old. Member States should be able to specify the period of notice to be given by the worker to the employer when applying for parental leave and to decide whether the right to parental leave may be subject to a certain period of service. In view of the growing diversity of contractual arrangements, the sum of successive fixed-term contracts with the same employer should be taken into account for the purpose of calculating the period of service. To balance the needs of workers with those of employers, Member States should also be able to decide whether they define if the employer may be allowed to postpone the granting of parental leave under certain circumstances. In such cases, the employer should provide justification in writing for the postponement. Given that flexibility makes it more likely that second parents, in particular fathers, will take up their entitlement to such leave, workers should be able to request to take parental leave on a full-time or part-time basis or in other flexible forms. It should be up to the employer whether or not to accept such a request for parental leave in other flexible forms than full-time. Member States should also assess if the conditions and detailed arrangements of parental leave should be adapted to the specific needs of parents in particularly disadvantaged situations (single parents, children with disabilities, serious illnesses).

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 21

(21) In order to encourage working parents and carers to remain in the work force, those workers should be able to adapt their working schedules to their personal needs and preferences. Working parents and carers should therefore be able to request flexible working arrangements, meaning the possibility for workers to adjust their working patterns, including through the use of remote working arrangements, flexible working schedules, or a reduction in working hours, for caring purposes. In order to address the needs of workers and employers, it should be possible for Member States to limit the duration of ~~flexible working arrangements, including a reduction in working hour~~part-time work, giving priority to other flexible working arrangements. While working part-time has indeed been shown to be useful in allowing some women to remain in the labour market after having children, long periods of reduced working hours may lead to lower social security contributions translating into reduced or non-existing pension entitlements. The ultimate decision as to whether or not to accept a worker’s request for flexible working arrangements should lie with the employer,. Specific circumstances underlying the need for flexible working arrangements can change. Workers should therefore not only have the right to return to their original working patterns at the end of a given agreed period, but should also be able to request to do so at any time where a change in the underlying circumstances so requires.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 23

(23) Workers exercising their rights to leave or to request flexible working arrangements should be protected against discrimination, retaliation or any less favourable treatment on that ground.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 24

(24) Workers exercising their rights to take leave or to request flexible working arrangements provided for in this Directive should enjoy protection from dismissal, pressures and mobbing to the detriment of the worker and any preparations for a possible dismissal on the grounds that they applied for, or have taken such leave or have exercised the right to request such flexible working arrangements. Where workers consider that they have been dismissed on those grounds, they should be able to ask the employer to provide duly substantiated grounds for the dismissal.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 26

(26) Member States should provide for effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties in the event of breaches of national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive or the relevant provisions already in force concerning the rights which are within the scope of this Directive. The effective implementation of the principle of equal treatment requires adequate judicial protection of workers against adverse treatment or adverse consequences resulting from a complaint or proceeding relating to the rights under this Directive. Victims may be deterred from exercising their rights on account of the risk of retaliation and therefore should be able to enjoy maximum protectedion from any adverse treatment where they exercise their rights provided for by this Directive. ~~Such~~The same protection ~~is particularly relevant as regards~~should also be provided for workers' representatives in the exercise of their function.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1

This Directive lays down minimum requirements designed to achieve equality between men and women with regard to labour market opportunities and treatment at work in terms of social rights and pay through facilitating the reconciliation of work and family life for working parents and carers.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d

(d) "relative" means a worker's son, daughter, mother, father, spouse or partner in civil partnership, where such partnerships are envisaged by national law and also an uncle/aunt/grandfather/ grandmother/grandchild who is dependent on the worker and is shown to be in need of special care and assistance;

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that fathers have the right to take pa~~ternity leave~~id paternity leave - like maternity leave - on a mandatory basis of at least tfourteen working days on the occasion of the birth of a child.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that workers have an individual right to parental leave paid at least what they are legally owed on sick days of at least four months to be taken before the child reaches a given age which shall be at least t~~welve~~hirteen.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2

2. Where Member States allow one parent to transfer their parental leave entitlement to the other parent, they shall ensure that at least three of the four months of parental leave cannot be transferred.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 4

4. Member States may make the right to parental leave subject to a period of work qualification or a length of service qualification which shall not exceed one year. In the case of successive fixed-term contracts, within the meaning of Council Directive 1999/70/EC21, with the same employer, the sum of those contracts shall be compulsorily taken into account for the purpose of calculating the qualifying period. _________________ 21 Council Directive of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP (OJ L 175, 10.7.1999, p.43).

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 5

5. Member States may define the circumstances in which an employer, following consultation in accordance with national law, collective agreements and/or practice, even if given advance notice, may be allowed to postpone the granting of parental leave by a reasonable period of time and in any case by never more than 20 successive days on the grounds that it would seriously disrupt the good functioning of the establishment. Employers ~~shall~~are required to justify any postponement of parental leave in writing.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 7

7. Member States shall assess the need for the conditions of access and detailed arrangements for the application of parental leave to be ~~adapted to~~extended to meet the needs of adoptive parents, parents having a disability, single parents (single-parent families) and parents with children with a disability or serious long-term illness. In particular, for parents of children with disabilities and extremely serious illnesses – according to the certification established by the national health authorities – the rejection of requests for parental leave shall be specifically forbidden.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)

2017/0085(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1

Member States may introduce or maintain provisions that are more favourable to workers than those laid down in this Directive, but never below the standards currently in force in national legislation. They shall however ensure that at least four months of parental leave remain non- transferable in accordance with Article 5(2) and that the leave protection is mandatory for parents of children with disabilities and extremely serious illnesses - pursuant to the certification established by the national health authorities.

2017/12/04
Committee: JURI

2017/0085(COD)