Activities of Marlene MIZZI related to 2014/2253(INI)
Plenary speeches (2)
30th and 31st annual reports on monitoring the application of EU law (2012-2013) (debate)
30th and 31st annual reports on monitoring the application of EU law (2012-2013) (A8-0242/2015 - Kostas Chrysogonos)
Amendments (19)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 b (new)
Paragraph -1 b (new)
-1b. Implementation and transposition of EU laws remain uneven across Member States which, combined with linguistic problems, excessive bureaucracy and a knowledge deficit, have created a Union that is not citizen-friendly; Notes that citizens who wish to live, work or do business across Europe face the daily reality of ongoing difficulties due to uneven implementation of EU law in the legal systems of the different Member States;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 a (new)
Paragraph -1 a (new)
-1a. Reiterates its view that Article 17 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) defines the fundamental role of the Commission as guardian of the Treaties; Calls on the Commission to continue with its active monitoring of the application of EU law in order to ensure timely and correct implementation and proper transposition;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Points out that in order to improve transposition, application and enforcement of EU law, the Commission should make compliance with EU law a real political priority by building a strong partnership and collaboration among all the stakeholders involved in shaping, implementing and enforcing such legislation and in particular with the European Parliament and the Member States;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses the vital role of citizens, businesses, NGOs and other stakeholders, when it comes to monitoring the shortcomings in the transposition and/or application of EU law by Member State authorities; Acknowledges in this regard the important role of petitions to Parliament and complaints to the Commission, as well as questions from Members of Parliament, which are among the first signs that problems exist relating to bad implementation of EU law and help draw attention to misapplication and potential violations of EU law;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Points out that citizens, businesses, NGOs and other organisations frequently file complaints with the Commission and that in 2013, the Commission received more new complaints (3505) than in any of the previous three years increasing the total number of open complaints by 19%; Calls on the Commission to improve its current practices to inform citizens in a timely and appropriate manner of any actions and steps taken in response to processing their complaints including giving prior notice to the complainant before closing a file;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that petitions submitted by EU citizens refer to violations of EU law, particularly in the fields of fundamental rights and the environment, home affairs, justice, health, transports, taxation, agriculture and rural development; considers that petitions give evidence of the fact that there are still frequent and widespread instances of incomplete transposition or misapplication of EU law, which requires increased efforts from the Member States and on-going monitoring from the Commission;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Reiterates that reducing late transposition is a long-established priority of the Commission's policy and should remain one of its top priorities; Welcomes the lower number of directives to be transposed in 2013 (74) in comparison with the 2011 figure (131); highlights, nevertheless, the higher number ofat there were more directives to be transposed in 2013 comparison with the 2012 figure (56ed to 2012 (74 in contrast to 56 in 2012);
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Points out that, despite the low number, late transposition of Directives remains a persistent problem hindering delivery of tangible benefits for citizens; Notes that although timely transposition of Directives continues to be a challenge in many Member States, Denmark, Latvia and Malta maintained a very low number of late transposition infringement cases over the past three years;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Notes that the four policy areas where the latest transposition infringements were launched continue to be environment, health and consumer rights, internal market and services and transport; Is of the opinion that having identified the problematic areas, the Commission and Member States should set out the actions to be taken to ensure the full and prompt transposition of European Union law in each area;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Stresses that the Commission should follow in a closer manner the transposition of Directives prior to the transposition deadline and where a risk of late transposition exists provide clarification of the legal framework in these fields in order to help Member States improve implementation in ways which reap concrete benefits in the daily lives of citizens;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 d (new)
Paragraph 4 d (new)
4d. Notes that timely transposition of EU legislation is essential for the smooth functioning of the EU, but so is the proper implementation of EU law; Stresses that very often deficiency and different standards comes from the fact that member States transpose EU laws in a different way, therefore calls on the Commission to implement a better review mechanism to examine how EU rules apply in practice at all levels in the various Member States, and how citizens and businesses are empowered to exercise their rights;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Reiterates the Commission focus on effective problem solving, effective management and preventive measures, but suggests that the Commission should think of new ways, other than formal infringement procedures, to improve the transposition and enforcement of EU law;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that the EU Pilot procedure is fully operational in all Member States andgradual phasing-in of Member States to the EU Pilot finished in June 2012 with the joining of Malta and Luxembourg, and since then the EU Pilot procedure is fully operational in all Member States; stresses that the number of new EU Pilot files has increased gradually during the past three years and the EU Pilot has produced impressive results so far, in particular with regard to the gathering of information and the improvement of the specific situation causing concern to citizens, as indicated by the reduced number of infringement procedures;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Welcomes Member States' efforts to settle the infringement cases without court proceedings within the EU pilot, which have led to a decrease in formal infringement procedures, but hopes that the Commission will clarify its legal status and will provide more information to the benefit of citizens and business alike;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Reiterates that more transparency, legal clarity and access to information on the whole pre-infringement and infringement procedure in the context of the EU Pilot and the annual report on the monitoring of the application of EU law is needed in particular when it comes to complainants;
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 – point a
Paragraph 8 – point a
(a) improved communication between the two parties, in particular with regard to the initiation and progress of infringement procedures by the Commission, including the EU Pilot procedure, so as to make sure that the European Parliament is fully informed with a view to constantly improving its legislative work,
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 – point b
Paragraph 8 – point b
(b) efforts to be made to give information and access to relevant information relating to the pre-infringement and infringement procedure to the Committee on Petitions within a reasonable timeframe, allowing the committee to respond to citizens’' requests more effectively,
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Welcomes the increasing use by the Commission of implementation plans for new pieces of EU legislation addressed to the Member States, which reduce the risks to timely and correct implementation, pre- empt transposition and application problems and, in turn, have an impact on the number of relevant petitions submitted.
Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Points out that in relation to the Commission initiative on EU regulatory fitness known as REFIT, the Commission needs to facilitate dialogue on regulatory fitness with citizens, Member States, business and civil society at large so as to ensure that quality legislation and social aspects of EU legislation are preserved and that one ideal does not progress at the expense of the other;