Activities of Pascal DURAND related to 2020/2275(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on engaging with citizens: the right to petition, the right to refer to the European Ombudsman and the European Citizens’ Initiative
Legal basis opinions (0)
Amendments (7)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 1
Paragraph 1 – point 1
1. ‘whereas the citizens of the Union have the right enshrined in Article 11(4) TEU to apply to the Commission directly to ask it to submit a proposal, within the framework of its powers, for a legal act of the Union for the purpose of implementing the Treaties; whereas the Court of Justice of the European Union has confirmed in its case law that the notion of a ‘legal act for the purpose of implementing the Treaties’ should not be interpreted restrictively and that by virtue of Article 288 TFEU such an act can mean both legislative and non- legislative measures’; whereas, in that same spirit, the EU competences relevant to the proposal should also not be interpreted restrictively;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 – point 2
Paragraph 2 – point 2
2. ‘whereas the Commission has listed a number of problems relating to the implementation of Regulation (EU) 2011/211 and whereas the new Regulation (EU) 2019/788 aims to address those issues in detail with regard to the effectiveness of the ECI as an instrument, and to bring improvements to the way it operates; whereas its implementation needs to be assessed effectively and in a timely manner, i.e. no later than 1January 2024, and every four years thereafter’;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 22 of the draft report of the Committee on Petitions touching upon the exclusive competences of AFCO should be changed as follows: 'Calls on the Ombudsman to check that the Union’s interests are not undermined by maladministration, cases of corruption or conflicts of interest, including in the context of Next Generation EU, the European recovery plan; emphasises that respect for the rule of law is an essential condition for access to EU funds; takes the view that this conditionality concerning respect for the rule of law and the fact that the European Union does not compromise on its values are factors that can strengthen citizens’ trust in the Union';
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 – point 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 – point 6 a (new)
6 a. 'Believes that, in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) 2019/788 on the ECI, in case the Commission, within the given deadlines, has failed to publish its intentions, or has set out in a communication that it intends not to take action on an ECI which has met the procedural requirements and is in line with the Treaties, in particular the core values of the Union, enshrined in Article 2 of the TEU, Parliament could, in line with Rule 222 of its Rules of Procedures, decide to follow up on the ECI with a legislative own-initiative report (INL); urges the Commission to commit itself to submitting a legislative proposal following Parliament’s adoption of such an INL; proposes in that regard to modify the current framework agreement between Parliament and the Commission; asks that the ECI regulation be amended to incentivise the Commission to table a legislative proposal where the ECI submitted meets the relevant requirements';
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 – point 7
Paragraph 7 – point 7
7. ‘Calls on the Commission to clearly inform the public about the division of competences between the Union and the Member States to make sure that ECIs concern subjects and issues that fall within the remit of EU competences to propose legal acts, and to provide practical and timely advice to the organisers on the drafting of ECIs and make adequate use of the possibility to partially register an ECI; emphasises that recently registered and ongoing ECIs have called for the EU to take more action, particularly in the fields of environmental protection, human and animal health, and civil and political rights’; therefore reiterates the need to give the EU competences relevant to the proposal the broadest possible interpretation';
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 – point 8
Paragraph 8 – point 8
8. ‘Asks the Commission to fully assess experiences with the introduction ofevaluate the temporary measures in Regulation (EU) 2020/1042, with particular regard to the extension of the collection periods and its impact on organisers’ ability to mobilise support for their ECIs, in order to inform inter alia the review process of Regulation (EU) 2019/788’;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 – point 10
Paragraph 10 – point 10
10. ‘Highlights the need to establish a proper follow-up mechanism for unsuccessful ECIs in order to takeeffectively assess citizens’ input seriously, including redirecting citizens to the Committee on Petitions, as the lack of impact could lead to disengagement; underlines the role that the Committee on Petitions must play throughout hearing processes; calls on the Commission to collaborate in a timely manner with Parliament after an ECI is deemed valid in order to enable Parliament to make full use of the three-month period for the organisation of hearings and prepare the plenary debates and resolutions on valid ECIs; insists that the objective of the longer timeframe under Regulation (EU) 2019/788 by which the Commission should respond to valid ECIs is fundamentally to enable the Commission to take full account of the views and positions on the ECIs expressed during the examination phase and to take due consideration of the possible options for the proposals for legal acts’;