Activities of Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that, for the operational budget, the S2R JU attained a rate of implementation of 94 % for the commitment appropriations and a rate of payment appropriations of 79 %; notes that, most of the payments made by the Joint Undertaking in 2017 were pre- financing payments for Horizon 2020 projects selected under the 2017 calls for proposals; notes the low (55,2%) implementation of payment appropriation in Title 2 (administrative expenditures) due to the use of multi- annual framework contracts; regrets that there were weaknesses in the budget planning process and that the S2R JU had around EUR 7,6 million unused from previous year;

2018/12/13
Committee: TRAN

2018/2212(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Notes that both, the Commission’s Finalevaluation on SESAR JU activities under FP7 and ECA’s Special report 18/2017 on Single European Sky, have drawn attention to the delays in the execution of the ATM Master Plan, and the misalignment between the fixed regulatory lifespan of the SESAR JU activities and the planned duration of the work expected; supports therefore the Court’s emphasis on the need to reinforce the Joint Undertaking’s accountability on the execution of the Master Plan;

2018/12/13
Committee: TRAN

2018/2193(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Encourages the Agency to ensure the independence of the accounting officer by making him or her directly responsible to the Agency’s Director (administratively) and to the Board (functionally), as underlined by the Court of Auditors; calls on the Agency to take into consideration and undertake all necessary actions concerning the recommendations of the Internal Audit Service for 2017 on Human Resources and competency management; welcomes the adoption of the Agency’s code of good administrative behaviour in January 2018, containing in particular all measures preventing conflicts of interest;

2018/12/18
Committee: TRAN

2018/2193(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Welcomes the Agency’s pro-active approach to transform its structure for its new tasks as defined by the Fourth railway Package, in particular through the setting up of a Steering Groups; encourages the Agency management to continue its focus on the preparation of the new tasks under the Fourth Railway Package technical pillar to be fully ready by 15 June 2019, recommending to put high priority on human resource management; notes the progress, among others, regarding preparatory decisions for the adoption of a framework for auditing Notified Bodies, as well as for the framework for the One- Stop-Shop and the policy on monitoring the performance and decision making of National Safety Authorities;

2018/12/18
Committee: TRAN

2018/2193(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Welcomes the certification, under ISO 9001, of the Agency’s Integrated Management System (IMS), which is an independent acknowledgement of the continuous improvement of the Agency’s performance; notes that in the light of the preliminary results of the assessment of the compliance and effectiveness of the internal control against the ERA management standards, it can be considered that the Agency’s control system as a whole works as intended and adequately mitigates the main risks to the achievement of the Agency’s objectives;

2018/12/18
Committee: TRAN

2018/2189(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that the Agency’s annual budget for 2017 was EUR 191,6 million, of which EUR 37,8 million came from EU subsidies, EUR 103,5 million from fees and charges and EUR 2,1 million from third countries contributions; is pleased that the Agency was very close to full implementation of its budget with 99 % execution rate, well above the Commission target of 95%; welcomes the Agency’s balanced situation as regards Fees and charges, as well as the increase of these amounts compared to 2016; notes that the Agency ended the year 2017 with a surplus of EUR 2.7 million, bringing the accumulated surplus to EUR 54,9 million; notes also that the target of 5% for the cancellations of carry-over has been met in 2017 (3,7%);

2018/12/13
Committee: TRAN

2018/2189(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Is pleased that the Agency, following a recommendation from the Parliament, in 2017 extended the scope of the Declaration of Interest exercise to all Agency’s staff (not only the managers and sensitive functions), including long term consultants, interims and trainees; welcomes the fact that the Declaration of Interest assessment process has been simplified and now is possible in electronic form; welcomes the introduction of a specific “Code of Conduct for external experts supporting EASA”, which establishes the principles governing the impartiality, independence and commitment to confidentiality of the external experts; reiterates the need to ensure the independence of Agency’s staff and external experts; notes that in order to ensure transparency, publicity and to allow potential candidates to identify vacancies, the vacancy notices should be published not only on the EASA website and in social media, but also on the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) website;

2018/12/13
Committee: TRAN

2018/2189(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Notes that in 2017 the Agency experienced a significant increase in the management of earmarked projects which altogether, amount for EUR 11,3 million (EUR 7,3 million in 2016). welcomes that these projects are aimed at improving the regulatory and oversight capabilities of national and regional aviation authorities throughout the world as well as contributing to research projects to enhance global aviation safety and to promote EU standards;

2018/12/13
Committee: TRAN

2018/2188(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that the Agency executed EUR 63,4 million in commitment appropriations, representing 98,04 % of the total budget of the year, and EUR 55,1 million in payment appropriations, amounting to 97,32 % of the total budget, taking into account the appropriations voted for the 2017 budget (C1) and automatic carry-over (C8);

2018/12/13
Committee: TRAN

2018/2188(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Regrets that delays in the Remote Piloted Aircraft Services (RPAS) operations resulted in a budget amendment which included a reduction of Union subsidy corresponding to the amount not used in 2017 and that related to the European cooperation on coast guard functions; ~~encourages~~welcomes however the Agency’s efforts, through these projects, to deliver operational services, analysis, expertise, and technical support to the Commission, the Member States and users in the maritime sector; encourages therefore the Agency to intensify its efforts to overcome legal, technical and contractual problems linked to the deployment RPAS operations;

2018/12/13
Committee: TRAN

2018/2188(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Notes that the high quality of information systems and databases developed by EMSA have resulted in an increasing interest expressed by third countries in exploring the potential for exporting the Agency’s knowledge and, by extension, EU standards and solutions beyond the geographical dimension while safeguarding Agency resources and EU interests;

2018/12/13
Committee: TRAN

2018/2166(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the finding of the Court of Auditors (‘the Court’) that the consolidated accounts of the Union for the year 2017 are reliable and that the transactions underlying the accounts of the Commission for the 2017 financial year are generally legal and regular in all material aspects, except for cost reimbursement payments, which are affected by errors; notes that the overall estimated level of error of 2,4% is still above the Court’s materiality threshold (2%), down from 3,1% in 2016 and 3,8% in 2015;

2018/12/13
Committee: TRAN

2018/2166(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that in 2017 the Commission selected 152 projects for a total of CEF Transport funding of EUR 2,7 billion, with the total investment of EUR 4,7 billion, including other public and private financing; reiterates the importance of the CEF funding instrument for the completion of the TEN-T network, for achieving a Single European Transport Area, for developing the cross-border links and filling the missing links; regrets that the opportunity offered by the CEF has not been fully appreciated by all national stakeholders; recalls that the amount of money spent under a financial instrument is not its only performance criteria and invites the Commission to deepen its assessment of the achievements completed under EU funded transport projects and measure their added-value aspect and result oriented spending;

2018/12/13
Committee: TRAN

2018/2166(DEC)

Pavel TELIČKA, Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Dominique RIQUET

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Notes that the Commission’s Internal Audit Service, as part of its audit on the Commission’s supervision of the implementation of CEF financial instruments, found that there was a very low rate of implementation of financial instruments under CEF and the majority of the budget originally allocated to CEF financial instruments (EUR 2,43 billion) was re-allocated to CEF grants budget lines, leaving only EUR 296 million available for CEF financial instruments until 2020; also notes that one of the reasons given was that the eligibility criteria of the CEF financial instruments and of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) largely overlap and potential CEF eligible projects have in fact been financed by EFSI, as it has greater political priority and a larger remit; calls on the Commission, as regards the CEF, to improve the level of awareness among beneficiaries of the eligibility rules, in particular by drawing a clear distinction between an implementation contract and subcontract - which was the main source of confusion among beneficiaries; calls on the Commission to ensure that financial instruments complement rather that substitute each other;

2018/12/13
Committee: TRAN

2018/2156(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Believes that an efficient and effective military mobility will strengthen the EU capacity to respond to emergency situations such as humanitarian crisis, natural disasters or civil emergencies;

2018/09/13
Committee: TRAN

2018/2156(INI)

Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Matthijs van MILTENBURG

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Recalls that in order to achieve fast and effective transfers of troops and military materiel, network continuity and network fitness are key elements; emphasises, in this regard, that various cross-border obstacles should be resolved and removed to achieve this aim;

2018/09/13
Committee: TRAN

2018/2156(INI)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jan HUITEMA, Frédérique RIES, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Is of the opinion that for the purpose of optimising the use of EU funds, any transport project of common interest financed by CEF should integrate, if necessary, the military mobility technical requirements at the conception phase, in order to avoid unnecessary upgrading of the infrastructure at a later stage for purely military reasons and, therefore, uneconomical use of funding;

2018/09/13
Committee: TRAN

2018/2110(INI)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jan HUITEMA, Frédérique RIES, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Elsi KATAINEN, Hilde VAUTMANS

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas training and education of drivers to promote careful driving based on which types of animals are being transported would improve the welfare of animals during transport1a; _________________ 1a https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal /pub/1966

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/2110(INI)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jan HUITEMA, Frédérique RIES, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Elsi KATAINEN, Hilde VAUTMANS

Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)

Cb. whereas proper animal handling may result in reduced time to load and unload animals, reduced weight loss, fewer injuries and wounds and better meat quality;

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/2110(INI)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jan HUITEMA, Frédérique RIES, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Elsi KATAINEN, Hilde VAUTMANS

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas the quality and the frequency of the Member States’ inspections has a direct impact on the level of compliance with the requirements;

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/2110(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)

Eb. whereas transport of live animals increases the risk of spread of infectious animal diseases; whereas sufficient biosecurity measures are necessary since transport related stress may impair the immune system of the animals and make them more sensitive to diseases;1a _________________ 1a https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal /pub/1966

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/2110(INI)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jan HUITEMA, Frédérique RIES, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Elsi KATAINEN, Hilde VAUTMANS

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)

Fa. whereas Member States are responsible for ensuring correct implementation and enforcement of Regulation 1/2005 at national level, including official inspections while the Commission is responsible for ensuring that Member States implement EU legislation properly;

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/2110(INI)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jan HUITEMA, Frédérique RIES, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Hilde VAUTMANS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that repeated infringements should lead to prosecution, penalties including the confiscation of vehicles, and compulsory retraining of those responsible for the welfare and transport of animals; considers that the penalties should reflect the damage, scope, duration and recurrence of the infringement;

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/2110(INI)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Frédérique RIES, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Recalls that the Commission in her role as Guardian of the Treaties is responsible for monitoring whether EU laws are applied correctly; calls on the European Ombudsman to investigate whether the Commission has consistently failed to ensure compliance with the current Regulation and if the Commission could thus be responsible for maladministration;

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/2110(INI)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Frédérique RIES, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9b. Recognises that the DG SANTE audits serves as an important source of information for the Commission to assess correct implementation of the current Regulation; calls on the Commission to carry out at least seven unannounced visits every year in line with the European Court of Audits recommendation;

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/2110(INI)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Frédérique RIES, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Takes note of the public interest in ensuring welfare of transported animals; therefore calls on the Commission to make the Trade Control and Expert System (TRACES) open to the public, in order to inform customers and suppliers along the livestock supply chain of the quality of the journeys;

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/2110(INI)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jan HUITEMA, Frédérique RIES, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Calls on the Commission to develop a strategy to shift from ~~live transport to a~~transport of live animals for the sole purpose of being slaughtered to promote trade of meat- and- carcasses~~-only trade~~ and replace transport of breeding animals with semen or embryos, given the environmental, animal welfare and food safety impact of live animal transport;

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/2110(INI)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jan HUITEMA, Frédérique RIES, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Elsi KATAINEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Welcomes the Commission's commitment to develop animal-based welfare indicators, considers that the Commission should develop these indicators without delay to be used as a complement to current legislative requirements, the animal-based welfare indicators should promote better animal welfare outcomes of animals in transport;

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/2110(INI)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Frédérique RIES, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)

19b. Calls on the Commission to ensure that stunning is performed, without exception, before religious ritual slaughter in all member states;

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/2110(INI)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jan HUITEMA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 c (new)

19c. Recognizes that lower stocking densities and interrupting journeys to let animals rest have an adverse economic impact on transport operators which may affect the proper handling of transported animals; Calls on the Commission to encourage incentives for the proper handling of transported animals;

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/2110(INI)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jan HUITEMA, Frédérique RIES, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Hilde VAUTMANS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Calls on the Commission to take action to prevent the spread of infectious diseases of animals in transport both within EU and coming from third countries by promoting biosecurity measures, increased animal welfare and give priority to direct transport that reduce the risk for direct or indirect contact with animals from other holdings, and avoid unloading at control posts if possible;

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/2110(INI)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Frédérique RIES, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Elsi KATAINEN, Hilde VAUTMANS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)

20b. Calls on the Commission to formulate, based on scientific findings, guidelines regarding water to animals transported in cages and conditions for transporting chicks that promote a high level of welfare;

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/2110(INI)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jan HUITEMA, Frédérique RIES, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Calls for the upcoming CAP reform to maintain and reinforce the link between ~~increased~~ CAP payments and improved animal welfare conditions which fully respect or go beyond the standards set out in Regulation 1/2005;

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/2110(INI)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Frédérique RIES, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Is concerned at persistent reports of animal welfare problems in third countries; calls on the Commission and Member States to promote a shift towards the transport of meat or carcasses, instead of live animals, and replace transport of breeding animals with semen or embryos to third countries;

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/2102(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Points out that, generally speaking, European competition policy is applied with the aim of systematically defending ~~consumers at the expense~~fair competition between all actors on the internal market, with special emphasis on the interests of consumers; considers that interests of agricultural producers;, considumers ~~that these two interest~~and European citizens should be placed on an equal footing;

2018/10/15
Committee: AGRI

2018/2102(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission to ensure that the interests of farmers are protected ~~follow~~when assessing ~~the~~an acquisition ~~of Monsanto by the Bayer group, which~~in relation to merger controls, which potentially could damage competition in the field of access to ~~crop protection products and seed~~essential products for farmers.

2018/10/15
Committee: AGRI

2018/2090(INI)

Carolina PUNSET, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights the vital role of education and training as the best investment in the EU’'s future; strongly believes that digital transformation has a great impact on education systems; stresses that digital competencies are of growing importance for every individual and underlines that in the future, nearly all jobs and services will require digital skills and data literacy;

2018/09/06
Committee: ITRE

2018/2090(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the Commission communication of 17 January 2018 on the Digital Education Action Plan (COM(2018)0022) and recalls the importance of completing the digital single market; points out that digitalisation has a twofold impact on education systems: firstly, citizens should be prepared for lifelong learning in a world that is becoming increasingly digitalised, and secondly, digital transformation should also be applied to education systems themselves, as well as to educators;

2018/09/06
Committee: ITRE

2018/2090(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Welcomes the Commission proposal to set up the Digital Europe Programme that will strengthen the EU΄s digital transformation and tackle key digital challenges, including advanced digital skills and building strong digital capacities;

2018/09/06
Committee: ITRE

2018/2090(INI)

Carolina PUNSET, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines that sufficient infrastructure offering high-quality and accessible connectivity is of great importance and enable access to the opportunities offered by technology; highlights the need to close the digital divide by creating an investment- friendly environment and fostering digital infrastructure such as high-capacity broadband networks; emphasizes the importance of the Connecting Europe Facility in providing the physical infrastructure for high capacity broadband networks;

2018/09/06
Committee: ITRE

2018/2090(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses the vital role of high- capacity broadband networks, cybersecurity and artificial intelligence as the backbone of future education and training schemes; underlines the importance of introducing coding classes in all schools and encouraging schools to participate in the EU Code Week; highlights the need to introduce cybersecurity teaching programmes in academic and vocational training curricula;

2018/09/06
Committee: ITRE

2018/2090(INI)

Carolina PUNSET, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses the urgent need to develop the full range of digital skills that individuals and companies will require in an increasingly digital economy; highlights the role that Digital Innovation Hubs can play in this context; underlines the need to strengthen connections and active dialogue between education and employment~~; recalls the need to encourage young people to pursue ICT studies~~ and recognises the importance of fostering work-based learning apprenticeships; recalls the need to encourage young people to pursue ICT studies; welcomes, in this direction, the Digital Opportunity traineeship initiative financed by Horizon 2020 and implemented through Erasmus+; emphasises that recommendations for a minimum level of digital competencies that students should acquire during their studies should be drawn up.;

2018/09/06
Committee: ITRE

2018/2090(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Stresses the need to boost entrepreneurial competences and an entrepreneurial mind-set and to support digital entrepreneurship; Underlines the role of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT) and the Knowledge and Innovation Communities in bringing together business, research and education into a knowledge triangle; Highlights the role of campus incubators and stresses the need to develop more university-linked incubation programmes in European universities;

2018/09/06
Committee: ITRE

2018/2090(INI)

Elsi KATAINEN, Nils TORVALDS, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI, Mirja VEHKAPERÄ, Pavel TELIČKA, Hilde VAUTMANS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Recalls that digital technology and access to data are enablers of innovation in education; Stresses the importance of open data as an educational resource, as well as a tool for further developing Open Science.

2018/09/06
Committee: ITRE

2018/2046(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Regrets that the support measures for the Russian embargo have not been prolonged given that numerous EU producers are still being negatively affected; calls for support measures for the dairy sector where market difficulties can still be found due to the Russian ban;

2018/07/16
Committee: AGRI

2018/2046(BUD)

Nils TORVALDS, Pavel TELIČKA, Gérard DEPREZ, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 64

64. ~~Welcom~~Notes the decision of 25 September 2018 of the General Court confirming the Parliament’s refusal to grant access to documents relating to MEPs’ subsistence allowances, travel expenses and parliamentary assistance allowances (Judgment in Cases T-639/15 to T-666/15 Maria Psara and Others v Parliament and T-94/16 Gavin Sheridan v Parliament); regrets the decision of the Bureau to block a substantial reform of the General Expenditure Allowance; continues to support a substantial reform of the General Expenditure Allowance as proposed by the Working Group on the GEA as this would create greater transparency by allowing an auditor to check the relevant accounts;

2018/10/03
Committee: BUDG

2018/2037(INI)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Hilde VAUTMANS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Affirms that EU trade and agriculture policies are closely intertwined and will remain so in the future, given the important role of agriculture in the context of negotiations both bilaterally for EU free trade agreements and multilaterally at the World Trade Organisation (WTO), on issues such as market access for agricultural products, the protection of geographical indications, sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) rules, ~~harmonisation of animal welfare~~prudent use of antimicrobial medicines, ensuring that the agricultural products imported to the internal market are produced respecting the rules on animal welfare and other food safety standards of the EU and other standards, and the simplification of import procedures;

2018/03/28
Committee: INTA

2018/2037(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas the Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) is the most integrated and successful EU policy, serving as basis for European integration, and should remain a common policy with an a~~mbitious~~dequate budget;

2018/03/28
Committee: ENVI

2018/2037(INI)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Regrets the lack of progress on domestic support in agriculture at the 11th WTO Ministerial Conference; reiterates that any future EU position on this topic must duly respect the framework of the reformed CAPminds that the EU has run down the export subsidies on its side and there is no budget line left for the export subsidies in the current EU budget; invites EU trading partners, in this regard, to make commitments to reducing trade- distorting domestic support; calls on the WTO members that continue to grant export subsidies to implement the Ministerial Decision on Export Competition adopted in Nairobi on 19 December 2015;

2018/03/28
Committee: INTA

2018/2037(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Regrets the lack of progress on domestic support in agriculture at the 11th WTO Ministerial Conference; reiterates that any future EU position on this topic must duly respect the framework of the reformed CAP;

2018/03/28
Committee: INTA

2018/2037(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the European Union’s overarching objective of multifunctional agriculture, ~~driven by family farms,~~ remains key to delivering the positive externalities and public goods that European citizens demand;

2018/03/22
Committee: AGRI

2018/2037(INI)

Elsi KATAINEN, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Hilde VAUTMANS, Jan HUITEMA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Petri SARVAMAA

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas the new delivery model (NDM) is at the core of the Commission’s communication on the Future of Food and Farming, and is to be welcomed, provided that it ensures genuine simplification, not only at EU level but also at Member State and regional level, and flexibility ~~for farmer~~and simplification for beneficiaries, without adding new constraints on Member States and thus a new layer of complexity, while safeguarding the functioning of the internal market and a level playing field;

2018/03/22
Committee: AGRI

2018/2037(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Pavel TELIČKA, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Ulrike MÜLLER

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas the CAP must play an important role in overcoming stagnation and volatility of farm incomes which, despite the concentration and intensification of production and increasing productivity, are still lower than in the rest of the economy and in comparison to EU’s key competitors;

2018/03/22
Committee: AGRI

2018/2037(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Calls for a ~~CAP that has its top priority the transition of each European farm towards an undertaking combining economic with environmental performance standar~~result-based CAP that is aligned with other EU policies and has its top priority the transition to market-driven and sustainable European agriculture by enhancing competiveness and setting European environmental, sustainable and societal development performance targets for the delivery of public goods;

2018/03/28
Committee: ENVI

2018/2037(INI)

Hilde VAUTMANS, Pavel TELIČKA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Elsi KATAINEN, Petri SARVAMAA

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas it is essential to ensure a fair standard of living for farmers across regions and Member States ensuring there is agricultural activity in all parts of the Union including in areas with natural constraints, affordable prices for citizens and consumers, and access to high quality food and healthy diets, while delivering on the commitments for environmental care, climate action, and animal and plant health and welfare;

2018/03/22
Committee: AGRI

2018/2037(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Elsi KATAINEN, Pavel TELIČKA, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI, Ulrike MÜLLER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls for a renovated second pillar that is less complex and more efficient, focused on truly incentive territorial and sector development policies that place agro-environmental initiatives, animal welfare, investment, training, research and innovation at the core of local issues;

2018/03/27
Committee: ENVI

2018/2037(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Pavel TELIČKA, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Considers that ~~only with suc~~with a complementary or merged model ~~can~~ the EU’s ambitious goals with regard to the environment and rural development can be reached;

2018/03/27
Committee: ENVI

Ulrike MÜLLER, Elsi KATAINEN, Hilde VAUTMANS, Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA

15a. Recalls that the generation renewal and the installation of young farmers must be encouraged by measures of CAP keeping in mind that it is also highly dependent on the overall income perspective, the image of agriculture and the quality of life in rural areas that can be improved through rural development measures like easing their access to land, loans and credits as well as priority access to national reserve funds;

2018/03/23
Committee: AGRI

2018/2037(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Underlines the importance of rural development, including the LEADER initiative, in supporting multi-functional agriculture and in fostering additional entrepreneurial activities and opportunities, in order to generate income from agri- tourism, and to secure community- supported agriculture and the provision of social services in rural areas; the overall objective has to be to improve the quality of life in rural areas;

2018/03/23
Committee: AGRI

2018/2037(INI)

Elsi KATAINEN, Hilde VAUTMANS, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Petri SARVAMAA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Stresses the importance to promote and enhance the role of co-operatives, producers groups and small scale organisations over the long term for supporting the implementation of the CAP objectives;

2018/03/23
Committee: AGRI

2018/2037(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Elsi KATAINEN, Hilde VAUTMANS, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jan HUITEMA, Ivan JAKOVČIĆ, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Calls on the Commission to foster innovation, research and modernisation ~~in agriculture by supporting training and agricultural~~by supporting a strong advisory system and training better adapted to needs of CAP beneficiaries; training and extension as a pre-condition in programme design and implementation in all Member States, while fostering ~~the transfer of know-how and the exchange of~~know-how transfer and best practice models exchange between Members States;

2018/03/23
Committee: AGRI

2018/2037(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Elsi KATAINEN, Hilde VAUTMANS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Calls on the Commission to foster innovation and modernisation in agriculture and food sector by supporting training and agricultural extension as a ~~pre-condition~~n important part in programme design and implementation in all Member States, while fostering the transfer of know-how and the exchange of best practice models between Member States;

2018/03/23
Committee: AGRI

2018/2037(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Elsi KATAINEN, Hilde VAUTMANS, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jan HUITEMA, Ivan JAKOVČIĆ, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Underlines that the Commission should be regularly evaluating such a support and measuring innovation and modernisation wherever possible;

2018/03/23
Committee: AGRI

2018/2037(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Elsi KATAINEN, Hilde VAUTMANS, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jan HUITEMA, Ivan JAKOVČIĆ, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)

19b. Believes that investments in innovation, education and training are vital for the future of European agriculture;

2018/03/23
Committee: AGRI

2018/2037(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Believes in risk diversification and the development of other tools such as insurance schemes and futures markets; emphasises that crisis mechanisms must be deeply reformed and simplified in order to recognise the different type of crisis: - seasonal crises e.g. fresh fruit and vegetables at the end of the season, - market crises e.g the past extreme price fluctuations for milk, - catastrophic crises such as natural disasters, - political crisis such as Russian ban which require different tools adapted to their own specificities;

2018/03/23
Committee: AGRI

2018/2037(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Elsi KATAINEN, Hilde VAUTMANS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)

21b. Believes that farmers should be given all the necessary tools to respond to volatility and market signals through greater transparency of markets and free and fair trade conditions;

2018/03/23
Committee: AGRI

2018/2037(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Ulrike MÜLLER, Elsi KATAINEN, Jens ROHDE, Pavel TELIČKA, Hilde VAUTMANS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Calls for clear and transparent initiatives to promote EU production, safety and environmental standards and quality production schemes, through both labelling and marketing activities on internal and third-country markets;

2018/03/23
Committee: AGRI

2018/2037(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Stresses that Parliament and the Council should, via the co-decision procedure, set the ~~general~~basic common objectives, measures and financial allocations, based on the objective indicators and determine the adequate level of flexibility needed to enable the Member States to cope with their specificities and needs in line with the single market;

2018/03/23
Committee: AGRI

2018/2037(INI)

Morten PETERSEN, Pavel TELIČKA, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Carolina PUNSET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. ~~Regrets the fact that~~Although the whole process of the CAP post-2020 programming exercise – consultation, communication, impact assessment and legislative proposals – is starting with a significant delay as the end of the eighth legislature approaches, it should not jeopardis~~ing~~e the possibility of a final agreement being reached before the European elections;

2018/03/23
Committee: AGRI

2018/2023(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Underlines that although more than 65 % of battery electric vehicles and plug- in hybrid electric vehicles are produced outside the Union and new mobility will lead to a shift in skills, it is crucial to ensure the momentum to boost our industry and create new clean energy jobs in Europe as well as to reduce the CO2 emissions in the Transport sector; calls on the Member States to accelerate the uptake of research related to electro-mobility by making full use of EU funds; calls, therefore, for adequate and ambitious EU funding under the next multiannual financial framework to address potential gaps;

2018/06/19
Committee: ITRE

2018/2023(INI)

Morten PETERSEN, Pavel TELIČKA, Carolina PUNSET, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Calls on transmission system operators and distribution system operators to ensure better cross border flows of electricity and thereby improve the stability of local grids and to mitigate a future energy consumption peak and thus a de facto potential increase in energy prices; stresses, therefore, the crucial need to develop and invest in smart charging technologies, including smart grids; underlines that although smart charging will go hand in hand with self- consumption and active consumers, security of supply is essential;

2018/06/19
Committee: ITRE

2018/2023(INI)

Morten PETERSEN, Pavel TELIČKA, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Carolina PUNSET

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses the importance of ensuring fair access for electricity providers to recharging points in order to avoid a monopoly situation; calls on the Commission to promote open access for all relevant actors, including actors from other Member States, to the market to ensure that consumers have a free choice of energy suppliers and energy sources;

2018/06/19
Committee: ITRE

2018/2008(INI)

Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

A a. whereas such unfair practices have to be cut out to avoid any misleading for consumers and considering that only a strong synergy at the EU level can solve this cross-border issue;

2018/03/02
Committee: AGRI

2018/2008(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)

Fb. whereas there is a continuous need to strengthen the role of consumer associations in this regards; whereas consumer associations play an unique role in guaranteeing consumers 'confidence and need to be further supported through additional legal and economic measures and capacity building;

2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO

2018/2008(INI)

Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Underlines that results of ~~vari~~numerous tests and surveys conducted in several Member States have proven that there are differences, inter alia in composition and ingredients or substances used, between products which are advertised and distributed in the single market under the same brand and with the ~~same~~identical packaging;

2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO

2018/2008(INI)

Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Recital C

C. whereas the analyses show that certain products contain less meat, or less of other ingredients, in certain countries, in most cases those countries which joined the EU in 2004, 2007 and 2013; whereas the analyses found instances of the same products being sold at considerably higher prices in those countries than in the so- called ‘old Member States’, thus hindering the principle that all consumers are treated equally;

2018/03/02
Committee: AGRI

2018/2008(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Recalls that based on these findings, consumers are concerned about discrimination between different Member States markets; underlines that any type of such discrimination is not acceptable and all EU consumers should enjoy access to the equivalent level of quality of products;

2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO

2018/2008(INI)

Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights that the cases when such significant differences were reported concern not only food products but frequently also non-food products, including detergents, cosmetics, toiletries and products intended for babies;

2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO

2018/2008(INI)

Ivan JAKOVČIĆ, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the allocation of EUR 2 million to develop a methodology for, and conduct, comparative testing of food products in different Member States; expects the testing to be completed at the earliest possible date, preferably in 2018;deleted

2018/03/02
Committee: AGRI

2018/2008(INI)

Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Takes note of the mandate given to the High Level Forum for a Better Functioning Food Supply Chain to address the issue of dual quality; encourages Member States and their competent authorities to actively participate in ongoing initiatives, including the development of a common methodology and collection of further evidence; emphasizes that the key for tackling this problem in practice is an effective and swift cross-border cooperation of relevant authorities including information exchange on potentially non-compliant products;

2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO

2018/2008(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Firmly believes that, in response to ~~European citizens’~~the sector's concerns about different products being sold under the same brand in different Member States, the practice of ‘one brand, one product, different content and proportional composition’ ~~need~~is unacceptable and has to be stopped by means of an amendment to Directive 2005/29/EC of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices;

2018/03/02
Committee: AGRI

2018/2008(INI)

Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. CIs of the opinion that manufacturers should be proactive by taking appropriate measures respecting the consumers and not wait for the new legislation to be put into place; considers that, until that practice is stopped, and in order to raise the profile of manufacturers’ initiatives on the use of local recipes, a system should be introduced for indicating, in a way that respects the consumer’s right of informed choice and consumer preferences, the local recipes used in the preparation of specific products;

2018/03/02
Committee: AGRI

2018/2008(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Considers that the Notice is perceived as primarily intended for foodstuffs; believes that provisions on the application of consumer protection law should be applied to all products available in the single market in general;

2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO

2018/2008(INI)

Ivan JAKOVČIĆ, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Manufacturers are invited to consider a logo on the packaging that would indicate that the content and the quality of the same brand and packaging product is the same across Member States;

2018/03/02
Committee: AGRI

2018/2008(INI)

Ivan JAKOVČIĆ, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Welcomes the allocation of EUR 2 million to develop a methodology for, and conduct, comparative testing of food products in different Member States; expects the testing to be completed at the earliest possible date, preferably in 2018;

2018/03/02
Committee: AGRI

2018/2008(INI)

Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls for the establishment of a~~n agency or other~~ specialised unit, within the existing bodies, to monitor consistency of composition and proportional use of ingredients in identically branded and packaged food products.

2018/03/02
Committee: AGRI

2018/2008(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Points out that national competent authorities can select samples and perform tests only on the territory of their Member State; ~~stresses the importance, therefore, of~~highlights the need for enhanced, effective and transparent cooperation between national consumer protection and food authorities, consumers associations and the Commission; welcomes the adoption of the revised Consumer Protection Cooperation Regulation11 in this regard; _________________ 11 Regulation (EU) 2017/2394; OJ L 345, 27.12.2017, p. 1.

2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO

2018/2008(INI)

Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Emphasises the value of public debate that leads to increased consumer awareness about products and their characteristics; notes that some manufacturers and owners of private labels have already announced changes to recipes; ~~highlights~~stresses the importance of the role of industry in improving transparency with regard to product composition; calls for even stronger involvement of both producers and retailers which will help to find effective remedy to the current situation without triggering enforcement procedures;

2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO

2018/2008(INI)

Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Believes that it is in the interest of all relevant stakeholders, both private and public, to identify as soon as possible workable solutions which would enable European consumers to access same quality products within the entire single market; recalls that consumers´ confidence in suppliers and retailers and, above all, in the functioning of the EU internal market is at stake;

2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO

2018/2008(INI)

Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Believes that the experiences of competent authorities thus far suggest that they have been unable individually to tackle effectively any specific cases of dual quality at national level; reiterates therefore the need for an effective cross- border cooperation and calls on the Commission and Member States to engage in it more intensively;

2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO

2018/2008(INI)

Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Calls on the Commission, therefore, to amend ~~Annex I to~~ the UCPD by introducing ~~another item onto the ‘blacklist’~~dual quality of products into its scope;

2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO

2018/2008(INI)

Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Calls on the Commission to extend the mandate given to the Joint Research Centre to work on a harmonised methodology for comparing characteristics of non-food products in the near future; JRC should also reach out for a cooperation to Member States authorities which has already undertaken their own testing of products for exchange of best practices in this area;

2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO

2018/2001(BUD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Pavel TELIČKA, Nils TORVALDS, Urmas PAET, Jean ARTHUIS, Louis MICHEL, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas, in the case of the US House of Representatives, the total appropriations dedicated to the representational allowance of Members amounted to 500 million for 435 Representatives8 , whereas for Parliament, those appropriations amounted to 458 million for 751 MEPs9 ; __________________ 8CRS report on Legislative Branch: FY2016 Appropriations, 1 February 2016. 9 Report of the Secretary General to the Bureau on the Preliminary Draft Estimates of the European Parliament for the Financial Year 2019;deleted

2018/03/14
Committee: BUDG

2018/2001(BUD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Pavel TELIČKA, Nils TORVALDS, Jean ARTHUIS, Louis MICHEL, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses that savings, of at least EUR 17 million, compared to the proposal of the Secretary-General are required, but the priority is the efficient use of the budget, without undermining the core competences of the European Parliament;

2018/03/14
Committee: BUDG

2018/2001(BUD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Pavel TELIČKA, Nils TORVALDS, Urmas PAET, Jean ARTHUIS, Louis MICHEL, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Notes that, as was the case for budgets for previous years, it is proposed to set aside an amount for ‘extraordinary’ investment and expenditure, i.e. investment and expenditure that is unusual or atypical for Parliament and arises infrequently; notes that in 2019, those investments and expenditure amount to EUR 71,6 million, including EUR 37,3 million for the change of parliamentary term and EUR 34,3 million for other extraordinary expenditure; recalls that the distinction, made in the 2016 budget and included in the consecutive budgets, between ordinary and extraordinary expenditure was made solely in order to respond to the implementation of urgent measures concerning security buildings and cybersecurity following the terrorists attacks; considers that the excessive use of this distinction, i.e. the inclusion of other expenditure in extraordinary expenditure, gives an erroneous indication of the evolution of the budgetary margin and is therefore in contradiction with the principle of transparency of Parliament's expenditure;

2018/03/14
Committee: BUDG

2018/2001(BUD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Pavel TELIČKA, Nils TORVALDS, Jean ARTHUIS, Louis MICHEL, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Notes that the Committee on Constitutional Affairs confirmed with the vote in plenary in February 2018 an own- initiative report on Parliament’s composition, and notably the reduction to 705 Members after the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the Union; notes that in the event that the United Kingdom is still a Member State at the beginning of the 2019-2024 parliamentary term, the number of Members shall be 751, until the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the Union becomes legally effective; points out, however, that the procedure requires a unanimous decision by the European Council after having obtained the consent of Parliament; underlines that Parliament’s estimates, for the moment, reflect a status-quo situation with a Parliament composed of 751 Members from 28 Member States;that during an informal meeting of the 27 heads of state or government on 23 February 2018, President Tusk signalled a broad support for this proposal; believes, therefore, this outcome to be considered the most likely; for that reason, takes note with satisfaction of the adjustments proposed by the Secretary- General in his note to the members of the Bureau on March 6, 2018.

2018/03/14
Committee: BUDG

2018/2001(BUD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Pavel TELIČKA, Nils TORVALDS, Jean ARTHUIS, Louis MICHEL, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Welcomes the Memorandum of Understanding which entered into force in 2017 between the Belgian Government and the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission, the European External Action Service, and other institutions based in Brussels, on security clearance checks verifications for all external contractors’ staff wishing to access the Union institutions; reminds its call, in the 2018 Parliament’s estimates of revenue and expenditure, to the Secretary-General to consider the advisability of extending the application of this Memorandum of Understanding to officials, parliamentary assistants and trainees in order to allow the necessary security verifications before their recruitment; asks, therefore, the Secretary-General to inform the Committee on Budgets of the state of progress of this file;

2018/03/14
Committee: BUDG

2018/2001(BUD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Pavel TELIČKA, Nils TORVALDS, Jean ARTHUIS, Louis MICHEL, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. ~~Welcom~~Notes the process of improving Members’ and staff working environments as decided by the Bureau in December 2017, which will continue in 2019 in order to provide flexible workspaces for Members to satisfy needs arising from changing working patterns, providing them with three offices in Brussels and two in Strasbourg after the 2019 elections; notes that costs for maintenance of Parliament’s buildings in 2019, including security and environmental requirements~~, should be taken into account and coordinated a~~; questions the very high costs of certain proposed developments, namely: the removal of the Library and related offices, the installation of the Atrium building visitors' seminar rooms, the refurbishment of the Members' restaurant (Spinelli building) and the refurbishment of the Churchill building's restaurant; calls on the Secretary-General to provide the Committee on Budgets with any information relating to these decisions before the Parliament's rea~~rly as possible~~ding of the budget in autumn 2018; questions if it is not possible to postpone all or part of these projects;

2018/03/14
Committee: BUDG

2018/2001(BUD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Pavel TELIČKA, Nils TORVALDS, Jean ARTHUIS, Louis MICHEL, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Welcomes in particular the ever- increasing quality of advice and research provided to Members and committees through the European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS) and the policy departments; recalls, however, that a mid- term evaluation of the efficacy of the cooperation between the European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS) and the policy departments was foreseen when creating the EPRS in 2013; requests once again the Secretary-General to proceed to undertake such an evaluation and present to the Committee on Budgets its results before the Parliament's reading of the budget in autumn 2018; welcomes the new and existing specific projects in the IT application, which will be implemented in full or in part in 2019: e- Parliament project, the Electronic Records Management System (ERMS) project, the Open Digital Library Program, the new project on research and development on machine learning with translation memories and the conference and event participants’ registration tool;

2018/03/14
Committee: BUDG

2018/2001(BUD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Pavel TELIČKA, Nils TORVALDS, Jean ARTHUIS, Louis MICHEL, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Recalls the abovementioned resolutions of 5 April 2017 on Parliament's estimates of revenue and expenditure for the financial year 201812 and of 25 October 2017 on the Council position on the draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 201813 ; reiterates the appeal for transparency regarding the General Expenditure Allowance (GEA) for Members; calls on Parliament's Bureau to work on better guidance regarding the accountability of the expenditure authorised under this allowance~~, without generating additional costs or administrative burden to Parliament´s administration or to Members and their offices~~; __________________ 12 Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0114. 13 Texts adopted, P8_TA_PROV(2017)0408

2018/03/14
Committee: BUDG

2018/2001(BUD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Pavel TELIČKA, Nils TORVALDS, Jean ARTHUIS, Louis MICHEL, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Recalls the principle of the independence of the mandate; underlines that it is the responsibility of elected Members to use the expenditures for parliamentary activities and that it is possible for Members who wish to do so to publish their spending record of the GEA on their personal webpages; stresses th~~e fact that the lump sum is widely used and recognised as the useful tool in Member States~~at a mixed system must be introduced where a part of the GEA remain as a lump sum and the rest would be paid out based on invoices or subject to an audit; reiterates that improved efficiency and transparency of the GEA does not mean to infringe upon the privacy ~~and should not require additional staff in Parliament's administration~~;

2018/03/14
Committee: BUDG

2018/2001(BUD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Pavel TELIČKA, Nils TORVALDS, Jean ARTHUIS, Louis MICHEL, Charles GOERENS, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Calls on the Bureau to ensure that the social and pension rights of Members and of Accredited Parliamentary Assistants are respected and that adequate financial means are made available; in this regard, reiterates its call to find a workable solution for those APAs who, having worked for two parliamentary terms in the end of the current term, will not be entitled to access to the European pension rights scheme, when they will reach the pension age, since they will be lacking some time out of the ten years' service needed, due to early elections in 2014 and the delays in the validation of the APAs new contracts because of heavy workload during the periods after the elections of 2009 and 2014;

2018/03/14
Committee: BUDG

2018/2001(BUD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Pavel TELIČKA, Nils TORVALDS, Urmas PAET, Jean ARTHUIS, Louis MICHEL, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Considers it appropriate to have an adequate increase in budget line 422 ‘Expenditure related to parliamentary assistance’, in particular taking into account the higher workload as a result of the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the Union, the growing number of trilogues, the increasing number of temporary and special committees, reaching a historical threshold of 25 standing and temporary committees, and the coincidence of the end of legislature with the complex package of legislative MFF proposals;deleted

2018/03/14
Committee: BUDG

2018/2001(BUD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Pavel TELIČKA, Nils TORVALDS, Jean ARTHUIS, Louis MICHEL, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)

30 a. Notes the on-going practice of using the year-end 'mopping up transfer' (ramassage) to contribute to current building projects; highlights, on the basis of the figures 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017, that this year-end 'mopping up transfer' takes place systematically on the same chapters and title and, with a few exceptions, exactly on the same lines; wonders, therefore, whether there is a programmed overvaluation of these chapters and lines in order to generate funds for the financing of budgetary policy;

2018/03/14
Committee: BUDG

2018/2001(BUD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Pavel TELIČKA, Jean ARTHUIS, Louis MICHEL, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 b (new)

30 b. Questions the necessity of having headsets and webcams installed in the offices in Brussels and Strasbourg for all parliamentary assistants, even though most of them have not even requested it; questions, therefore, the cost of such a decision and the reasons for taking it; calls on the Secretary-General to provide the Committee on Budgets with any information relating to this decision;

2018/03/14
Committee: BUDG

2018/2001(BUD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Pavel TELIČKA, Jean ARTHUIS, Louis MICHEL, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 c (new)

30 c. Notes that the restrictions on the access to the Parliament's catering areas were lifted on January 1, 2017; accepts the practice that anyone working in Parliament's buildings or accessing its premises for an interinstitutional meeting to have lunch in the canteens and restaurants of the Parliament; notes, however, that access to ASP self-service in Brussels and LOW self-service in Strasbourg has become very complicated due to the daily presence of groups of visitors; calls, therefore, for controls to be re-established rapidly at the entrance of these two self-services, not for members and staff of other institutions, but in order to systematically reorient these groups towards the restauration areas reserved for them;

2018/03/14
Committee: BUDG

2018/0332(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 5

(5) This Directive should not prejudice the right of each Member State to decide on the standard time or times for the territories under its jurisdiction and falling under the territorial scope of the Treaties, and on further changes thereto. However, in order to ensure that the application of summer-time arrangements by some Member States only does not disrupt the functioning of the internal market and ensure a coordinated approach, Member States should refrain from changing the standard time in any given territory under their jurisdiction for reasons related to seasonal changes, be such change presented as a change of time zone. Moreover, in order to minimise disruptions, inter alia, to transport, communications and other concerned sectors, they should notify the Commission in due time of their intention to change their standard time ~~and subsequently apply the notified changes. The Commission should, on the basis of that notification, inform all other Member States so that they can~~. The Commission should then assess the potential negative impact of such change on the functioning of the internal market. Only after such exchange and proper analysis and only if no significant negative impact on the Internal Market would be identified, could a Member State apply the notified changes. The Commission should, on the basis of that notification, inform all other Member States so that they can inform the Commission if they have reasons to believe that the change would impact the Internal Market and/or them, if the change is confirmed and take all necessary measures. It should also inform the general public and stakeholders by publishing this information.

2019/01/30
Committee: ITRE

2018/0332(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7

(7) This Directive should apply from 1 April 20219, so that the last summer-time period subject to the rules of Directive 2000/84/EC should start, in every Member State, at 1.00 a.m., Coordinated Universal Time, on 31 March 20219. Member States that, after that summer-time period, intend to adopt a standard time corresponding to the time applied during the winter season in accordance with Directive 2000/84/EC should change their standard time at 1.00 a.m., Coordinated Universal Time, on 27 October 20219, so that similar and lasting changes occurring in different Member States take place simultaneously. It is desirable that Member States take the decisions on the standard time that each of them will apply as from 20219 in a concerted manner.

2019/01/30
Committee: ITRE

2018/0332(COD)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2

2. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, Member States may still apply a seasonal change of their standard time or times in 20219, provided that they do so at 1.00 a.m., Coordinated Universal Time, on 275 October 20219. The Member States shall notify this decision in accordance with Article 2.

2019/01/30
Committee: ITRE

2018/0332(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1

1. Without prejudice to Article 1, if a Member State decides to change its standard time or times in any territory under its jurisdiction, it shall notify the Commission at least 6 months before the change takes effect. ~~Where a Member State has made such a notification and has not withdrawn it at least 6 months before the date of the envisaged change, the Member State shall apply this change.~~

2019/01/30
Committee: ITRE

2018/0332(COD)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2

2. Within 1 month of the notification, the Commission shall inform the other Member States thereof ~~and publish that information in the Official Journal of the European Union~~. The other Member States shall inform the Commission without undue delay of potential disruptions or negative impact that the proposed notified change might bring. Within 3 months of the notification, the Commission shall publish an impact assessment of the planned change of standard time or times on possible negative impacts on for example the functioning of the internal market.

2019/01/30
Committee: ITRE

2018/0332(COD)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. If, following the assessment referred to in paragraph 2, the Impact assessment demonstrate that the planned change of standard time or times will have a negative impact, it shall inform the Member State in question. That Member State shall then decide if it will redraw its notification to change its standard time or times or explain how it will counter the negative impact of the change.

2019/01/30
Committee: ITRE

2018/0332(COD)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. If, following the assessment referred to in paragraph 2, the Impact assessment do not demonstrate that the planned change of standard time or times will have a negative impact or the Member State concerned has provided to the Commission within two months after the publication of the Impact assessment with the explanations referred to in paragraph 2a, the Member State may apply this change. The Commission shall publish that information in the Official Journal of the European Union.

2019/01/30
Committee: ITRE

2018/0332(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Member States shall adopt and publish, by 31 ~~April~~December 201920 at the latest, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions.

2019/01/30
Committee: ITRE

2018/0332(COD)

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

They shall apply those provisions from 1 April 20219.

2019/01/30
Committee: ITRE

2018/0332(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1

Directive 2000/84/EC is repealed with effect from 1 April 20219.

2019/01/30
Committee: ITRE

2018/0328(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14

(14) Emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, Internet of Things, high-performance computing (HPC) and quantum computing, blockchain and concepts such as secure digital identities create at the same time new challenges for cybersecurity as well as offer solutions. Assessing and validating the robustness of existing or future ICT systems will require testing security solutions against attacks run on HPC and quantum machines. The Competence Centre, the Network, the European Digital Innovation Hubs and the Cybersecurity Competence Community should help advance and disseminate the latest cybersecurity solutions. At the same time the Competence Centre and the Network should be at the service of developers and operators in critical sectors such as transport, energy, health, financial, government, telecom, manufacturing, defence, and space to help them solve their cybersecurity challenges.

2019/01/17
Committee: ITRE

2018/0328(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 a (new)

(16a) The Competence Centre should provide the appropriate support to ENISA in its tasks defined by Directive (EU) 2016/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 2016 concerning measures for a high common level of security of network and information systems across the Union (“NIS Directive”) and to the Regulation (EU) 2018/XXX of the European Parliament and of the Council of YYY on ENISA, the “EU Cybersecurity Agency”, and repealing Regulation (EU) 526/2013, and on Information and Communication Technology cybersecurity certification (“Cybersecurity Act”). Therefore, ENISA should provide relevant inputs to the Competence Centre in its task of defining funding priorities.

2019/01/17
Committee: ITRE

2018/0328(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24

(24) The Governing Board of the Competence Centre, composed of representatives of the Member States ~~and~~, the Commission and the European Network and Information Security Agency (ENISA), should define the general direction of the Competence Centre’s operations, and ensure that it carries out its tasks in accordance with this Regulation. The Governing Board should be entrusted with the powers necessary to establish the budget, verify its execution, adopt the appropriate financial rules, establish transparent working procedures for decision making by the Competence Centre, adopt the Competence Centre’s work plan and multiannual strategic plan reflecting the priorities in achieving the objectives and tasks of the Competence Centre, adopt its rules of procedure, appoint the Executive Director and decide on the extension of the Executive Director’s term of office and on the termination thereof.

2019/01/17
Committee: ITRE

2018/0328(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)

(4a) ‘European Digital Innovation Hubs’ means non-for-profit organisations established by [Regulation 2018/XXX of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Digital Europe Programme] which act as a one-stop-shop for industry, including SMEs, public organisations and academia in order to stimulate the broad adoption of digital technologies and provide support in the area of advanced digital skills.

2019/01/17
Committee: ITRE

2018/0328(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2

2. The Competence Centre shall undertake its tasks, where appropriate, in collaboration with the Network of National Coordination Centres ~~and a~~, the European Digital Innovation Hubs and the Cybersecurity Competence Community.

2019/01/17
Committee: ITRE

2018/0328(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 1

1. ~~facilit~~create and ~~help coordinate the work of~~manage the National Coordination Centres Network (‘the Network’) referred to in Article 6 and coordinate its work with the European Digital Innovation Hubs and the Cybersecurity Competence Community (‘the Community’)referred to in Article 8;

2019/01/17
Committee: ITRE

2018/0328(COD)

Angelika MLINAR, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2

2. The Competence Centre may be responsible for the overall execution of relevant joint procurement actions including pre-commercial procurements on behalf of members of the Network, members of the cybersecurity Competence Community, or other third parties representing the users of cybersecurity products and solutions. For this purpose, the Competence Centre may be assisted by one or more National Coordination Centres or relevant European Digital Innovation Hubs or members of the Cybersecurity Competence Community.

2019/01/17
Committee: ITRE

2018/0328(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)

(fa) promoting and disseminating a common minimal cybersecurity educational curricula in cooperation with the relevant bodies in the Member States;

2019/01/17
Committee: ITRE

2018/0328(COD)

4. National Coordination Centres shall, where relevant, cooperate through the Network and coordinate with the relevant European Digital Innovation Hubs for the purpose of implementing tasks referred to in points (ab), (bc), (d), (cf), (ef a) and (g) of paragraph 1.

2019/01/17
Committee: ITRE

2018/0328(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2

2. The Cybersecurity Competence Community shall consist of industry, academic and non-profit research organisations, and associations as well as public entities and other entities dealing with operational and technical matters. It shall bring together the main stakeholders with regard to cybersecurity technological and industrial capacities in the Union. It shall involve National Coordination Centres as well as Union institutions and bodies with relevant expertise., in particular the European Digital Innovation Hubs.

2019/01/17
Committee: ITRE

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

(fa) contribution to reducing or eliminating the European defence industry’s dependence on technologies or products controlled and/or subject to authorisation by a third country or one of its entities;

2018/09/14
Committee: ITRE

3. In order to facilitate exchange of sensitive information between the Commission, the recipients and, where applicable the Member states, the Commission shall set up an secure electronic exchange system.

2018/09/14
Committee: ITRE

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 3

3. The Commission shall regularly monitor the implementation of the Fund and annually report to the Council and the European Parliament on the progress made. To this end, the Commission shall put in place necessary monitoring arrangements.

2018/09/14
Committee: ITRE

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3

3. At the end of the implementation period but no later than four years after the 31 December 203127, a final evaluation of the Fund implementation shall be carried out by the Commission. The final evaluation report shall include the results of the implementation and to the extent possible given timing the impact of the Fund. The report - building on relevant consultations of Member States and associated countries and key stakeholders - shall notably assess the progress made towards the achievement of objectives set out in Article 3. It shall also analyse cross border participation, including of SMEs and mid-caps in projects implemented under the Fund as well as the integration of SMEs and Mid-caps in the global value chain. The evaluation shall also contain information on the countries of origin of the recipients and, where possible, the distribution of the generated intellectual property rights.

2018/09/14
Committee: ITRE

2018/0245(NLE)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3

(3) The objective of the present Programme "European Instrument for Nuclear Safety complementing the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument on the basis of the Euratom Treaty" should be to promote the establishment of effective and efficient nuclear safety, radiation protection, and the application of efficient and effective safeguards of nuclear materials in third countries, building on its own activities within the Union and sharing of best practices.

2018/11/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0245(NLE)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7

(7) This Instrument should provide for actions in support of those objectives and build on the actions previously supported under Regulation (Euratom) No 237/201424 concerning nuclear safety and nuclear safeguards in third countries, in particular in acceding countries, candidate countries and potential candidates. Priority should be given to the countries neighbouring the EU. __________________ 24 Council Regulation (Euratom) No 237/2014 of 13 December 2013 establishing an Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation (OJ L 77 15.3.2014 p 109.)

2018/11/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0245(NLE)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)

(8 a) Individual, differentiated approach towards countries receiving support through this programme should be promoted. Use of the Instrument should be based on the assessment of specific needs of countries receiving the support, as well as on the expected overall benefit of the programme, in particular structural changes in the countries concerned.

2018/11/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0245(NLE)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9

(9) ~~Whenever possible and appropriate, t~~The results of the Community's external action should be monitored and assessed on the basis of pre- defined, transparent, country-specific and measurable indicators, adapted to the specificities and objectives of the Instrument and preferably based on the results framework of the partner country.

2018/11/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0245(NLE)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Multiannual indicative programmes should set out a framework for qualified and independent oversight to increase the level of nuclear safety of the partner countries.

2018/11/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0236(COD)

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Carolina PUNSET

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9

(9) The policy objectives of this Programme will also be addressed as eligible areas for financing and investment operations through financial instruments and budgetary guarantee of the InvestEU Fund, in particular under its sustainable infrastructure and research, innovation and digitisation policy windows. Financial support should be used to boost investment by addressing market failures or sub- optimal investment situations, in a proportionate manner and actions should not duplicate or crowd out private financing or distort competition in the internal market. Actions should have a clear European added value.

2018/09/18
Committee: TRAN

2018/0236(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)

(6a) Around 10% of the EU’s GDP are enabled by satellite navigation signals while over 200.000 professionals are employed in the EU space sector; it is therefore essential to continue developing the state-of-the-art infrastructure of this sector and thereby stimulate upstream and downstream economic activities;

2018/09/10
Committee: ITRE

2018/0236(COD)

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Carolina PUNSET

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8

(8) The Programme shares similar objectives with other Union programmes, notably Horizon Europe, InvestEU Fund, European Defence Fund and Funds under Regulation (EU) [Common Provisions Regulation]. Therefore, cumulative funding from those programmes should be foreseen, provided they do cover the same cost ~~item~~s, in particular through arrangements for complementary funding from Union programmes where management modalities permit - either in sequence, in an alternating way, or through the combination of funds including for the joint funding of actions, allowing, where possible, innovation partnerships and blending operations. During the implementation of the Programme, the Commission should therefore promote synergies with other related Union programmes which would allow, where possible, use of access to risk finance, innovation partnerships, cumulative or blended funding.

2018/09/10
Committee: ITRE

2018/0236(COD)

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Carolina PUNSET

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27

(27) As promoter of the Union’s general interest, it falls to the Commission to implement the Programme, assume overall responsibility and promote their use. In order to optimise the resources and competences of the various stakeholders, the Commission should be able to delegate certain tasks. Moreover the Commission is the best placed to determine the main ~~technical and operational specification~~requirements necessary to implement systems and services evolution.

2018/09/10
Committee: ITRE

2018/0236(COD)

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Carolina PUNSET

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42 a (new)

(42a) The results of stakeholder consultation indicate that there is room for further advancing international cooperation in the field of space industry and that the Union should enhance its efforts to support European companies to access external markets to be competitive at a global level;

2018/09/10
Committee: ITRE

2018/0236(COD)

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Carolina PUNSET

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49 a (new)

(49a) The full potential of Copernicus for the EU society and economy should be entirely unleashed beyond direct beneficiaries by means of an intensification of user uptake measures, which requires further action to render the data usable by non-specialist and thereby stimulate growth, job creation and knowledge transfers;

2018/09/10
Committee: ITRE

2018/0236(COD)

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Carolina PUNSET

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) maximise the socio-economic benefits, including by promoting and ensuring the widest possible use of the data, information and services provided by the Programme's components;

2018/09/18
Committee: TRAN

2018/0236(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57 a (new)

(57a) Copernicus’ Climate Change services, although still in a pre- operational phase are already on good track as the number of users doubled between 2015 and 2016; all Climate Change services should become fully operational as soon as possible and thereby provide the continuous flow of data necessary for effective climate change mitigation and adaptation actions;

2018/09/10
Committee: ITRE

2018/0236(COD)

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Carolina PUNSET

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 59

(59) To promote and facilitate the use of Earth observation data and technologies both by local and regional authorities, by small and medium-sized enterprises, scientists and researchers, dedicated networks for Copernicus data distribution, including national and regional bodies, should be promoted through user uptake activities. To this end, the Commission and the Member States should strive to establish closer links between Copernicus and Union and national policies in order to drive the demand for commercial applications and services and enable enterprises, particular small and medium- sized enterprises and start-ups, to develop applications based on Copernicus data and information aiming at developing a competitive Earth observation data eco- system in Europe.

2018/09/10
Committee: ITRE

2018/0236(COD)

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Carolina PUNSET

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) an autonomous, user-driven, Earth observation system under civil control, offering geo-information data and services based on a free and open data policy, comprising satellites, ground infrastructure, data and information processing facilities, and distribution infrastructure, and fully integrating the needs and requirements of security (‘Copernicus’);

2018/09/10
Committee: ITRE

2018/0236(COD)

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Carolina PUNSET

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2

Additionally, the Programme shall include measures for ensuring efficient access to space for the Programme and for fostering an innovative and competitive space sector.

2018/09/10
Committee: ITRE

2018/0236(COD)

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Carolina PUNSET

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) provide, or contribute to the provision of, high-quality and up-to-date and, where appropriate, secure space- related data, information and services without interruption and wherever possible at global level and based on a free and open data policy, meeting existing and future needs and able to meet the Union's political priorities, including as regards climate change mitigation and adaptation, and security and defence;

2018/09/10
Committee: ITRE

2018/0236(COD)

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Carolina PUNSET

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) enhance the security of the Union and its Member States, its freedom of action and reinforce its strategic autonomy, in particular in terms of technologies and evidence-based decision- making;

2018/09/10
Committee: ITRE

2018/0236(COD)

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Carolina PUNSET

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d

(d) promote the role of the Union in the international arena as a leading actor in the space sector, foster the principle of reciprocity at international level and strengthening its role in tackling global challenges and supporting global initiatives, including with regards to climate change and sustainable development.

2018/09/10
Committee: ITRE

2018/0236(COD)

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Carolina PUNSET

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 5

5. The Commission shall promote and ensure the uptake and use of the data and services provided by the Programme's components in the public and private sectors, including by supporting appropriate development of those services and, where necessary, the development of the corresponding standards at EU level and by fostering a stable long-term environment. It shall develop synergies between the applications of the various components of the Programme. It shall ensure complementarity, consistency, synergies and links between the Programme and other Union actions and programmes, including, where appropriate, by ensuring the compatibility and the interoperability between those services and projects financed by other Union actions and programmes.

2018/09/18
Committee: TRAN

2018/0236(COD)

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

(b) for Copernicus: to deliver accurate user-driven and reliable Earth Observation data and information, based on a free and open data policy, supplied on a long-term basis, to support the implementation and monitoring of the Union and its Member States' policies in the fields of the environment, climate change, agriculture and rural development, civil protection, safety and security, as well as the digital economy;

2018/09/10
Committee: ITRE

2018/0236(COD)

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Carolina PUNSET

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

(f) support and reinforce the competitiveness, entrepreneurship, skills and capacity to innovate of legal and natural persons from the Union active or wishing to become active in that sector, with particular regard to the position and needs offoster the development of a strong and competitive Union space economy and maximise opportunities for Union enterprises of all sizes, in particular small and medium- sized enterprises ~~and start-ups.~~, new entrants and start-ups, to develop and provide innovative space systems and services;

2018/09/10
Committee: ITRE

2018/0236(COD)

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Carolina PUNSET

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) development activities linked to autonomous, reliable and cost-efficient access to space including alternative launching technologies and innovative systems or services, taking into account the essential security interests of the Union and its Member States, as referred to in Article 25;

2018/09/10
Committee: ITRE

2018/0236(COD)

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Carolina PUNSET

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – title

6 Actions in support of an competitive and innovative Union space sector

2018/09/10
Committee: ITRE

2018/0236(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

(aa) to cooperate with ENISA in the field of cyber security;

2018/09/18
Committee: TRAN

2018/0236(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 101 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. The Commission shall define a methodology to provide for qualitative indicators for an accurate assessment of the progress towards achieving the general objectives set out in Article 4 (a), (b) and (c). On the basis of this methodology the Commission shall complement the Annex, at the latest by January1st 2021.

2018/09/18
Committee: TRAN

2018/0236(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 101 – paragraph 3

3. The performance reporting system shall ensure that data for monitoring programme implementation and results are suitable for an in-depth analysis of the progress achieved and the difficulties encountered and are collected efficiently, effectively, and in a timely manner. To that end, proportionate reporting requirements shall be imposed on recipients of Union funds and, where relevant, Member States.

2018/09/18
Committee: TRAN

2018/0236(COD)

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Carolina PUNSET

Proposal for a regulation
Article 102 – paragraph 1

1. The Commission shall carry out evaluations of the Programme in a timely manner to feed into the decision-making process. The evaluations shall also provide for a qualitative assessment of the progress towards achieving the general objectives set out in Article 4.

2018/09/18
Committee: TRAN

2018/0236(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) strict distribution of tasks and responsibilities between the entities involved in the implementation of the Programme, in particular between the Member States, the Commission, the Agency and the European Space Agency, based on each organisations’ competences, improving effectiveness and cost efficiency and avoidance of overlap of activities;

2018/09/10
Committee: ITRE

2018/0236(COD)

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Carolina PUNSET

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2

2. The Commission shall manage ~~the~~ components of the Programme where such management is not entrusted to another entity.

2018/09/10
Committee: ITRE

2018/0236(COD)

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Carolina PUNSET

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1

When necessary for the smooth functioning of the Programme and the smooth provision of the services provided by the Programme's components, the Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, determine the ~~technical and operational specification~~requirements required for the implementation of and evolution of those components and of the services they provide after having consulted users and all the other relevant stakeholders. When determining those technical and operational specifications, the Commission shall avoid reducing the general security level and to meet a backward compatibility imperative.

2018/09/10
Committee: ITRE

2018/0236(COD)

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Carolina PUNSET

Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 3

3. The Commission may entrust other tasks to the Agency, but, in order to avoid duplication, strictly on the basis of improved efficiency in implementation of the Programme’s objectives, including undertaking communication, promotion, and marketing of data and information activities, as well as other activities related to user uptakes with regard to the Programme's components other than Galileo and EGNOS.

2018/09/10
Committee: ITRE

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, climate change 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.

2018/10/16
Committee: ITRE

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)

(8a) Merge of the existing programmes should not lead to a lower clarity and transparency. The European Commission together with Member States should seek to provide accurate and timely information about the programmes and raise awareness among the potential beneficiaries.

2018/10/16
Committee: ITRE

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25

(25) To overcome these market failures and to ensure that SMEs continue to play their role as the foundation for the Union economy´s competitiveness, small and medium sized enterprises need extra support through debt and equity instruments to be established under the SME window of the InvestEU Fund established by Regulation […] of the European Parliament and of the Council52 . The loan guarantee facility put in place under Regulation (EU) No 1287/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council53 has a proven added value and is expected to bring a positive contribution to at least 500 000 SMEs; a successor will be established under the SME window of the InvestEU Fund. ~~__________________ 52~~More attention should be paid to better communication and public campaigns in order to increase awareness of the availability of the programme for SMEs. __________________ 52 COM(2018) 439 final COM(2018) 439 final 53 Regulation (EU) No 1287/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 establishing a Programme for the Competitiveness of Enterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises (COSME) (2014 - 2020) and repealing Decision No 1639/2006/EC (OJ L 347 of 20.12.2013, p. 33).

2018/10/16
Committee: ITRE

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26

(26) The policy objectives of this Programme will be also addressed through financial instruments and budgetary guarantee under the SME window of the InvestEU Fund. The SME window of the InvestEU Fund should have a central overarching point providing information about the programme in each Member State, in order to increase the accessibility and awareness of the funds for SMEs. Financial support should be used to address market failures or sub- optimal investment situations, in a proportionate manner and actions should not duplicate or crowd out private financing or distort competition in the internal market. Actions should have a clear European added value.

2018/10/16
Committee: ITRE

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27

(27) The Programme should provide effective support for SMEs throughout their life-cycle. It should build on the unique knowledge and expertise developed with regard to SMEs and industrial sectors and on a long experience in working with European, national and regional stakeholders. This support should build on the successful experience of the Enterprise Europe Network as a one-stop-shop to improve SMEs competitiveness and develop their business in the Single Market and beyond. The Network plans to continue delivering services on behalf of other Union programmes, notably for the Horizon2020 programme, using the financial resources of these programmes. Also the mentoring scheme for new entrepreneurs should remain the tool to enable new or aspiring entrepreneurs to gain business experience by matching with an experienced entrepreneur from another country and thus allow strengthening entrepreneurial talents. The Programme should further strive to grow and extend its geographical coverage and thus offer wider range of matching possibilities to entrepreneurs in complementarity with other Union initiatives where relevant. Every effort should be made to achieve reasonably geographically balanced distribution of the funds.

2018/10/16
Committee: ITRE

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27 a (new)

(27a) More effort should be made to reduce the administrative burden and to increase the accessibility of the programmes in order to reduce costs SMEs and microenterprises face due to a complicated application process and participation requirements. Member States should also consider establishing a single information point for undertakings interested in using Union´s funds functioning as a one-stop-shop. Evaluation procedure should be as simple and fast as possible in order to allow for timely use of the benefits the programme offers.

2018/10/16
Committee: ITRE

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 67

(67) The Programme should promote synergies and complementarities with respect to the Digital Europe Programme established by Regulation (EU) […] of the European Parliament and of the Council73 which aims to promote the digitalisation of the Union economy and the public sector and increased cybersecurity. __________________ 73 COM(2018) 434 final

2018/10/16
Committee: ITRE

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) to improve the functioning of the internal market, and especially to protect and empower citizens, consumers and businesses, in particular micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), by enforcement of Union law, facilitation of market access, standard setting, and by promoting human, animal and plant health and animal welfare; as well as to enhance cooperation and sharing of best practices between the competent authorities of Member States and between the competent authorities of Member States and the Commission and the decentralised Union agencies;

2018/10/16
Committee: ITRE

2018/0231(COD)

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

(b) improving the competitiveness and sustainability of enterprises with special emphasis on SMEs and achieving additionality through the provision of measures that provide various forms of support to SMEs, access to markets including the internationalisation of SMEs, favourable business environment for SMEs, the competitiveness of sectors, the modernisation of industry, green innovation and the promotion of entrepreneurship and contributing to the high-quality training of workers;

2018/10/16
Committee: ITRE

2018/0231(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 Programme, concerning in particular preparatory, monitoring, control, audit and evaluation activities as well as use of information technology networks focusing on information processing and exchange, and use and development of corporate information technology tools. The total costs of administrative and technical support should not exceed a limit of 5% of the overall budget referred to in Article 4 (1).

2018/10/16
Committee: ITRE

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Every effort should be made to distribute the resources in reasonably geographically balanced manner.

2018/10/16
Committee: ITRE

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point b

(b) facilitating SMEs’ access to markets, supporting them in addressing global, environmental and societal challenges and business internationalisation, and strengthening Union industrial leadership in global value chains, including the Enterprise Europe Network;

2018/10/16
Committee: ITRE

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. The Commission shall prepare by the end of March 2021 a Framework Programme that will include the time table of the work programmes and calls, their topics and allocated financing and other necessary details necessary to provide transparency and predictability for all period of the Programme and to enhance the quality of the projects. The Framework Programme will be adopted through a delegated act.

2018/10/16
Committee: ITRE

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Upon the publication of a work programme, the Commission shall make public a notice of the calls for proposals foreseen under the work programme; such notice shall contain, in accordance with Article 194 of the Financial Regulation, at least the following information for each call listed: (a) Priorities; (b) Indicative opening date; (c) Indicative closing date; (d) Estimated budget.

2018/10/16
Committee: ITRE

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. The Commission shall define a methodology to provide for qualitative indicators for an accurate assessment of the progress achieved through the Programme.

2018/10/16
Committee: ITRE

2018/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1

1. Evaluations shall be carried out in a timely manner, but at least every two years, to feed into the decision- making process.

2018/10/16
Committee: ITRE

2018/0231(COD)

Dominique RIQUET, Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Gesine MEISSNER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2

2. The interim evaluation of the Programme shall be performed once there is sufficient information available about the implementation of the Programme, on the basis of the monitoring conducted in accordance with Article 20, but no later than four years after the start of the Programme implementation. It shall also include a comprehensive evaluation of the procedures, objectives and eligibility criteria for the priorities of the ongoing funding period. Based on the results of this interim evaluation, recommendations for a review of the Programme shall be proposed.

2018/10/16
Committee: ITRE

2018/0229(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2

(2) Evaluations have underlined that the variety of financial instruments delivered under the 2014-2020 Multiannual Financial Framework period has led to some overlaps. That variety has also produced complexity for intermediaries and final recipients who were confronted with different eligibility and reporting rules, thus acting as a further disincentive for investments. Absence of compatible rules also hampered the combination of several Union funds although such combination would have been beneficial to support projects in need of different types of funding. Therefore, a single fund, the InvestEU Fund, should be set up in order to achieve a more efficiently functioning support to final recipients by integrating and simplifying the financial offer under a single budgetary guarantee scheme, thereby improving the impact of Union intervention while reducing the cost to the Union budget.

2018/10/02
Committee: TRAN

2018/0229(COD)

Dominique RIQUET, Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Gesine MEISSNER

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3

(3) In the last years, the Union has ~~adopt~~followed ambitious strategies to complete the Single Market and to stimulate sustainable growth and jobs, such as the Capital Markets Union, the Digital Single Market Strategy, the Clean Energy for all Europeans package, the establishment of the Connecting Europe Facility, the Union Action Plan for the Circular Economy, the Low- Emission Mobility Strategy, the Defence and the Space Strategy for Europe. The InvestEU Fund should exploit and reinforce synergies between those mutually reinforcing strategies through providing support to investment and access to financing.

2018/10/02
Committee: TRAN

2018/0229(COD)

Dominique RIQUET, Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Gesine MEISSNER

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5

(5) The InvestEU Fund should contribute to improving the competitiveness of the Union, including in the field of sustainable infrastructure, innovation and digitisation, the sustainability of the Union's economic growth, the social resilience and inclusiveness and the integration of the Union capital markets, including solutions addressing their fragmentation and diversifying sources of financing for the Union enterprises. To that end, it should support projects that are technically and economically viable by providing a framework for the use of debt, risk sharing and equity instruments underpinned by a guarantee from the Union's budget and by contributions from implementing partners. It should be demand-driven while support under the InvestEU Fund should at the same time focus on contributing to meeting policy objectives of the Union.

2018/10/02
Committee: TRAN

2018/0229(COD)

Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

(6) The InvestEU Fund should support investments in tangible and intangible assets to foster growth, investment and employment, and thereby contributing to improved well-being and fairer income distribution in the Union. Intervention through the InvestEU Fund should complement, whenever necessary, Union support delivered through grants.

2018/10/02
Committee: TRAN

2018/0229(COD)

Dominique RIQUET, Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Gesine MEISSNER

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12

(12) Investment projects receiving substantial Union support, notably in the area of infrastructure, should be subject to an assessment of their European added value, particuarly including their sustainability ~~proofing~~, in accordance with guidance that should be developed by the Commission in cooperation with implementing partners under the InvestEU Programme and, using in an appropriate way the criteria established by [Regulation on establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment] for determining whether an economic activity is environmentally sustainable and coherently with the guidance developed for other programmes of the Union. Such guidance should include adequate provisions to avoid undue administrative burden.

2018/10/02
Committee: TRAN

2018/0229(COD)

Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Angelika MLINAR, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1

(1) With 1.8% of EU GDP, down from 2.2% in 2009, infrastructure investment activities in the Union in 2016 were about 20% below investment rates before the global financial crisis. Thus, while a recovery in investment-to-GDP ratios in the Union can be observed, it remains below what might be expected in a strong recovery period and is insufficient to compensate years of underinvestment. More importantly, the current investment levels and forecasts do not cover the Union’s structural investment needs in the face of technological change and global competitiveness, including for innovation, research, skills, infrastructure, small and medium- sized enterprises ('SMEs'), start- ups, and the need to address key societal challenges such as sustainability or population ageing. Consequently, continued support is necessary to address market failures and sub-optimal investment situations to reduce the investment gap in targeted sectors to achieve the Union's policy objectives.

2018/09/14
Committee: ITRE

2018/0229(COD)

Dominique RIQUET, Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Gesine MEISSNER

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) As set out in the reflection paper on the social dimension of Europe16and the European Pillar of Social Rights17, building a more inclusive and fairer Union is a key priority for the Union to tackle inequality and foster social inclusion policies in Europe. Inequality of opportunities affects in particular access to education, training and health. Investment in the social, skills and human capital-related economy, as well as in the integration of vulnerable populations in the society, can enhance economic opportunities, especially if coordinated at Union level. The InvestEU Fund should be used to support investment in education and training, help increase employment, in particular among the unskilled and long-term unemployed, and improve the situation with regard to intergenerational solidarity, the health sector, homelessness, digital inclusiveness, community development, the role and place of young people in society as well as vulnerable people, including third country nationals. The InvestEU Programme should also contribute to the support of European culture and creativity. To counter the profound transformations of societies in the Union and of the labour market in the coming decade, it is necessary to invest in human capital, microfinance, social enterprise finance and new social economy business models, including social impact investment and social outcomes contracting. The InvestEU Programme should strengthen nascent social market eco-system, increasing the supply of and access to finance to micro- and social enterprises, to meet the demand of those who need it the most. The report of the High-Level Task-Force on Investing in Social Infrastructure in Europe18has identified investment gaps in social infrastructure and services, including for education, training, health and housing, which call for support, including at the Union level. Therefore, the collective power of public, commercial and philanthropic capital, as well as support from foundations, should be harnessed to support the social market value chain development and a more resilient Union. _________________ 16 17 18 Published as European Economy Discussion Paper 074 in January 2018Does not affect the English version.) COM(2017) 206. COM(2017) 250.

2018/10/02
Committee: TRAN

2018/0229(COD)

Dominique RIQUET, Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Gesine MEISSNER

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19

(19) Each policy window should be composed of two compartments, that is to say an EU compartment and a Member State compartment. The EU compartment should address Union-wide market failures, particularly in the case of cross-border projects, or sub-optimal investment situations in a proportionate manner; supported actions should have a clear European added value. The Member State compartment should give Member States the possibility to contribute a share of their resources of Funds under shared management to the provisioning of the EU guarantee to use the EU guarantee for financing or investment operations to address specific market failures or sub- optimal investment situations in their own territory, including in vulnerable and remote areas such as the outermost regions of the Union, to deliver objectives of the Fund under shared management. Actions supported from the InvestEU Fund through either EU or Member State compartments should not duplicate or crowd out private financing or distort competition in the internal market.

2018/10/02
Committee: TRAN

2018/0229(COD)

Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Angelika MLINAR, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3

(3) In the last years, the Union has adopted ambitious strategies to complete the Single Market and to stimulate sustainable growth and jobs, such as the Capital Markets Union, the Digital Single Market Strategy, the Clean Energy for all Europeans package, the Union Action Plan for the Circular Economy, Horizon 2020, the Low- Emission Mobility Strategy, the Defence and the Space Strategy for Europe. The InvestEU Fund should exploit and reinforce synergies between those mutually reinforcing strategies through providing support to investment and access to financing.

2018/09/14
Committee: ITRE

2018/0229(COD)

Dominique RIQUET, Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Gesine MEISSNER

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24

(24) The EU guarantee underpinning the InvestEU Fund should be implemented indirectly by the Commission relying on implementing partners with outreach to final recipients. A guarantee agreement allocating guarantee capacity from the InvestEU Fund should be concluded by the Commission with each implementing partner, to support its financing and investment operations meeting the InvestEU Fund objectives and eligibility criteria. The InvestEU Fund should be provided with a specific governance structure to ensure ~~the appropriate~~balanced use of the EU guarantee.

2018/10/02
Committee: TRAN

2018/0229(COD)

Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Gesine MEISSNER

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30

(30) In order to ensure that interventions under the EU compartment of the InvestEU Fund focus on market failures and sub- optimal investment situations at Union level, but, at the same time, satisfy the objectives of best possible geographic outreach, the EU guarantee should be allocated to implementing partners, which alone or together with other implementing partners, can cover at least t~~hree~~wo Member States. However, it is expected that around 75 % of the EU guarantee under the EU compartment would be allocated to implementing partner or partners that can offer financial products under the InvestEU Fund in all Member States.

2018/10/02
Committee: TRAN

2018/0229(COD)

Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Angelika MLINAR, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5

(5) The InvestEU Fund should contribute to improving the competitiveness of the Union, including in the field of innovation and digitisation, scientific excellence, the sustainability of the Union's economic growth, the social resilience and inclusiveness and the integration of the Union capital markets, including solutions addressing their fragmentation and diversifying sources of financing for the Union enterprises. To that end, it should support projects that are technically and economically viable by providing a framework for the use of debt, risk sharing and equity instruments underpinned by a guarantee from the Union's budget and by contributions from implementing partners. It should be demand-driven while support under the InvestEU Fund should at the same time focus on contributing to meeting policy objectives of the Union.

2018/09/14
Committee: ITRE

2018/0229(COD)

Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Gesine MEISSNER

Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1

This Regulation establishes the InvestEU Fund providing for an EU guarantee for financing and investment operations carried out by the implementing partners in support of the Union’s internal policies and sets the terms governing relations with the various partners, under the scope of this Regulation.

2018/10/02
Committee: TRAN

2018/0229(COD)

Dominique RIQUET, Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA

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

The EU guarantee for the purposes of the EU compartment referred to in point (a) of Article 8(1) shall be EUR 38 000 000 000 (current prices). It shall be provisioned at the rate of 40 %, that is to say EUR 15 200 000 000 (current prices).

2018/10/02
Committee: TRAN

2018/0229(COD)

Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Angelika MLINAR, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11

(11) According to the 2018 Global Risks Report issued by the World Economic Forum, half of the ten most critical risks threatening the global economy relate to the environment. Such risks include air, soil , inland water and ocean pollution, extreme weather events, biodiversity losses and failures of climate-change mitigation and adaptation. Environmental principles are strongly embedded in the Treaties and many of the Union's policies. Therefore, the mainstreaming of environmental objectives should be promoted in the InvestEU Fund related operations. Environmental protection and related risk prevention and management should be integrated in the preparation and implementation of investments. The EU should also track its biodiversity-related and air pollution control-related expenditure in order to fulfil the reporting obligations under the Convention on Biological Diversity and Directive (EU) 2016/2284 of the European Parliament and of the Council15 Investment allocated to environmentally sustainability objectives should therefore be tracked using common methodologies coherent with that developed under other Union programmes applying to climate, biodiversity and air pollution management in order to allow assessing the individual and combined impact of investments on the key components of the natural capital, including air, water, land and biodiversity. __________________ 15 Directive (EU) 2016/2284 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2016 on the reduction of national emissions of certain atmospheric pollutants, amending Directive 2003/35/EC and repealing Directive 2001/81/EC (OJ L 344, 17.12.2016, p. 1).

2018/09/14
Committee: ITRE

2018/0229(COD)

Dominique RIQUET, Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Gesine MEISSNER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2

2. The indicative distribution of the amount referred to in the first subparagraph of paragraph 1 is set out in Annex I to this Regulation. The Commission may modify the amounts referred to in that Annex I, where appropriate, by up to 1520 % for each objective. It shall inform the European Parliament and the Council of any modification.

2018/10/02
Committee: TRAN

2018/0229(COD)

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

2a. In the event that new provisions should prove necessary, these shall be deducted from the margins of the EU's annual budget or the from the Flexibility Instrument, but under no circumstances from budget lines or funds that have already been allocated.

2018/10/02
Committee: TRAN

2018/0229(COD)

Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Angelika MLINAR, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) A significant effort is urgently needed to invest in digital transformation and to distribute the benefits of it to all Union citizens and businesses, in urban and rural areas. The strong policy framework of the Digital Single Market Strategy should now be matched by investment of a similar ambition, including in artificial intelligence.

2018/09/14
Committee: ITRE

2018/0229(COD)

Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Angelika MLINAR, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) play a crucial role in the Union. However, they face challenges when accessing finance because of their perceived high risk and lack of sufficient collateral. Additional challenges arise from SMEs' need to stay competitive by engaging in digitisation, internationalisation and innovation activities and skilling up their workforce. Moreover, compared to larger enterprises, they have access to a more limited set of financing sources: they typically do not issue bonds, have only limited access to stock exchanges or large institutional investors. The challenge in accessing finance is even greater for those SMEs whose activities focus on intangible assets. SMEs in the Union rely heavily on banks and debt financing in the form of bank overdrafts, bank loans or leasing. Supporting SMEs that face the above challenges by simplifying their access to finance and providing more diversified sources of funding is necessary for increasing the ability of SMEs to finance their creation, growth and development, withstand economic downturns, and for making the economy and the financial system more resilient during economic downturn or shocks. This is also complementary to the initiatives already undertaken in the context of the Capital Markets Union. Programmes such as COSME and H2020 have been important for SMEs in that they facilitated access to finance in all phases of their lifecycle, and that this was added to by EFSI for which there was a quick SME uptake. The InvestEU Fund should provide an opportunity to focus on specific, more targeted financial products.

2018/09/14
Committee: ITRE

2018/0229(COD)

Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Gesine MEISSNER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point a

(a) cross-border projects between entities located or established in one or more Member States and extending to one or more third countries, including acceding countries, and candidate countries ~~and potential candidates~~, countries covered by the European Neighbourhood Policy, the European Economic Area or the European Free Trade Association, or to an overseas country or territory as set out in Annex II to the TFEU, or to an associated third country, whether or not there is a partner in those third countries or overseas countries or territories;

2018/10/02
Committee: TRAN

2018/0229(COD)

Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Gesine MEISSNER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

For the EU compartment, the eligible counterparts shall have expressed their interest and shall be able to cover financing and investment operations in at least t~~hree~~wo Member States. The implementing partners may also cover together financing and investment operations in at least t~~hree~~wo Member States by forming a group.

2018/10/02
Committee: TRAN

2018/0229(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1

1. The remuneration for risk-taking shall be allocated between the Union and an implementing partner in proportion to their respective share in the risk-taking of a portfolio of financing and investment operations or, where relevant, of individual operations. The implementing partner shall have a~~n appropriate~~ balanced exposure at its own risk to financing and investment operations supported by the EU guarantee, and, therefore, to the first-loss guarantee, unless exceptionally the policy objectives targeted by the financial product to be implemented are of such nature that the implementing partner could not reasonably contribute its own risk-bearing capacity to it.

2018/10/02
Committee: TRAN

2018/0229(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. The Commission shall define a methodology to provide for qualitative indicators for an accurate assessment of the progress towards achieving the objectives set out in Article 3. On the basis of this methodology the Commission shall complement the Annex III, at the latest by January 1st 2021.

2018/10/02
Committee: TRAN

2018/0229(COD)

Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Angelika MLINAR, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3

3. The performance reporting system shall ensure that data for monitoring implementation and results are suitable for an in-depth analysis of the progress achieved and the difficulties encountered and are collected efficiently, effectively and in a timely manner. To that end, proportionate reporting requirements shall be imposed on implementing partners and other recipients of Union funds, as appropriate.

2018/10/02
Committee: TRAN

2018/0229(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29

(29) In selecting implementing partners for the deployment of the InvestEU Fund, the Commission should consider the counterpart's capacity to fulfil the objectives of the InvestEU Fund and contribute its own resources, in order to ensure adequate geographical coverage and diversification, to crowd-in private investors and to provide sufficient risk diversification as well as new solutions to address market failures and sub-optimal investment situations. Given its role under the Treaties, its capacity to operate in all Member States and the existing experience under the current financial instruments and the EFSI, the European Investment Bank (‘EIB’) Group should remain a privileged implementing partner under the InvestEU Fund's EU compartment. In addition to the EIB Group, national or regional promotional banks or institutions should be able to offer a complementary financial product range given that their experience and capabilities at regional level could be beneficial for the maximisation of the impact of public funds on the territory of the Union. Moreover, it should be possible to have other international financial institutions as implementing partners, in particular when they present a comparative advantage in terms of specific expertise and experience in certain Member States. It should also be possible for other entities fulfilling the criteria laid down in the Financial Regulation to act as implementing partners.

2018/09/14
Committee: ITRE

2018/0229(COD)

Jan HUITEMA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1

1. Evaluations shall be done in a timely manner to feed into the decision- making process. The evaluations shall also provide for a qualitative assessment of the progress towards achieving the objectives set out in Article 3.

2018/10/02
Committee: TRAN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. The Commission shall define a methodology to provide for qualitative indicators for an accurate assessment of the progress towards achieving the general objectives set out in Article 3(1). On the basis of this methodology the Commission shall complement Annex III at the latest by 1st January 2021.

2018/09/27
Committee: TRAN

Elsi KATAINEN, Herbert DORFMANN, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Petri SARVAMAA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 69 – paragraph 2 – point b

(b) the start-up and development of rural business activities linked to agriculture ~~and forestry~~, forestry, bioeconomy and circular economy, tourism and other sectors in rural areas or farm household income diversification;

2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Jan HUITEMA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Elsi KATAINEN, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Pavel TELIČKA, Merja KYLLÖNEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 69 – paragraph 2 – point c

2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall grant support for risk management tools under the conditions set out in this Article and as further specified in their CAP Strategic Plans. Member States shall ensure that this obligation shall not be to the detriment of private risk management tools.

2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Jan HUITEMA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 72 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, in the case of setting-up of farm advisory services, or knowledge exchange on eco- and boost schemes, Member States may grant support in the form of a fixed amount of maximum EUR 200 000.

2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Herbert DORFMANN, Pavel TELIČKA, Petri SARVAMAA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 73 – paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. By way of derogation from paragraph 5 operations relating to early tending of seedling stands and tending of young stands with ecological, protective and recreational objectives can be selected for support where they had been physically completed before the application for funding is submitted to the authority. Such operations are not required or are deemed to have an incentive effect, if: (i) the aid scheme establishes a right to aid in accordance with objective criteria and without further exercise of discretion by the Member State; a condition for granting the aid is that the budget available for the aid scheme is not exhausted (ii) the aid scheme has been adopted and in force before eligible costs are incurred by the beneficiary; and (iii) the aid scheme only covers such sites where new forest has been established according to the national legislation and the establishment has been notified to the competent authority (iv) the aid scheme only covers such measures that are based on forest management plan or equivalent

2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Pavel TELIČKA, Petri SARVAMAA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 80 – paragraph 1

1. Expenditure shall be eligible for contribution from the EAGF and the EAFRD ~~from 1 January of the year following the year of the approval~~the date of submission of the CAP Strategic Plan byto the Commission or from 1 January 2021, whichever is earlier.

2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Martina DLABAJOVÁ, Pavel TELIČKA, Petri SARVAMAA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 86 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

At least 30% of the total EAFRD contribution to the CAP Strategic Plan as set out in Annex IX shall be reserved for interventions addressing the specific environmental- and climate-related objectives set out at least in points (d), (e) and (f) of Article 6(1) of this Regulation~~, excluding interventions based on Article 66~~.

2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Jan HUITEMA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 87 a (new)

Article 87a Tracking of competitiveness boosting expenditure 1. On the basis of the information provided by Member States the Commission shall evaluate the contribution of the policy to the boosting of competitiveness objectives using a simple and common methodology. 2. The contribution to the expenditure target shall be estimated through the application of specific weightings differentiated on the basis whether the support makes a significant or a moderate contribution towards boosting competitiveness as linked to the cross-cutting objective referred to in Article 5 and the economic objectives in points (a), (b) and (c) of Article 6(1). These weightings shall be based on a set of indicators measuring these objectives and shall be developed by the Commission by a delegated act in accordance with Article 138.

2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Jan HUITEMA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 95 – paragraph 1 – point d

(d) a description of the direct payments, eco-schemes, boost-schemes, sectoral and rural development interventions specified in the strategy;

2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

The Commission shall provide the Member State with a list of the specific information needed to evaluate the approval of the plan. The Member State shall provide to the Commission all necessary the additional information requested and, where appropriate, revise the proposed plan. If the Commission deems information provided by the Member State insufficient, the Commission shall provide reasons for the decision.

2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new)

Each year, starting from 2022 the European Commission shall provide to the European Parliament and to the Council a summary report of approved and disapproved national CAP Strategic plans, with clearly described evaluations and justified decisions. the European Commission shall organise annually a joint meeting with the European Parliament to discuss the progress in approving the Strategic Plans.

2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 110

~~[...]~~deleted

2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Jan HUITEMA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 2 – point k a (new)

(ka) the CAP Strategic Plans are translated into English and published in a way that it ensures publicity and transparency at European level.

2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Jan HUITEMA, Elsi KATAINEN, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 114 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part

EIP Operational Groups shall form part of the EIP and may be established by producer and interbranch organizations. They shall draw up a plan for innovative projects to be developed, tested, adapted or implemented shall be based on the interactive innovation model which has as key principles:

2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 118 – paragraph 2

Member States shall ensure that comprehensive, ~~complete,~~ timely and reliable data sources are established to enable effective follow-up of policy progress towards objectives using output, result and impact indicators.

2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 123

Performance bonus 1. attributed to Member States in the year 2026 to reward satisfactory performance in relation to the environmental and climate targets provided that the Member State concerned has met the condition set out in Article 124(1). 2. equal to 5% of the amount per Member State for financial year 2027 as set out in Annex IX. Resources transferred between the EAGF and the EAFRD under Articles 15 and 90 are excluded for the purpose of calculating the performance bonus.Article 123 deleted A performance bonus may be The performance bonus shall be

2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 124

Attribution of the performance bonus 1. of the year 2026, the performance bonus withheld from a Member State’s allocation following the second paragraph of Article 123 shall be attributed to this Member State if the result indicators applied to the specific environmental- and climate-related objectives set out in points (d), (e) and (f) of Article 6(1) in its CAP Strategic Plan have achieved at least 90% of their target value for the year 2025. 2. months of the receipt of the annual performance report in the year 2026 adopt an implementing act without applying the Committee procedure referred to in Article 139 to decide for each Member State whether the respective CAP Strategic Plans have achieved the target values referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article. 3. in paragraph 1 are achieved, the amount of the performance bonus shall be granted by the Commission to the Member States concerned and considered to be definitely allocated to financial year 2027 on the basis of the decision referred to in paragraph 2. 4. in paragraph 1 are not achieved, the commitments for financial year 2027 relating to the amount of the performance bonus of the Member States concerned shall not be granted by the Commission. 5. bonus, the Commission may take into consideration cases of force majeure and serious socio-economic crises impeding the achievement of the relevant milestones. 6. implementing acts laying down the detailed arrangements to ensure a consistent approach for determining the attribution of the performance bonus to Member States. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 139(2).rticle 124 deleted Based on the performance review The Commission shall within two Where the target values referred to Where the target values referred to When attributing the performance The Commission shall adopt

2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 129 – paragraph 3

3. Existing administrative registers such as the IACS, LPIS, animal and vineyard registers shall be maintained. ~~The IACS and LPIS shall be further developed to better meet the statistical needs of the CAP.~~ Data from administrative registers shall be used as much as possible for statistical purposes, in cooperation with statistical authorities in Member States and with Eurostat.

2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 131 – paragraph 3

3. By way of derogation from paragraph 2, Articles 107, 108 and 109 TFEU shall apply to support provided for an operation falling both within and outside the scope of Article 42 TFEU, save where support for working capital is provided through a financial instrument to primary agricultural production and processing of agricultural products covered by Annex I to the Treaty.

2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Result indicators – R.1

R.1 Enhancing performance through knowledge and innovation: Share of ~~farmer~~beneficiaries receiving support for advice, training, knowledge exchange, or participation in operational groups to enhance economic, environmental, climate and resource efficiency performance.

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Result indicators – R.9

R.9 Farm modernisation: Share of farmers receiving investment support to restructure and modernise, including to improve resource efficiency

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Result indicators – R.10

R.10 Better supply chain organisation: Share of farmers and SMEs participating in supported Producer Groups, Producer Organisations, local markets, short supply chain circuits and quality schemes

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Result indicators – R.30

R.30 Generational renewal: Number of young farmers setting up a farm and new business start-ups with support from the CAP

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Impact indicators – I.21

I1.21 Attracting young farmers and facilitate business development: Evolution of number of young and new farmers and SMEs

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Result indicators – R.33

R.33 Digitising the rural economy: RShare of rural population covered by a supported Smart Villages strategy

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – GAEC 1 – Requirements and standards

As an option for Member States, maintenance of permanent grassland based on a ratio of permanent grassland in relation to agricultural area Maintenance of permanent grassland based on a ratio of permanent grassland in relation to agricultural area

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – GAEC 2 – Requirements and standards

As an option for Member States, appropriate ~~protection~~measures of wetland and peatland

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – GAEC 6 – Requirements and standards

Tillage management reducing the risk of soil degradation, in most sensitive parcels including slope consideration

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – GAEC 7 – Requirements and standards

~~No bare soil~~As an option for Member States, avoiding bare soil in most sensitive parcels in most sensitive period(s)

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – GAEC 8 – Requirements and standards

Crop rotation or other practices with an equivalent objective, such as crop diversification

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – GAEC 9 – Requirements and standards – indent 1

- Minimum share of ~~agricultural area devoted to non-productive features or~~ecological focus area in most appropriate areas

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – GAEC 10 – Requirements and standards

BAs an option for Member States, ban on converting or ploughing permanent grassland in Natura 2000 sites

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – SMR 7 – Additional note (new)

Council Directive 2008/71/EC of 15 July 2008 on identification and registration of pigs (OJ L 213, 8.8.2005, p. 31): Articles 3, 4 and 5 This SMR is an option for Member States where animal-related coupled support and animal-related rural development support are applied

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – SMR 8 – Additional note (new)

Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 July 2000 establishing a system for the identification and registration of bovine animals and regarding the labelling of beef and beef products and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 820/97(OJ L 204, 11.8.2000, p. 1): Articles 4 and 7 This SMR is an option for Member States where animal-related coupled support and animal-related rural development support are applied

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – SMR 9 – Additional note (new)

Council Regulation (EC) No 21/2004 of 17 December 2003 establishing a system for the identification and registration of ovine and caprine animals and amending Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 and Directives 92/102/EEC and 64/432/EEC (OJ L 5, 9.1.2004, p. 8): Articles 3, 4 and 5 This SMR is an option for Member States where animal-related coupled support and animal-related rural development support are applied

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – SMR 11

Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on transmissible animal diseases (OJ L 84, 31.3.2016, p.1) Article 18(1), limited to foot-and-mouth disease, swine vesicular disease and blue tonguedeleted

2018/12/12
Committee: AGRI

2018/0197(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory part

(b) 'a greener, low-carbon Europe by promoting clean and fair energy transition, green and blue investment, the circular economy, sustainable mobility, climate adaptation and risk prevention and management ('PO 2') by:

2018/10/03
Committee: TRAN

2018/0197(COD)

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

(vi a) promoting low-emission mobility and multimodal connections;

2018/10/03
Committee: TRAN

2018/0197(COD)

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

(e) investment in airport infrastructure except for outermost regions and for intermodal infrastructure connecting the airport to public transport;

2018/10/03
Committee: TRAN

2018/0197(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) The ERDF should help to redress the main regional imbalances in the Union and to reduce disparities between the levels of development of the various regions and the backwardness of the least favoured regions including those facing challenges due to the decarbonisation commitments. ERDF support under the Investment for jobs and growth goal should therefore be concentrated on key Union priorities in line with policy objectives laid down in Regulation (EU) 2018/xxx [new CPR]. Therefore support from the ERDF should be concentrated on the policy objectives of ‘a smarter Europe by promoting innovative and smart economic transformation’ ~~and~~, ‘a greener, low-carbon Europe by promoting clean and fair energy transition, green and blue investment, the circular economy, climate adaptation and risk prevention and management’ and ‘a better connected Europe in the service of citizens and competitiveness’. That thematic concentration should be attained at national level while allowing for flexibility at the level of individual programmes and between the three groups of Member States formed according to respective gross national income. In addition, the methodology to classify Member States should be set out in detail taking into account the specific situation of the outermost regions.

2018/10/12
Committee: ITRE

2018/0197(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20

(20) Trans-European transport networks projects in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1316/2013 shall continue to be financed from the Cohesion Fund and from the ERDF, via both shared management and the direct implementation mode under the Connecting Europe Facility (‘CEF’).

2018/10/12
Committee: ITRE

2018/0197(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3

3. In compliance with its reporting requirement pursuant to Article [38(3)(e)(i)] of the Financial Regulation, the Commission shall present to the European Parliament and the Council information on performance in accordance with Annex II. Such information shall also provide for a qualitative assessment of the progress towards achieving the specific objectives set out in Article 2.

2018/10/03
Committee: TRAN

2018/0197(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – point a

(a) Member States of group 1 shall allocate at least 8570 % of their total ERDF resources under priorities other than for technical assistance to PO 1 and PO 2, and at least 650 % to PO 1;

2018/10/12
Committee: ITRE

2018/0197(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – point b

(b) Member States of group 2 shall allocate at least 450 % of their total ERDF resources under priorities other than for technical assistance to PO 1, and at least 30 % to PO 2;

2018/10/12
Committee: ITRE

2018/0197(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – point c

(c) Member States of group 2 shall allocate at least 350 % of their total ERDF resources under priorities other than for technical assistance to PO 1, and at least 30 % to PO 2;

2018/10/12
Committee: ITRE

2018/0197(COD)

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

(a) investments in infrastructure, in particular those with European added value, as defined in Regulation (EU) [new CEF Regulation];

2018/10/12
Committee: ITRE

2018/0197(COD)

Dominique RIQUET, Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA

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

2a. The amount transferred from the ERDF to the Connecting Europe Facility shall be used in accordance with the provisions of Regulation (EU) [new CEF Regulation].

2018/10/12
Committee: ITRE

2018/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 63

(63) Trans-European transport networks projects in accordance with Regulation (EU) No [new CEF Regulation]25 will continue to be financed from the Cohesion Fund via both shared management and the direct implementation mode under the Connecting Europe Facility ('CEF'). Building on the successful approach of the 2014-2020 programming period, EUR 10 000 000 000 of the Cohesion Fund should be transferred to the CEF for this purpose and, for the same reasons, EUR 20 000 000 000 should also be transferred from the ERDF to the CEF so as to improve support for TEN-T projects and ensure, for this part, direct financing under this mechanism [new CEF Regulation]. _________________ 25 Regulation (EU) […] of the European Parliament and of the Council of […] on [CEF] (OJ L […], […], p. […])]

2018/10/09
Committee: TRAN

2018/0196(COD)

Dominique RIQUET, Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2

2. However, the Commission shall implement the amount of support from the Cohesion Fund and the ERDF transferred to the Connecting Europe Facility ('CEF'), the European Urban Initiative, Interregional Innovative Investments, the amount of support transferred from the ESF+ to transnational cooperation, the amounts contributed to InvestEU37 and technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission under direct or indirect management in accordance with [points (a) and (c) of Article 62(1)] of the Financial Regulation. _________________ 37 [Regulation (EU) No […] on […] (OJ L […], […], p. […])].

2018/10/09
Committee: TRAN

2018/0196(COD)

Dominique RIQUET, Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 104 – paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. EUR 20 000 000 000 shall be transferred from the ERDF to the CEF. It shall be spent on transport infrastructure projects by launching specific calls in accordance with Regulation (EU) [new CEF Regulation] in Member States eligible for funding from the ERDF.

2018/10/09
Committee: TRAN

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1

(1) The high functionality and relatively low cost of plastic means that this material is increasingly ubiquitous in everyday life. Its growing use in short- lived applications, which are not designed for re-use or cost-effective recycling means that related production and consumption patterns have become increasingly inefficient and linear. Therefore, in the context of the Circular Economy Action Plan32 , the Commission concluded in the European Strategy for Plastics33 that the steady increase in plastic waste generation and its leakage into our environment, in particular into the marine environment, must be tackled in order to achieve a truly circular lifecycle for plastics. Any further efforts in the segment of plastics have to be based on and fully compatible with the recently adopted EU circular economy legislation and fit into the system which has been thereby established. _________________ 32 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions "Closing the loop – An EU action plan for the Circular Economy" (COM(2015)0614 final). 33 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions "A European Strategy for Plastics in a Circular Economy" (COM(2018)28 final).

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1 a (new)

(1 a) The recently adopted EU Waste legislation, in particular Directive 2008/98/EU, Directive94/62/EU and Directive 1999/31/EU has set a complex system of statistics of waste collection and recycling, clear targets for recycling of certain waste streams including plastic and a waste hierarchy. It has also identified incentives for transition towards a more circular economy, broader use of recycled materials, defined obligations for producers under the minimum requirements for extended producer responsibility. The aim of this directive is not to replace this scheme but rather complement it by measures tackling a specific problem of marine litter.

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3

(3) Marine litter is of a transboundary nature and is recognized as a global problem. Reducing marine litter is a key action for the achievement of United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 14 which calls to conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development.36 The Union must play its part in tackling marine litter and aim to be a standard setter for the world, while safeguarding a fair competition environment for its industry. In this context, the Union is working with partners in many international fora such as G20, G7 and United Nations to promote concerted action. This initiative is part of the Union efforts in this regard. _________________ 36 The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 25 September 2015.

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)

(3 a) Despite the EU´s effort in the field of climate diplomacy and international cooperation, the situation in certain 3rd countries is still alarming. The EU must step up its effort in international cooperation in the field of environmental protection. The EU has to fulfil its role as a facilitator and pioneer of environmental policy and waste management. The EU should strive to transfer experiences, disseminate know how and technologies to tackle plastic pollution and exchange the best practices in the field of protection of aquatic environment, its cleaning and prevention of plastic pollution.

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6

(6) Existing Union legislation40 and policy instruments provide some regulatory responses to address marine litter. In particular, plastic waste is subject to overall Union waste management measures and targets, such as the recycling target for plastic packaging waste41 and the recently adopted objective in the Plastics Strategy42 to ensure that all plastic packaging is recyclable by 2030. However, the impact of that legislation on marine litter is not sufficient and there are differences in the scope and the level of ambition amongst national measures to prevent and reduce marine litter. In addition, some of those measures, in particular marketing restrictions for single-use plastic products, may create barriers to trade and distort competition in the Union. _________________ 40 Directive 2008/98/EC, Directive 2000/59/EC, Directive 2000/60/EC, Directive 2008/56/EC and Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy, amending Regulations (EC) No 847/96, (EC) No 2371/2002, (EC) No 811/2004, (EC) No 768/2005, (EC) No 2115/2005, (EC) No 2166/2005, (EC) No 388/2006, (EC) No 509/2007, (EC) No 676/2007, (EC) No 1098/2007, (EC) No 1300/2008, (EC) No 1342/2008 and repealing Regulations (EEC) No 2847/93, (EC) No 1627/94 and (EC) No 1966/2006 (OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1). 41 Directive 94/62/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 1994 on packaging and packaging waste (OJ L 365 31.12.1994, p. 10). 42 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions "A European Strategy for Plastics in a Circular Economy" (COM(2018)28 final).

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7

(7) To focus efforts where they are most needed, this Directive should only cover the most found single-use plastics products, which are estimated to represent around 86% of the single-use plastics found, in counts, on beaches in the Union. In doing so it has to avoid any discrimination.

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8 a (new)

(8 a) Plastic products should be manufactured taking into account their entire lifespan. Eco-design of plastic product should always take into account production phase, recyclability and possibly also reusability of the product. Producers should be encouraged, where appropriate, to use single or compatible polymers for manufacturing their products in order to simplify sorting and enhance recyclability, especially in case of plastic packaging.

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10

(10) The single-use plastic products should be addressed by one or several measures, depending on various factors, such as the availability of suitable and more sustainable alternatives, the feasibility to change consumption patterns, and the extent to which they are already covered by existing Union legislation. The proposed measures should always take into account Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), to avoid half-way solutions resulting in even worse negative impact on different part of environment or economy as for example replacing plastics by similar material produced from biomaterial without having a clear assessment of biodegradability of such material including biodegradability in the aquatic environment.

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12

(12) For other single-use plastic products, suitable and more sustainable alternatives that are also affordable are readily available. In order to limit the adverse impact of such products on the environment, Member States should be required to prohibit their placing on the Union market of products which contain substances and materials for which there are sustainable and available alternatives. By doing so, the use of those readily available and more sustainable alternatives as well as innovative solutions towards more sustainable business models, re-use alternatives and substitution of materials would be promoted.

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14

(14) Certain single-use plastic products end up in the environment as a result of inappropriate disposal through sewers or other inappropriate release into the environment. Therefore, single-use plastic products that are frequently disposed of through sewers otherwise inappropriately disposed of should be subject to marking requirements. The marking should inform consumers about appropriate waste disposal options and/or waste disposal options to be avoided and/or about the negative environmental impacts of litter as a result of inappropriate disposal. The Commission should be empowered to establish a harmonised format for the marking and when doing so should, where appropriate and reflecting different specifics in Member States, test the perception of the proposed marking with representative groups of consumers to ensure that it is effective and clearly understandable. Marking has to be placed visibly on the packaging of the products which is sold to the end user.

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15

(15) With regard to single-use plastic products for which there are no readily available suitable and more sustainable alternatives, Member States should, in line with the polluter pays principle, also introduce extended producer responsibility schemes to cover the costs of waste management and clean-up of litter as well as the costs of awareness-raising measures to prevent and reduce such litter. While doing so the complete consumer chain has to betaken into consideration and producers cannot be held responsible for misbehaviour of consumers. Shared responsibility should apply.

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 19

(19) Directive 2008/98/EC lays down general minimum requirements for extended producer responsibility schemes. Those requirements should apply to extended producer responsibility schemes established by this Directive. This Directive, however, establishes additional extended producer responsibility requirements, for example, the requirement on producers of certain single-use plastic products to cover the costs of ~~clean-up of litter~~awareness raising and informing consumers about appropriate way of disposal and impact of littering on the environment. Principle of shared responsibility should apply as well as better cooperation among all relevant sectors including producers, consumers and public sphere.

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 20

(20) Beverage bottles that are single-use plastic products are one of the most found marine litter items on the beaches in the Union. This is due to ineffective separate collection systems and low participation in those systems by the consumers. It is necessary to promote more efficient separate collection systems and therefore, a minimum separate collection target should be established for beverage bottles that are single-use plastic products. Member States should be able to achieve that minimum target by setting separaIt is up to the Member States to establish the most efficient and suitable collection scheme to achieve targets lied down in the Directive 2008/98/Ec and Directive 94/62/EU. Better collection ~~targets for beverage bottles that are single-use plastic products in the framework of the extended producer responsibility schemes or by establishing deposit refund sche~~and higher recycling rates could be supported trough Eco- design measures, for example by encouraging producers to use single or compatible polymers or ~~by any~~introducing other measure ~~that they find appropriate~~s encouraging producers to use sustainable materials. This will have a ~~direct,~~ positive impact on the collection rate, the quality of the collected material and the quality of the recyclates, offering opportunities for the recycling business and the market for the recyclate.

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 20 a (new)

(20 a) Member States should consider introducing a mandatory recycled content of certain plastic products to support recycling rates and market with recycled materials. Industrial synergies should be supported in this respect, waste from one industry could be a valuable resource for another one. Member States should play their role in supporting such synergies and incentivising a voluntary activities of producers in the field of waste prevention and better waste management and tackling pollution.

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 23

(23) Member States should lay down rules on penalties applicable to infringements of the provisions of this Directive and ensure that they are implemented. The penalties should be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Consumers should also be incentivized or penalized for their behaviour.

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Member States shall take the necessary measures to achieve a significant reduction in the consumption of the single-use plastic products listed in Part A of the Annex on their territory by … [six years after the end-date for transposition of this Directive]. Member States shall adopt national plans for the achievement of this reduction, including specific quantitative reduction targets, specific incentives for concerned sectors and the measures taken. The national plans shall be submitted to the Commission and shall be updated where necessary. The Commission may issue recommendations on the adopted plans.

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

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

Those measures may include national consumption reduction targets, measures ensuring that reusable alternatives to those products are made available at the point of sale to the final consumer, economic instruments such as ensuring that single- use plastic products are not provided free of charge at the point of sale to the final consumer. Those measures may vary depending on the national specifics and the environmental impact of the products referred to in the first subparagraph. Measures taken by businesses on a voluntary basis are desirable and should be prioritized and promoted.

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Beverage containers with carbonated beverages shall be excluded from the scope of this Article.

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

With regard to the schemes established pursuant to paragraph 1, Member States shall ensure that the producers of the single-use plastic products listed in Part E of the Annex shall cover the costs of the collection of waste consisting of those single-use plastic products and its subsequent transport and treatment, including the costs ~~to clean up litter and the costs~~ of the awareness raising measures referred to in Article 10 regarding those products.

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Member States shall take the necessary measures to ~~collect separately, by 2025, an amount~~fulfil targets for collection of wplast~~e single-use plastic products listed in Part F of the Annex equal to 90% of such single-use plastic products placed on the market in a given year by weight~~ics and plastic packaging as set by Directive 2008/98/EU, Directive 94/62/EU. In order to achieve that objective Member States may inter alia:

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

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

(b a) (c) use other measures, for example for example those listed in it he Annex of Directive2008/98/EU.

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Member States are advised to establish a scheme for incentivising and penalising consumers for their misbehaviour.

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex I – part B – indent 6 a (new)

- Products made of or containing Oxo-plastic

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex I – part D – indent 3 a (new)

- Disposable nappies

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0172(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex I – part F – indent 1 a (new)

- Disposable nappies

2018/09/07
Committee: ITRE

2018/0169(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission for the adoption of detailed rules regarding the ~~format and presentation of the~~ information to be provided to the public by Member States, regarding the ~~format and presentation of the~~ information on monitoring of the implementation of this Regulation to be provided by the Member States and regarding the ~~format and presentation of the~~ information as regards the Union-wide overview drawn up by the European Environmental Agency Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council38. __________________ 38 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by the Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).

2018/11/06
Committee: ENVI

2018/0169(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2

2. The purpose of this Regulation is to guarantee that reclaimed water is safe for its intended use, thereby ensuring a high level of protection of human and animal health and the environment, addressing water scarcity and the resulting pressure on water resources in a coordinated way throughout the Union, thus also contributing to the efficient functioning of the internal market. However, contamination of water resources used for drinking water purposes shall be avoided.

2018/11/06
Committee: ENVI

2018/0169(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1

This Regulation shall apply to reclaimed water destined for a use specified in section 1 of Annex I. This regulation shall not apply to pilot projects focussing on water reuse in reclamation plants.

2018/11/06
Committee: ENVI

2018/0169(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new)

11a. ‘Point of compliance’ means the outlet of the reclamation plant.

2018/11/06
Committee: ENVI

2018/0169(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

After the point of compliance, the quality of water is not the responsibility of the reclamation plant operator anymore, but becomes the responsibility of the end user and/or any relevant other actors involved. This also applies for the risk management tasks.

2018/11/06
Committee: ENVI

2018/0169(COD)

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

(b) a description of how the reclamation plant operator will comply at the point of compliance with the minimum requirements for water quality and monitoring set out in section 2 of Annex I;

2018/11/06
Committee: ENVI

2018/0169(COD)

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

(c) a description of how the reclamation plant operator will comply at the point of compliance with the additional requirements proposed in the Water Reuse Risk Management Plan.

2018/11/06
Committee: ENVI

2018/0169(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7

1. application, the competent authority shall, if appropriate consult and exchange relevant information with the following: (a) same Member State, in particular the water authority, if different than the competent authority; (b) affected Member State(s) designated in accordance with Article 9(1). 2. decide within 3 months from the receipt of the complete application as referred to in point (a) of Article 6(3) whether to grant the permit. Where the competent authority needs more time due to the complexity of the application, it shall inform the applicant thereof, indicate the expected date of granting the permit and provide reasons for the extension. 3. Where the competent authority decides to grant a permit, it shall determine the conditions applicable, which shall include the following, as applicable: (a) conditions in relation to the minimum requirements for water quality and monitoring set out in section 2 of Annex I; (b) conditions in relation to the additional requirements proposed in the Water Reuse Risk Management Plan; (c) any other conditions necessary to further mitigate any unacceptable risks to the human and animal health or the environment. 4. regularly and at least every five years and, if necessary, modified.7 Article 7 deleted Granting of the permit For the purposes of assessing the other relevant authorities of the contact points in potentially The competent authority shall The permit shall be reviewed

2018/11/06
Committee: ENVI

2018/0169(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3

3. The Commission may, by means of implementing acts, lay down detailed rules regarding the ~~format and presentation of the~~ information to be provided under paragraph 1. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 15.

2018/11/06
Committee: ENVI

2018/0169(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4

4. The Commission may, by means of implementing acts, lay down detailed rules regarding the ~~format and presentation of the~~ information to be provided in accordance with paragraph 1 as well as detailed rules regarding the format and presentation of the Union-wide overview referred to in paragraph 3. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 15.

2018/11/06
Committee: ENVI

2018/0169(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2

It shall apply from ... [~~one~~two years after the date of entry into force of this Regulation].

2018/11/06
Committee: ENVI

2018/0166R(APP)

Gérard DEPREZ, Jean ARTHUIS, Thierry CORNILLET, Louis MICHEL, Pavel TELIČKA, Nils TORVALDS, Dominique RIQUET

Recital E a (new)

E a. whereas beyond the capacity of the action provided by the Multiannual Financial Framework, the European Union is called upon to meet the global challenges and threats that Member States cannot afford anymore alone. The recognition of some “European common goods” (agriculture, solidarity, defense and security, management of the migration policy, climate protection, digital economy, space) leads to evaluate the effectiveness of national public spending and to study the European added value that would result from the transfer of all or part of the corresponding appropriations to the European Union level. The MFF 2021- 2027 must/should be sufficiently flexible to deal with unforeseen events and must/should allow initiatives to increase the volume of appropriations in the Union budget, and this development would strengthen its strategic autonomy without necessarily increasing the overall burden of public expenditure within the EU;

2018/10/18
Committee: BUDG

2018/0166R(APP)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Reiterates its call for the CAP budget to be ~~maintained~~adequate in the 2021-2027 MFF ~~at least at the level of the 2014-2020 budget for the EU-27 in real terms~~, given the fundamental role of this policy; reaffirms its view that agriculture must not suffer any financial disadvantage as a result of political decisions such as the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the EU or the funding of new European policies;

2018/09/03
Committee: AGRI

2018/0166R(APP)

Gérard DEPREZ, Jean ARTHUIS, Louis MICHEL, Pavel TELIČKA, Nils TORVALDS, Dominique RIQUET, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Paragraph 4

4. Declares, moreover, its opposition to any reduction in the level of key EU policies, such as the EU cohesion policy and the common agricultural policy (CAP), ERASMUS+, youth employment, research and innovation as well as SMEs; is particularly opposed to any radical cuts that will adversely impact on the very nature and objectives of these policies, such as the cuts proposed for the Cohesion Fund or for the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development; opposes, in this context, the proposal to reduce the European Social Fund despite its enlarged scope and the integration of the Youth Employment Initiative; recalls the need to strengthen the focus of future spending on performance and results, based on ambitious and relevant performance targets, in particular under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), following the Briefing paper of the European Court of Auditors: Future of the CAP (March 2018);

2018/10/18
Committee: BUDG

2018/0166R(APP)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Disagrees with~~Recognises the Commission’s proposal for the next MFF, which would entail ~~substantial~~ cuts to the CAP; ~~highlights the fact that the extent of the cuts varies according to the parameters used for the comparison~~underlines that the CAP funds have to be aligned with other EU policies such as Research and Innovation and Cohesion funds; recalls the need for a general budgetary discipline; therefore when increases are necessary for certain priorities, at first and foremost cuts are needed elsewhere within the MFF; disagrees with the Commission’s approach of providing two calculation methods for the MFF (current vs constant);

2018/09/03
Committee: AGRI

2018/0166R(APP)

Gérard DEPREZ, Jean ARTHUIS, Louis MICHEL, Pavel TELIČKA, Nils TORVALDS, Dominique RIQUET, Matthijs van MILTENBURG

Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Underlines the effectiveness of the centralised governance structure laid down by the CEF Regulation; notes that transferring part of Cohesion Fund funding to the CEF has been a great success and that the degree of satisfaction of the Member States concerned confirms that this mechanism shall be continued under the next MFF and be sufficient to complete the currently ongoing projects funded through the Cohesion Fund contribution; accordingly proposes an allocation of EUR 20 billion from the European Regional Development Fund to the CEF, with the same management rules to be managed under similar rules to those which apply to Cohesion Fund funding for the CEF, albeit accessible for all Member States; believes that, in view of the big difference between available funding and what is needed, more attention needs to be paid to solutions with a big EU- added value such as missing cross-border links, such as rail, and this transfer would ensure that TEN- T projects in Europe made significant headway;

2018/10/18
Committee: BUDG

2018/0166R(APP)

Gérard DEPREZ, Nils TORVALDS, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Thierry CORNILLET, Louis MICHEL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Jean ARTHUIS

Paragraph 5

5. Underlines, furthermore, the importance of the horizontal principles that should underpin the MFF and all related EU policies; reaffirms, in this context, its position that the EU must deliver on its commitment to be a frontrunner in implementing the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and deplores the lack of a clear and visible commitment to that end in the MFF proposals; requests, therefore, the mainstreaming of the SDGs into all EU policies and initiatives of the next MFF; further emphasises that the elimination of discrimination is vital to fulfil the EU’s commitments towards an inclusive Europe and deplores the lack of gender mainstreaming and gender equality commitments in EU policies, as presented in the MFF proposals; underlines ~~also its position that, following~~that to reach the obligations of the Paris Agreement, climate-related spending should be significantly increased to at least 30% in comparison with the current MFF ~~and reach 30 % as soon as possible~~with a swift achievement of 30%, both annually and atfor the ~~latest by 2027~~MFF as a whole;

2018/10/18
Committee: BUDG

2018/0166R(APP)

Gérard DEPREZ, Dominique RIQUET, Louis MICHEL, Pavel TELIČKA, Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Jean ARTHUIS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses ~~the~~current importance of direct payments as well as second-pillar funds for farmers; ~~deplores in particular the severe cuts envisaged for the second pillar of the CAP,~~proposes a EAGF that reflects the long term aim for a transition to a market-driven and sustainable European agriculture that increases competiveness and decreases the farmers needs for income support; emphasizes a proper funded EAFRD which makes a significant contribution to investment and employment in rural areas; stresses that it cannot be taken for granted that national co-funding will fill the budget gap;

2018/09/03
Committee: AGRI

2018/0166R(APP)

Gérard DEPREZ, Nils TORVALDS, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Louis MICHEL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Jean ARTHUIS, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Calls for better spending and increased accountability and transparency of the Union funds by a strengthened focus on performance and results leading, based on ambitious and relevant performance targets;

2018/10/18
Committee: BUDG

2018/0166R(APP)

Gérard DEPREZ, Nils TORVALDS, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Louis MICHEL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Jean ARTHUIS, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Paragraph 14 – point i

i. Increase the budget for ~~research and innovation~~Horizon Europe to reach EUR 120 billion in 2018 prices;

2018/10/18
Committee: BUDG

2018/0166R(APP)

Paragraph 14 – point ii a (new)

ii a. Introduce a transfer from ERDF to CEF-Transport in line with the transfer from Cohesion Fund to CEF-Transport;

2018/10/18
Committee: BUDG

2018/0166R(APP)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI, Nils TORVALDS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal to allow the carry-over of crisis reserve funds; ~~regret~~emphasizes the fact that the initial amounts to be used to constitute the fund will not be sourced from outside the CAP budget but will instead be taken from direct payments in 2020 and will not be paid back to farmers.

2018/09/03
Committee: AGRI

2018/0166R(APP)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI, Nils TORVALDS, Jean ARTHUIS

Paragraph 14 – point vii

vii. Introduce a specific allocation (EUR ~~5.5~~2 billion) for Child Guarantee;

2018/10/18
Committee: BUDG

2018/0166R(APP)

Gérard DEPREZ, Jean ARTHUIS, Thierry CORNILLET, Louis MICHEL, Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Nils TORVALDS

Paragraph 14 – point xviii a (new)

xviii a. Further reinforce the ‘Fiscalis’ programme for cooperation in the field of taxation;

2018/10/18
Committee: BUDG

2018/0166R(APP)

Paragraph 14 – point xviii b (new)

The paragraph 96 of the resolution on the next MFF: preparing the Parliament’s position on the MFF post-2020, is not reflected in the Interim report “recommends setting up an internal European Democracy Fund for the strengthened support for civil society and NGOs working in the fields of democracy and human rights, to be managed by the Commission". We propose to include this new fund under the Justice, Rights and Values chapter in new Heading 7.xviii b. Introduce a specific allocation (EUR 50 million) for an internal European Democracy Fund; Or. en Justification

2018/10/18
Committee: BUDG

2018/0166R(APP)

Gérard DEPREZ, Nils TORVALDS, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Louis MICHEL, Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI, Thierry CORNILLET, Jean ARTHUIS

Paragraph 14 a (new)

14 a. Underlines the essential role played by the decentralised agencies in aiding the Union and the Member States make informed, science-based decisions, actively contributing to the implementation of Union policies and enhancing cooperation between Member States to address the concerns of Union citizens; stresses for at least the stability of envelopes in real terms of agencies that have been entrusted with additional tasks particular where recent legislative proposals foresee new activities for an agency including but not limited to fundamental rights, security and migration, environment, climate, health and safety and urges this is accurately reflected in the grouping of agencies;

2018/10/18
Committee: BUDG

2018/0166R(APP)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI, Jean ARTHUIS

Paragraph 15 a (new)

15 a. Strongly emphasises the importance of the fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which should be streamlined into every policy proposals as a horizontal obligation of the Union; welcomes in this context the creation of new Justice, Rights and Values Fund aiming at inter alia promoting European justice area, rights, values and equality; JHA agencies, should support the Commission in its coordination and oversight tasks in respect to funds by assisting in monitoring and training activities; calls in particular for a close cooperation of the Fund with the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights;

2018/10/18
Committee: BUDG

2018/0166R(APP)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI, Jean ARTHUIS, Nils TORVALDS

Paragraph 16

16. Intends to defend the Commission proposal on securing a sufficient level of funding for a strong, efficient and high- quality European public administration at the service of all Europeans; recalls that, during the current MFF, the EU institutions, bodies and agencies have implemented a 5% reduction inof the staff a~~nd believes that they should not be subject to any further reduction that would jeopardise directly the delivery of Union policies~~s in the establishment plan; recalls that this was achieving by eliminating posts that were vacant and by not replacing staff that left; notes, despite everything, that during the period 2012-2017, the total budget for contract staff increased by 33,4% in number; question, therefore, the relevance and the merits of such measure;

2018/10/18
Committee: BUDG

2018/0166R(APP)

Gérard DEPREZ, Nils TORVALDS, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Thierry CORNILLET, Louis MICHEL, Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI, Jean ARTHUIS

Paragraph 18 – point ii

iii. The relevant Commission proposal to be presented in time for the next Parliament and Commission to conduct a meaningful adjustment of the 2021-2027 framework, and no later than 1 January 20234;

2018/10/18
Committee: BUDG

2018/0166R(APP)

Gérard DEPREZ, Nils TORVALDS, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Louis MICHEL, Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI, Jean ARTHUIS

Paragraph 27

27. Points out that detailed and effective review clauses should be included in the individual MFF programmes and instruments, in order to ensure that meaningful assessments of them are carried out and that Parliament is subsequently fully involved in any decisions taken on necessary adaptations; stresses that these reviews shall be carried out once there is sufficient information available about the implementation of the programmes, but no later than three years after the start of the programmes implementation;

2018/10/18
Committee: BUDG

2018/0166R(APP)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Paragraph 29

29. Calls on the Commission to present the relevant legislative proposals on top of those which it has already tabled, to be decided on under the ordinary legislative procedure; requests, in particular, a proposal for a Regulation establishing an energy transition fund; requests, furthermore, the introduction of the European Child Guarantee in the ESF+, athe introduction of the internal European Democracy Fund in the Justice, Rights and Values, revision of the Regulation establishing the European Union Solidarity Fund and of the Regulation concerning humanitarian aid; considers that a revision of the Financial Regulation should also be proposed when the need arises as a result of the MFF negotiations;

2018/10/18
Committee: BUDG

2018/0166R(APP)

Gérard DEPREZ, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Louis MICHEL, Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Nils TORVALDS, Jean ARTHUIS

Paragraph 31

31. Welcomes, in this context, as an important step towards a more ambitious reform, the Commission’s set of proposals adopted on 2 May 2018 on a new system of own resources; invites the Commission to take into account the Opinion No 5/2018 of the European Court of Auditors concerning the Commission's proposal on the new system of Own Resources of the European Union, which underlines that better calculation and further simplification of the system is needed;

2018/10/18
Committee: BUDG

2018/0140(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)

(1 a) The purpose of this Regulation is to reduce the costs of processing transport information between authorities and economic operators, to improve the enforcement capabilities of the authorities and to encourage the digitalisation of the freight transport and logistics.

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0140(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2

(2) The movement of goods is accompanied by a large amount of information which is still exchanged in paper format, among businesses and between businesses and the public authorities. The use of paper documents represents a significant administrative burden for logistic operators and a negative impact on environment.

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0140(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)

(5 a) Member States’ competent authorities should also be able to submit to the economic operators concerned the request for the relevant regulatory information needed in electronic form.

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0140(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 b (new)

(5 b) The economic operators concerned should also be required to submit regulatory information electronically to Member States’ competent authorities.

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0140(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

(6) Since this Regulation is ~~only~~ intended to facilitate and encourage the provision of information, specifically, by electronic means, it should not affect the provisions of Union or national law determining the content of regulatory information and, in particular, should not impose any additional regulatory information requirements. While this Regulation is intended to allow compliance with regulatory information requirements through electronic means rather by means of paper documents, it should not otherwise affect the relevant Union provisions on requirements regarding the documents to be used for the structured presentation of the information in question. The provisions of Union legislation on shipments of waste containing procedural requirements for the shipments as should equally remain unaffected by this Regulation. This Regulation should also be without prejudice to the provisions on reporting obligations set out in Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 or in implementing or delegated acts adopted under its terms.

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0140(COD)

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

1. This Regulation establishes a legal framework for the electronic communication of regulatory information related to the transport of goods on the territory of the Union and for the interoperability of this communication. For that purpose, this Regulation:

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0140(COD)

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

(a) lays down the conditions under which Member States’ competent authorities are required to accept regulatory information when made available electronically by economic operators concerned and, where necessary, to provide electronic freight transport information to the economic operators concerned;

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0140(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – title

4 Requirements for the economic op~~tit~~erators concerned (There is a typo mistake in the EN version)

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0140(COD)

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

~~Where e~~Economic operators concerned shall make regulatory information available electronically~~, t~~. They shall do so on the basis of data processed in a certified eFTI platform and, if applicable, by a certified eFTI service provider. The regulatory information shall be made available in machine-readable format and, at the request of the competent authority, in human-readable format.

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0140(COD)

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

Information in machine-readable format shall be made available via an authenticated, interoperable and secure connection to the data source of an eFTI platform. Economic operators concerned shall communicate the Internet address via which the information can be accessed, together with any other elements that are necessary to allow the competent authority to uniquely identify the regulatory information.

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0140(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – title

Acceptance and provision of regulatory information by competent authorities

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0140(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Member States’ competent authorities shall communicate with the economic operators concerned concerning regulatory information electronically.

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0140(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2

~~Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 14(2).~~deleted

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0140(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. The eFTI platforms shall be governed by the general principles of technological neutrality as well as interoperability. The eFTI platforms used for processing regulatory information shall provide functionalities that ensure that:

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0140(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) personal data ~~can b~~are processed in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679;

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0140(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) commercial data ~~can be~~is processed in accordance with Article 6;

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0140(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

(b a) eFTI platforms and the data contained therein are interoperable;

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0140(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point h

(h) the data elements processed correspond to the common eFTI data set and subsets, and can be processed in any of the official languages of the Union or co- official in a Member State.

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0140(COD)

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

(a a) data is interoperable

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0140(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) competent authorities have immediate access to regulatory information concerning a freight transport operation processed by means of their eFTI platforms, when this access is given to the authorities by an economic operator concerned;

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0140(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3

3. Member States shall maintain an updated list of the accredited conformity assessment bodies, and of the eFTI platforms and eFTI service providers certified by those bodies in accordance with Articles 11 and 12. They shall make that list publicly available on an official government Internet website. The list shall be ~~regularly updated, and by the latest~~updated without delay each time a change to the information that it contains occurs. In any event, the list shall be updated by 31 March each year at the latest.

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0140(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2

It shall apply from [OP insert ~~four~~three years from the entry into force].

2018/12/05
Committee: TRAN

2018/0129(COD)

Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jozo RADOŠ

Proposal for a directive
Recital 5

(5) A large proportion of road accidents occur on a small proportion of roads where traffic volumes and speeds are high and where there is a wide range of traffic travelling at different speeds. Therefore the limited extension of the scope of Directive 2008/96/EC to motorways and primary roads beyond the TEN-T network ~~should~~is expected to contribute significantly to the improvement of road infrastructure safety across the Union.

2018/10/29
Committee: TRAN

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2

(2) Online intermediation services can be crucial for the commercial success of undertakings who use such services to reach consumers. The growing intermediation of transactions through online intermediation services, fuelled by strong data-driven indirect network effects, lead to an increased dependence of such business users, including micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, on those services in order for them to reach consumers. Given that increasing dependence, the providers of those services may often have superior bargaining power, which enables them to effectively behave unilaterally in a way that can be unfair and that can be harmful to the legitimate interests of their businesses users and, indirectly, also of consumers in the Union.

2018/10/18
Committee: TRAN

2018/0112(COD)

Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jozo RADOŠ

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)

(4 a) For certain sectors of the economy more recently opened to intra-EU competition, online intermediation services and search engine both contribute greatly to the completion of the internal market. In such sectors, online intermediation services and search engines provide services to undertakings which had already established their own online trading channels and are not dependent on online intermediations services. In these cases, further transparency obligations should be considered from the business users to the online intermediation services, in the interest of fair competition and the consumers in the Union.

2018/10/18
Committee: TRAN

2018/0112(COD)

Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jozo RADOŠ

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 and that the online intermediation services are in the possession of sufficient information to provide consumers in the Union with timely, accurate and relevant services. 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.

2018/10/18
Committee: TRAN

2018/0112(COD)

Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jozo RADOŠ

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) Providers of online intermediation services might in certain cases 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 other acts of Union law or the law of Member States in accordance with Union law, including in the areas of competition and unfair commercial practices, and the application of such laws. Upon request from business users or another provider of online interdiction services, or on its own initiative, the Commission should actively and promptly assess the legality of such restrictions against Union law.

2018/10/18
Committee: TRAN

2018/0112(COD)

Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jozo RADOŠ

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25

(25) Providers of online intermediation services should bear a reasonable proportion of the total costs of the mediation, taking into account all relevant elements of the case at hand. To that aim, the mediator should suggest which proportion is reasonable in the individual case. However, that proportion should never be less than half of those costs. In exceptional cases where business users are large undertakings benefitting from their own online trading channel and where the mediator identifies an apparent abuse of the mediation procedure at the detriment of the providers of online intermediation services, business users should bear a higher proportion of the costs.

2018/10/18
Committee: TRAN

2018/0112(COD)

Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jozo RADOŠ

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28

(28) Codes of conduct, drawn up either by the service providers concerned or by organisations or associations representing them, can contribute to the proper application of this Regulation and should therefore be encouraged. When drawing up such codes of conduct, in consultation with all relevant stakeholders, account should be taken of the specific features of the sectors concerned as well as of the specific characteristics of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises. The Commission should assess the compliance of the codes of conduct with Union law.

2018/10/18
Committee: TRAN

2018/0112(COD)

Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jozo RADOŠ

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

4 a. Business users shall share with providers of online intermediation services an accurate description of the characteristics of the goods and services offered to consumers.

2018/10/18
Committee: TRAN

2018/0112(COD)

Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jozo RADOŠ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Upon request from business users or another provider of online interdiction services, or on its own initiative, the Commission shall promptly and actively assess the legality of such restrictions against Union law.

2018/10/18
Committee: TRAN

2018/0112(COD)

Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jozo RADOŠ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4

4. Providers of online intermediation services shall bear a reasonable proportion of the total costs of mediation in each individual case. A reasonable proportion of those total costs shall be determined, on the basis of a suggestion by the mediator, by taking into account all relevant elements of the case at hand, in particular the relative merits of the claims of the parties to the dispute, the conduct of the parties, as well as the size and financial strength of the parties relative to one another. ~~However, p~~Providers of online intermediation services shall ~~in any case~~ bear at least half of the total cost, except in cases where the mediator has identified an apparent abuse of the mediation procedure at the detriment of the providers of online intermediation services.

2018/10/18
Committee: TRAN

2018/0112(COD)

Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jozo RADOŠ

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

2 a. The Commission shall verify the compliance of the codes of conduct with Union law.

2018/10/18
Committee: TRAN

2018/0112(COD)

Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jozo RADOŠ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2

2. The first evaluation of this Regulation shall be carried out, in particular, with a view to assessing the compliance with, and impact on the online platform economy of, the obligations laid down in Articles 5, 6, 7 and 8, and whether additional rules, including regarding enforcement, may be required to ensure a fair, predictable, sustainable and trusted online business environment within the internal market. As part of this evaluation, an assessment shall also be made of whether this Regulation had any impact in the transport sector, in particular towards the achievement of the Single European Transport Area.

2018/10/18
Committee: TRAN

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Hilde VAUTMANS

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9

(9) The relevant rules should apply to business conduct by larger~~, that is to say non-small and medium-sized,~~ operators in the food supply chain as they are the ones who normally possess stronger relative bargaining power when trading with small and medium-sized suppliers.

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Hilde VAUTMANS

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12 a (new)

(12 a) A supplier should be able to require that their trading arrangement with the buyer in agricultural and food chain such as delivery of products be subject to a written contract with all the relevant aspects of the trading arrangement including elements according to Articles 148(1a) and 168(1a) of Regulation No (EU) 1308/2013.

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jan HUITEMA, Hilde VAUTMANS

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13

(13) In order to ensure an effective enforcement of the prohibitions laid down in this Directive, Member States should designate an authority that is entrusted with their enforcement. The authority should be able to act either on its own initiative or by way of complaints by parties affected by unfair trading practices in the agriculture and food supply chain. Where a complainant requests that his identity remain confidential because of fear of retaliation, the enforcement authorities of the Member States should honour such a request in accordance with national law.

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Jan HUITEMA, Hilde VAUTMANS, Jean ARTHUIS

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13 a (new)

(13 a) In order to ensure an effective enforcement of the prohibition of unfair trading practices, the designated enforcement authorities should dispose of all necessary resources, staff and expertise.

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Hilde VAUTMANS, Jean ARTHUIS

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15

(15) The enforcement authorities of the Member States should have the necessary powers that enable them to effectively gather any factual information by way of information requests. They should ~~hav~~ensure the ~~power to order the~~fair and proper functioning of agricultural and good supply chain and promptly terminat~~ion of~~e a prohibited practice, where applicable. The existence of a deterrent, such as the power to impose fines or other sanctions and the publication of investigation results, can encourage behavioural change and pre- litigation solutions between the parties and should therefore be part of the powers of the enforcement authorities. Repeated infringements should be taken into account when determining the sanctions to be applied. The Commission and the enforcement authorities of the Member States should cooperate closely so as to ensure a common approach with respect to the application of the rules set out in this Directive. In particular, the enforcement authorities should provide each other mutual assistance, for example by sharing all relevant information and assisting in investigations which have a cross-border dimension.

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Jan HUITEMA, Hilde VAUTMANS

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15 a (new)

(15 a) The exercise of the powers conferred by this Directive on enforcement authorities should be subject to appropriate safeguards which meet the standards of general principles of Union law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in accordance with the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union;

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Hilde VAUTMANS, Jean ARTHUIS

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2

2. This Directive applies to certain unfair trading practices which occur in relation to the sales of agricultural and food products by a supplier that is a small and medium-sized enterprise to a buyer that is not a small and medium-sized enterprise, as well as to the sales of agricultural and food products by a supplier that is a small-sized enterprise to a buyer that is at least a medium-sized enterprise.

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Jan HUITEMA, Hilde VAUTMANS, Jean ARTHUIS

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. Member States shall ensure that the following trading practices arconstitute prohibited trading arrangements:

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jan HUITEMA, Jean ARTHUIS, Hilde VAUTMANS

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) a buyer unilaterally and retroactively changes the terms of the supply agreement concerning the frequency, timing or volume of the supply or delivery, the quality standards or the prices of the agricultural and food products;

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Jan HUITEMA, Jean ARTHUIS, Hilde VAUTMANS

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

2. Member States shall ensure that the following trading practices arconstitue prohibited trading arrangements, if they are not agreed in clear and unambiguous terms at the conclusion of the supply agreement:

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Hilde VAUTMANS

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point d – indent 1 (new)

- Where a complaint relating to a practice referred in paragraph 2 is submitted to an enforcement authority, the burden of proof that the supply or trading arrangement covers the trading practise at issue in clear and unambiguous terms shall be on the buyer.

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Jan HUITEMA, Jean ARTHUIS, Hilde VAUTMANS

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4

4. Member States shall ensure that the prohibitions laid down in paragraphs 1 and 2 constitute overriding mandatory provisions of trading arrangements which are applicable to any situation falling within their scope~~, irrespective of the law otherwise applicable to the supply agreement between the parties~~.

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Hilde VAUTMANS

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 (new)

A supplier may require that their trading arrangement shall be subject to a written contract including all relevant aspects of the trading arrangement.

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Hilde VAUTMANS

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)

The designated authorities shall have the necessary resources to ensure an effective enforcement of the prohibitions of unfair trading practices, in terms of qualified staff able to conduct proficient legal and economic assessments, financial means, technical and technological expertise and equipment including adequate information technology tools.

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jean ARTHUIS, Hilde VAUTMANS

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. A supplier may submit a complaint to the enforcement authority of the Member State in which the supplier is established. The enforcement authority of that Member State shall forward the complaint to the enforcement authority of the Member State in which the buyer suspected to have engaged in a prohibited trading practice is established. The enforcement authorities shall facilitate the dialogue and play an active role in the dispute resolution.

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Jean ARTHUIS, Hilde VAUTMANS

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2

2. Producer organisations or associations of producer organisations whose member(s) or member(s) of their members consider(s) that they are affected by a prohibited trading practice shall have the right to submit a complaint and to be properly involved in the procedures.

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jan HUITEMA, Jean ARTHUIS

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) to proactively initiate and conduct investigations on its own initiative or based on a complaint;

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Jan HUITEMA

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) to take a decision, within the framework of applicable national law, establishing an infringement of the prohibitions laid down in Article 3 and require the buyer to terminate the prohibited trading practice. The authority may abstain from taking any such decision, if such decision would risk revealing the identity of a complainant or disclosing any other information in respect of which the complainant considers disclosure harmful to his interests, provided that the complainant has identified that information in accordance with Article 5(3);

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Jan HUITEMA

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

(d) to impose a pecuniary fine or other sanctions on the author of the infringement~~. The fine~~ in accordance with the national law. The fine and the other sanctions shall be effective, proportionate to the harm caused and dissuasive taking into account the nature, duration and gravity and possible repetition of the infringement;

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Jan HUITEMA, Jean ARTHUIS, Hilde VAUTMANS

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)

(fa) Member states shall ensure that the exercise of those powers is subject to appropriate safeguards in respect of rights of defence, in accordance with the general principles of Union law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, including where the complainant requests confidential treatment of information pursuant to Article 5(3).

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Jan HUITEMA

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f b (new)

(fb) The Member States may decide that the fines or other sanction are initiated by the enforcement authority and imposed by competent national courts, while ensuring that those fines are effective and have an equivalent effect to administrative fines imposed by enforcement authorities. In any event, other sanctions imposed shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive taking into account the nature, duration, gravity and possible repetition of the infringement.

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Jan HUITEMA, Jean ARTHUIS, Hilde VAUTMANS

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1

To ensure a higher level of protection, Member States may provide for rules designed to combat unfair trading practices ~~going beyond those set out in Articles 3, 5, 6 and 7~~, which are stricter than those set out in this Directive, provided that such national rules are compatible with the rules on the functioning of the internal market.

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Jan HUITEMA, Jean ARTHUIS, Hilde VAUTMANS

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Proceedings in relation to Article 6 (c-e) shall respect the administrative and legal proceedings and principles in the specific Member State.

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0082(COD)

Elsi KATAINEN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Jan HUITEMA, Jean ARTHUIS, Hilde VAUTMANS

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 b (new)

This Directive shall be without prejudice to national rules aimed at combating unfair trading practices that are not within the scope of this Directive, provided that such rules are compatible with the rules on the functioning of the internal market.

2018/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2

(2) Test Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is an evidence-based process that allows competent authorities to determine the relative effectiveness of new or existing technologies. HTA focuses specifically on the added value of a health technology in comparison with other new or existing health technologies.

2018/05/25
Committee: ITRE

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) In order that the harmonised procedures fulfil their internal market objective, Member States should be required to take full account of the results of joint clinical assessments and not repeat those assessments. Compliance with this obligation does not prevent Member States from carrying out additional clinical analyses to the extent that they are missing from the joint clinical assessment and are deemed necessary within the national health technology assessment context. Member States remain free to carry out non-clinical assessments on the same health technology, or from drawing conclusions on the added value of the technologies concerned as part of national appraisal processes which may consider clinical as well as non-clinical data and criteria. It also does not prevent Member States from forming their own recommendations or decisions on pricing or reimbursement.

2018/05/25
Committee: ITRE

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25

(25) In order to ensure a uniform approach to the joint work provided for in this Regulation, ~~implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission to~~the Coordination Group shall establish a common procedural and methodological framework for clinical assessments~~, procedures for joint clinical assessments and procedures for joint scientific consultations~~. Where appropriate, distinct rules should be developed for medicinal products and medical devices. In the development of such rules, the Commission should take into account the results of the work already undertaken in the EUnetHTA Joint Actions. It should also take into account initiatives on HTA funded through the Horizon 2020 research programme, as well as regional initiatives on HTA such as the Beneluxa and Valletta Declaration initiatives. Implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission to establish procedures for joint clinical assessments and procedures for joint scientific consultations. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council.13 _________________ 13 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by the Member States of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).

2018/05/25
Committee: ITRE

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2

2. The designated sub-group shall ~~reques~~meet relevant health technology developers to ~~submit documentation~~agree on the scope of the assessment and on documentation from relevant sources including clinical trials but also inter alia patient registries, databases or European Reference Networks, containing the information, data and evidence necessary for the joint clinical assessment.

2018/05/25
Committee: ITRE

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 13

13. The assessor shall ensure the removal of any information of a commercially sensitive nature from the approved joint clinical assessment report and the summary report. The assessor shall consult the developer on the report before its publication. The developer shall have a period of 7 working days to point out which information it considers confidential and to justify the commercially sensitive nature of that information.

2018/05/25
Committee: ITRE

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) not carry out a clinical assessment or an equivalent assessment process on a health technology included in the List of Assessed Health Technologies or for which a joint clinical assessment has been initiated; Member States shall have the right to complement the clinical evidence in the joint clinical assessment report according to their national context. Additional clinical evidence cannot deny the conclusions reached in the joint clinical assessment report.

2018/05/25
Committee: ITRE

2018/0018(COD)

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

(ii) select medicinal products referred to in Article 5(1)(a) for joint clinical assessment based on the ~~selection criteria referred to in Article 5(2).~~following cumulative criteria: (a) Unmet medical needs; (b) Potential impact on patients, public health, or healthcare systems; (c) Significant cross-border dimension; (d) Major Union-wide added value; (e) The available resources;

2018/05/25
Committee: ITRE

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

(a a) The application of the selection criteria referred to in Article 10 (a) (ii)

2018/05/25
Committee: ITRE

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point d

(d) the consultation of patients, health professionals, clinical experts and other relevant stakeholders;

2018/05/25
Committee: ITRE

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)

(c a) Health professionals

2018/05/25
Committee: ITRE

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point d

(d) the provision of additional evidence necessary to support health technology assessments, including computer modeling and simulation data.

2018/05/25
Committee: ITRE

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) methodologies used to formulate the contents and design of clinical assessments, based on the common tools and methodologies for cooperation developed after many years of cooperation through EUnetHTA Joint Actions, BeNeLuxA and Valletta.

2018/05/25
Committee: ITRE

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – point e

(e) facilitate cooperation with the European Medicines Agency on the joint work on medicinal products including the sharing of confidential information; The sharing of confidential information needs to be proportionate to and aligned with the requirements for the joint clinical assessments and be discussed and agreed by the health technology developer or other relevant stakeholders;

2018/05/25
Committee: ITRE

2018/0018(COD)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Carolina PUNSET, Angelika MLINAR, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point 1 (new)

(1) 3.Common rules on Data a) The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 31 concerning data collection, interoperability of data and the comparability of data. b) The confidential handling of data shall be safeguarded at all times

2018/05/25
Committee: ITRE

2018/0003(NLE)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10

(10) In order to equip the Union with the computing performance needed to maintain its research at a leading edge and in order to harness the added value of joint action on Union level the Member States investment in High Performance Computing should be coordinated and the industrial take-up of High Performance Computing technology have to be reinforced. The Union should increase its effectiveness in turning the technology developments into High Performance Computing systems that are procured in Europe, establishing an effective link between technology supply, co-design with users, and a joint procurement of world- class systems.

2018/05/03
Committee: ITRE

2018/0003(NLE)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Angelika MLINAR, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18

(18) The Joint Undertaking should address clearly defined topics that would enable academia ~~and~~but also European industries at large to design, develop and use the most innovative technologies in High Performance Computing, and to establish an integrated infrastructure across the Union with world-class High Performance Computing capability, high- speed connectivity and leading-edge applications and data and software services for its scientists and for other lead users from industry, including SMEs and the public sector. The Joint Undertaking should make efforts to reduce the specific HPC-related skills gap. The Joint Undertaking should prepare the path towards building the first hybrid High Performance Computing infrastructure in Europe, integrating classical computing architectures with quantum computing devices, e.g. exploiting the quantum computer as an accelerator of High Performance Computing threads. Structured and coordinated financial support at European level is necessary to help research teams and European industries remain at the leading edge in a highly competitive international context by producing world- class results and their integration in competitive systems, to ensure the fast and broad industrial exploitation of European technology across the Union generating important spill-overs for society, to share risk-taking and joining of forces by aligning strategies and investments towards a common European interest. The Commission could consider, upon notification by a Member State or group of Member States concerned, that the Joint Undertaking’s initiatives qualify as Important Projects of Common European Interest, provided that all relevant conditions are met in accordance with the Community Framework for state aid for research and development and innovation25. __________________ 25 Communication from the Commission — Criteria for the analysis of the compatibility with the internal market of State aid to promote the execution of important projects of common European interest, OJ C 188, 20.6.2014, p. 4.

2018/05/03
Committee: ITRE

2018/0003(NLE)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Carolina PUNSET, Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Angelika MLINAR, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32

(32) Provision of financial support to activities from Connecting Europe Facility programme or other relevant programs should comply with rules of this programme.

2018/05/03
Committee: ITRE

2018/0003(NLE)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Carolina PUNSET, Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Angelika MLINAR, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40

(40) All calls for proposals and all calls for tender under the Joint Undertaking should take into account the duration of the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme and Connecting Europe Facility Programme, as appropriate, except in duly justified cases. For the period not covered by the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme and the Connecting Europe Facility Programme, appropriate adjustments should be made taking in to account the MFF for the period after 2020, with the aim at continuing the activities of the Joint Undertaking.

2018/05/03
Committee: ITRE

2018/0003(NLE)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Carolina PUNSET, Angelika MLINAR, Pavel TELIČKA

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

(da) to enable synergies and provide added value of cooperation between Participating Member States and other actors.

2018/05/03
Committee: ITRE

2018/0003(NLE)

Fredrick FEDERLEY, Carolina PUNSET, Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Angelika MLINAR, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1

(1) By 30 June 2022 the Commission shall carry out, with the assistance of independent experts, an interim evaluation of the Joint Undertaking, which shall assess in particular the level of participation in, and contribution to, the actions by the Participating States, the Private Members and their constituent entities and affiliated entities, and also by other legal entities. The evaluation should also identify possible other policy needs, including assessment of the situation for specific sectors on their possibility to fully access and use the possibilities enabled by High Performance Computing. The Commission shall prepare a report on that evaluation which includes conclusions of the evaluation and observations by the Commission. The Commission shall send that report to the European Parliament and to the Council by 31 December 2022.

2018/05/03
Committee: ITRE

2017/2285(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Draft opinion
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas the total budget for Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) Transport is 24.05 billion Euros for the period 2014-2020, of which 11.305 billion is made available specifically for projects located within the territories of Member States that are eligible for the Cohesion Fund;

2018/03/01
Committee: TRAN

2017/2285(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Draft opinion
Recital E

E. whereas Member States face the common challenge of financing transport infrastructure with a ~~very~~ tight budget and creating a network that better integrates and connects the different transport modes;

2018/03/01
Committee: TRAN

2017/2285(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Notes theat still ~~limited~~ progress is to be made in the completion of the strategic TEN-T networks through projects planned under the ERDF and the CF~~, with a very low rate of project selection~~; invites the Commission to investigate how present limitations in implementation could be overcome;

2018/03/01
Committee: TRAN

2017/2285(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that ~~many~~several Member States are still lagging behind as regards meeting basic EU common transport policy targets~~, especially when comparing central and eastern Member States with western ones~~; points out that their specific needs are not always aligned with the EU’s investment priorities ~~and calls, therefore, for the necessary flexibility in financing transport projects under the ERDF and the CF~~;

2018/03/01
Committee: TRAN

2017/2285(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Calls for continued and balanced support to the TEN-T core, comprehensive networks and horizontal priorities, taking into account the need to upgrade and renovate existing infrastructure and to better integrate national transport networks, including road infrastructure; stresses in this context the need for adequate ~~budget envelopes~~ and clearly structured funding programmes under the transport and cohesion policies post 2020;

2018/03/01
Committee: TRAN

2017/2285(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Invites the Commission and Member States to use fully the potential of the European Regional Development Fund and Cohesion Fund for European cross-border infrastructure projects, in order to complete the core and comprehensive Trans-European Transport Network;

2018/03/01
Committee: TRAN

2017/2285(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

4. Supports a wider application of the blending approach; calls, however, for an increase in the exchange of best practice, technical assistance and preparatory toolkits for Member States to disseminate information on financial instruments; also recalls that financial instruments are not always appropriate to finance railway, inland waterways or cross-border projects and that smaller countries face difficulties in implementing PPPs; stresses, therefore, the need to reinforce the grant part of the EU funds as grants remain an essential tool in attracting private financing and closing gaps between Member States.

2018/03/01
Committee: TRAN

2017/2285(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Invites the Commission and Member States to continuing co-financing projects in the next programming period with the principle of "use it or lose it";

2018/03/01
Committee: TRAN

2017/2284(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Anthea McINTYRE, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Regrets the fact that in many Member States there is no ~~real~~t sufficient commitment to IPM practices, which are the cornerstone of the directive; underlines the fact that rigorous implementation of IPM is one of the key measures to reduce dependency on pesticide use in sustainable agriculture, which is environmentally friendly, economically viable and socially responsible and contributes to Europe’s food security while strengthening biodiversity and human and animal health, boosting the rural economy and reducing costs for farmers by facilitating the market uptake of low-risk and non-chemical alternatives; stresses that additional financial incentives are needed to strengthen the uptake of IPM practices by individual farms;

2018/11/21
Committee: ENVI

2017/2284(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Mairead McGUINNESS, Pavel TELIČKA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Anthea McINTYRE, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Stresses the importance of the availability of low-risk pesticides, adequate research and the sharing of best practices within and among Member States to fully utilise the potential of integrated pest management.

2018/11/21
Committee: ENVI

2017/2284(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Mairead McGUINNESS, Pavel TELIČKA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Anthea McINTYRE, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4 b. Acknowledges the willingness of farmers to use IPM, but understands that farmers are reluctant to apply new methods for pest management if they face an unacceptably high risk to their economic viability in case these methods do not work;

2018/11/21
Committee: ENVI

2017/2284(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Anthea McINTYRE, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses that the common agriculture policy (CAP), in its current form, is not sufficiently capable of reducing farms’ dependency on pesticides; considers that specific policy instruments in the post- 2020 CAP are required in order to help change farmers’ behaviour as regards pesticide use, such as fiscal measures at national level, cross- compliance between IPM and CAP direct payments etc.;

2018/11/21
Committee: ENVI

2017/2284(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Mairead McGUINNESS, Pavel TELIČKA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Anthea McINTYRE, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11 a. Encourages more focus on risk reduction, as extensive use of low-risk substances might be more harmful than limited use of high-risk substances;

2018/11/21
Committee: ENVI

2017/2284(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Mairead McGUINNESS, Pavel TELIČKA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Anthea McINTYRE, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12 a. Regrets that in some Member States the training and certification requirements of the Directive are not fully met; underlines the importance of training of users to ensure the safe and sustainable use of PPPs; considers it fitting to distinguish between professional and amateur users, given that they are not subject to the same obligations; emphasises that professional and non- professional users of PPPs should receive adequate training; stresses that PPPs are not only used in agriculture, but also for weed and pest control in urban areas, including public parks and railways;

2018/11/21
Committee: ENVI

2017/2284(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Mairead McGUINNESS, Pavel TELIČKA, Anthea McINTYRE, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)

12 b. Highlights that sustainable and responsible use of pesticides is a precondition for the authorisation of plant protection products;

2018/11/21
Committee: ENVI

2017/2284(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Anthea McINTYRE, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16 a. Recommends to give Member States the flexibility to apply IPM as part of the greening measures under the CAP;

2018/11/21
Committee: ENVI

2017/2279(INI)

Urmas PAET, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Stresses that investing in and developing connectivity and infrastructure lessens the disparities between regions and peripheral areas and must be taken with high priority.

2018/02/23
Committee: BUDG

2017/2279(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to ~~European public goods and to~~ the Treaty objective of reducing disparities;

2018/02/28
Committee: REGI

2017/2279(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Recalls that the particular structural social and economic situation of the outermost regions justifies specific measures, in accordance with Article 349 TFEU, and stresses the need to improve the specific measures for these regions by adjusting them whenever necessary; calls on the Commission to take the judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU of 15 December 2015 as the basis for ensuring that Article 349 TFEU is properly applied as regards the conditions governing access to the Structural Funds; ~~suggests in particular extending the specific allocation for the outermost regions to the social component and better tailoring the thematic concentration;~~

2018/02/28
Committee: REGI

2017/2279(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Considers that the introduction of integrated strategies for sustainable urban development has been a success and should be replicated in other sub-regional territories~~, for example by setting an integrated territorial objective alongside the thematic objectives~~;

2018/02/28
Committee: REGI

2017/2279(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for territories which are lagging behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considers thatInvites the Commission to further explore in the European Semester how cohesion policy c~~ould~~an contribute to ~~the promotion of social~~economic and ~~fisc~~social convergence by ~~providing incentives; calls on the Commission to take better account of this aspect in the European Semester;~~building on investments and structural reforms

2018/02/28
Committee: REGI

2017/2279(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change ~~and~~, the circular economy and digital and transport infrastructure should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;

2018/02/28
Committee: REGI

2017/2279(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Emphasises that future cohesion policy should focus more on protecting and supporting communities and territories adversely affected by globalisation (plant relocations, job losses); calls for the ~~scope for coordination between the Structural Funds and the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund to be explored;~~Commission to explore the mainstreaming and integration of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund in the future European Structural and Investment Funds

2018/02/28
Committee: REGI

2017/2279(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Advocates stepping up integrated approaches, and stresses that the ESF must remain an integral component of European regional policy~~, by virtue of its essential territorial dimension~~;

2018/02/28
Committee: REGI

2017/2279(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Emphasises that financial instruments can be an effective lever and that they should be promoted if they generate added value; stresses, however, that their effectiveness hinges on many factors (nature of the project, of the territory or of the risk) and that all regions, regardless of their level of development, must be ~~free~~incited to determine the most appropriate method of financing; ~~opposes any binding targets for the use of financial instruments;~~

2018/02/28
Committee: REGI

2017/2279(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Calls for the conditions governing the use of financial instruments to be simplified and for the coordination of these instruments with grants to be facilitated; emphasises the importance of the complementary role played by national development banks and institutions in implementing financial instruments tailored to local needs; regards it as essential to harmonise the rules on financial instruments as much as possible, however they are managed;

2018/02/28
Committee: REGI

2017/2279(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Believes that it is both legitimate and necessary to establish a link between cohesion policy and the guarantee of an environment conducive to investment, effectiveness and the proper use of funds, while stressing that cohesion policy is not meant to be reduced to an instrument for serving priorities without reference to its objectives; expresses its support for a balanced link with economic governance where this helps to maximise the impact of ESI Funds; calls on the Commission to overhaul the European Semester to strengthen its territorial dimension and take account of other factors which contribute to the achievement of cohesion objectives, such as real convergence;

2018/02/28
Committee: REGI

2017/2279(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Calls for the smart specialisation strategies to be continued, and acknowledges the importance of ex-ante conditionalities, which have proved their worth, but stresses that they have been a source of complexity and delays in the development and launching of programming; calls on the Commission ~~to reduce~~and the nuMember ~~of ex ante conditionalities and, in this field, to improve compliance with the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity, making~~States to make use to a maximum ~~use~~extent of existing strategic documents which could fulfil future ex ante conditionalities;

2018/02/28
Committee: REGI

2017/2279(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Notes that the quality of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to i~~ncrease administrative capacities~~mprove the quality of governance;

2018/02/28
Committee: REGI

2017/2279(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Stresses the need to provide a framework which guarantees legal stability through simple, clear and predictable rules, particularly as regards management and checks; calls, in the next programming period, for a reduction in the volume of legislation and guidelines, for the relevant documents to be translated into all the EU languages ~~and for any retrospective application and interpretation of rules to be banned~~;

2018/02/28
Committee: REGI

2017/2279(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37

37. Considers that cohesion policy can help to meet new challenges, such as security or the integration of refugees under international protection~~, with due regard for the sovereignty of the Member States~~; stresses, however, that ~~cohesion policy cannot be the solution to all crises, and opposes the use of cohesion policy funds to cover short-term~~the use of ESIF should be based on the principles of cohesion policy and not to financ~~ing~~e needs outside its scope;.

2018/02/28
Committee: REGI

2017/2257(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

A a. whereas decarbonisation of transport and the use of low-emission technologies offer opportunities for the future of mobility and sustainable economic growth;

2018/03/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2257(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the Commission Communication entitled ‘Europe on the Move: an agenda for a socially fair transition towards clean, competitive and connected mobility for all’, which recognises that the mobility sector is undergoing profound changes and stresses that the digital mobility revolution should lead to a more innovative, integrated, sustainable, fairer and more competitive road transport sector;

2018/03/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2257(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Points out that the digital revolution will reshape the automotive industry value chain, investment priorities and technological ~~choic~~opportunities, with implications for its global competitive position;

2018/03/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2257(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Stresses that automated driving would ultimately raise questions on the interpretation of existing EU legislation on driving time and rest periods; calls on the Commission to continuously monitor if legislative action is needed.

2018/03/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2257(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Highlights that Europe is a world leader in both manufacturing and transport operations and stresses that it is of crucial importance that the European transport sector continues to develop, invest and renew itself in a sustainable manner, in order to maintain its technological leadership and competitive position;

2018/03/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2257(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Notes that research at EU level, notably through Horizon 2020, will be key to delivering results, as demonstrated by projects such as the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking, and calls for further financial support for the development of batteries and battery cell production and recycling, as the advancement of these technologies will play a key role in the future of clean mobility;

2018/03/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2257(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Underlines that connectivity among autonomous vehicles and between vehicles and infrastructure will be crucial in order to ensure an unobstructed traffic flow; calls therefore on the Commission to address issues of data use and management while stressing the importance of data protection;

2018/03/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2257(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13 a. Underlines the importance of adequate safety legislation in order to achieve a safer road transport sector; calls upon the Commission to deliver on the announced legislation on road safety in a timely manner;

2018/03/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2254(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Hannu TAKKULA, Hilde VAUTMANS, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Ulrike MÜLLER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Calls for legislative solutions that will assist farmers in reducing the use of antibiotics in livestock farming, with the aim of prudent and responsible use of antimicrobials; insists that such legislative solutions must address prophylactic and metaphylactic use; endeavours to keep the additional administrative burden as small as possible;

2018/03/07
Committee: AGRI

2017/2254(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Hilde VAUTMANS, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls for further research and development into new antimicrobials and encourages alternatives, such as vaccines, to be investigated, including the development of more sustainable ~~farming systems based on less intensive farming models~~and animal friendly farming models to ensure adequate animal husbandry;

2018/03/07
Committee: AGRI

2017/2254(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Hannu TAKKULA, Hilde VAUTMANS, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses that disease prevention must be the first step for legislation tackling AMR in agriculture, both to ensure a high standard of animal welfare and reduce the need to resort to antibiotics; ~~believe~~demands that antibiotics should never be used as compensation for poor hygiene or inadequate animal husbandry;

2018/03/07
Committee: AGRI

2017/2254(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Hilde VAUTMANS, Hannu TAKKULA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure adequate funding for~~6. Believes that on-farm investments, such as in quality housing, ventilation, cleaning, disinfection, vaccination ~~and bio-security~~, probiotics, prebiotics, gen- selection and bio-security must be encouraged and should not be undermined in the future CAP;

2018/03/07
Committee: AGRI

2017/2254(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Hannu TAKKULA, Hilde VAUTMANS, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Emphasises the crucial role of education and training programmes, based on the latest scientific developments, in raising awareness about antimicrobial resistance and the prudent use of antimicrobials in veterinary medicine for farmers and those involved in livestock farming;

2018/03/07
Committee: AGRI

2017/2254(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Hilde VAUTMANS, Hannu TAKKULA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Underlines the need to c~~hange the business culture employed by veterinary medicine producers, which encourages the use and overuse of certain medicines in order to generate profits~~losely cooperate with veterinary medicine producers in order to diminish the use of certain medicines with high AMR-Impact; emphasizes that public-private partnerships are essential for the One- Health approach;

2018/03/07
Committee: AGRI

2017/2254(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Hilde VAUTMANS, Hannu TAKKULA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Notes that the use of antibiotics as growth promoters in food-producing animals has been banned in the EU since 2006; calls on the Commission to enforce this ban as a conditionality to all food imports from third countries ~~through Free Trade Agreements~~;

2018/03/07
Committee: AGRI

2017/2186(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Notes that, in 2016, the operational costs (Title 3) represented 87,8 % of the overall S2R JU budget including the expected un-used appropriations not required in the year (Title 4); further notes that, for the operational budget, the S2R JU attained a rate of implementation of 100 % for the commitment appropriations and a rate of payment appropriations of 86,6 % ; notes that the payment appropriations were used for the pre-financing of the grants resulting from the 2015 and 2016 calls for proposals;

2018/01/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2186(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Notes that the S2R JU has set up a risk management policy but has not yet performed a specific anti-fraud assessment, nor has it established an action plan for the implementation of its own anti-fraud strategy; notes also that, since only pre- financing of projects has been paid in 2016, no ex-post controls have been carried out; encourages the S2R JU to adopt, as soon as possible, an ex-post control strategy; asks the S2R JU to provide details on the risk management system, and in particular on how to avoid conflicts of interest;

2018/01/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2186(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Is concerned that in its procedure for the procurement services, S2R JU sets a maximum contract budget, which does not seem to be based on a cost estimation process and a reasonable market price reference system; asks the S2R JU to put in place appropriate cost estimation processes before launching procurement procedures in order to ensure the cost-effectiveness of its multi-annual service contracts, as experience shows that most of the bids received were close to the maximum budget;

2018/01/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2186(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Underlines the importance of research and innovation in the rail sector in order to achieve a significant reduction of the life-cycle cost of the railway transport system and to achieve significant increases in capacity of the railway transport system, in reliability and punctuality, as well as in order to remove the remaining technical obstacles to interoperability and to reduce the negative externalities linked to transport; highlights also that the objectives of the S2R JU are to achieve a Single European Railway Area and to enhance the attractiveness and competitiveness of the European railway system;

2018/01/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2181(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Is concerned that in its procedure for procurement services, the Joint Undertaking sets a maximum contract budget, which does not seem to be based on a cost estimation process and a reasonable market price reference system; asks the Joint Undertaking to put in place appropriate cost estimation processes before launching procurement procedures, in order to ensure the cost-effectiveness of its multi-annual service contracts;

2018/01/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2181(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Welcomes the publication of the “SESAR European Drones Outlook Study” in November 2016; considers that a variety of innovations, including technologies related to Air Traffic Management, are required to safely integrate drones into European airspace; notes with interest its overview of the development of the European drone market to 2050 and the huge potential for Europe and its global competitiveness, as well as the actions that need to be taken in the coming 5 to 10 years to unlock that potential, including support for research and development acheieved by setting up, at Union level, an ecosystem that encompasses both a regulatory framework and technology, and that brings together all key public and private stakeholders, and results in the provision of increased levels of Union funding;

2018/01/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2181(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 13

13. RNotes that European airspace management remains fragmented and the Single European Sky as a concept has not yet been achieved; reiterates the vital role of the Joint Undertaking in coordinating and implementing research into the SESAR project, which is a pillar project of the Single European Sky;

2018/01/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2162(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Regrets that corrective actions related to the Court’s comments of 2013 regarding the double location of the Agency in Lille and Valenciennes have not yet been implemented; ~~further regrets that in the absence of~~stresses that it is likely that costs could be reduced if all operations were centralised in one location; points out that the reduction of costs might also facilitate a comprehensive seat agreement with the host Member State - which would have the effect of clarifying the conditions under which the Agency and its staff operate ~~- the costs of operations are likely to be higher than necessary~~;

2018/01/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2162(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Notes the results of the annual benchmarking exercise focusing on the efficiency of internal resources showing a decrease of the percentage of staff assigned to administrative tasks (from 23 % to 18 %) and an increase in the percentage of staff assigned to operational task (from 65 % to 70 %), while the staff assigned to control and financial tasks was around 12 %; regrets, however, that the evolution of percentage is mainly due to a correction in the assignment of staff into the various categories; points out that such reduction is not in line with the 5 % staff cut communicated by the Commission on the programming of resources for decentralised agencies;

2018/01/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2162(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Highlights the Agency's role in ensuring the safety and interoperability of European rail system in order to contribute to creating a more competitive European railway sector; supports the Commission’s vision of a European railway system that leads the world on safety performance;

2018/01/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2162(DEC)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Jens ROHDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12

12. Notes that, in 2016, the Agency continued the implementation of the action plan defined in the Agency Antifraud Strategy, by organising tailor made training sessions on fraud prevention; welcomes that a comprehensive revision of the Agency's rules on Conflict of Interest (Col) has been carried out in 2017; further notes that, within the framework of the policy on conflict of interest for the Administrative Board (AB), the Agency published the CVs and the declaration of interest of AB Members; notes, however, that some CVs and declarations of interest are missing; requests that CVs and declarations of interests are published without delay after the appointment of AB Members;

2018/01/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2158(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Reiterates the need to ensure the independence of Agency’s staff and external experts; in this context welcomes the ongoing efforts to ensure proper prevention and management of conflicts of interest, taking into account remarks by the Parliament; notes that the Agency provided relevant training to its staff, maintains a Conflict of Interest Register and continues the review of its “Policy on impartiality and independence: prevention and mitigation of Conflict of Interest” in order to further improve the internal process for the completion, review and update of Declarations of Interest for the Agency’s staff members; welcomes the fact that more than 80% of EASA staff were trained on anti-fraud matters by the end of 2016, and encourages the Agency to aim for training 100% of EASA staff; also notes that the Agency produced a Code of Conduct including a policy on Conflict of Interest and a declaration of interest for the external experts supporting the work of the Agency;

2018/01/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2158(DEC)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Jens ROHDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Notes the results of the third benchmarking exercise on the Agency’s posts, which showed that 12,5 % of the jobs were dedicated to administrative support and coordination, 81,0 % to operational tasks and 6,4 % to neutral (finance/control and linguistics) tasks; is pleased that a breakdown of staff by category and sector, as well as by source of funding for their activities (fees and charges versus Union subsidies), has been included in the 2016 Annual Report, which shows that that 60,4 % of posts, including 50,1 % of operational posts, are funded from fees and charges and 33,8 % of posts are funded from the Union subsidy; notes that for the second consecutive year the Agency has achieved full occupancy of all posts according to the establishment plan; notes a discrepancy in this establishment plan between the different AD and AST posts authorised under the EU budget and the posts actually filled, and calls upon the Agency to address this imbalance;

2018/01/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2158(DEC)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Jens ROHDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Reiterates that the revision of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council1 envisages broadening the scope of competence of the Agency and that, accordingly, the role played by new technologies, such as remotely piloted aircraft systems, must be taken fully into consideration when new competences are assigned; stresses the importance of allocating adequate funding to the Agency to ensure the successful uptake of these new responsibilities, as well as adequate staffing in order to fulfil additional tasks; notes, however, that the Agency should amend its Financial and Fees and charges regulations to better formalise the treatment of an accumulated surplus, in order to potentially reduce the Union subsidy; _________________ 1 Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 February 2008 on common rules in the field of civil aviation and establishing a European Aviation Safety Agency, and repealing Council Directive 91/670/EEC, Regulation (EC) No 1592/2002 and Directive 2004/36/EC (OJ L 79, 19.3.2008, p. 1).

2018/01/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2158(DEC)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Jens ROHDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Welcomes the political agreement on the revision of the common rules in the field of civil aviation and establishing a European Union Aviation Safety Agency1a, as agreed in November 2017 by the Parliament, the Council and Commission; urges the Commission and Member States to provide necessary resources for the new and reinforced competences concerning, among others, risks to civil aviation arising from conflict zones, environmental related topics and the certification and registration of unmanned aircraft; _________________ 1aRegulation COM(2015) 613: Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules in the field of civil aviation and establishing a European Union Safety Agency, and repealing Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

2018/01/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2158(DEC)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Jens ROHDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8 b. Welcomes the active role of the Agency in the call for proposals under the Horizont 2020 programme; urges the Agency to remain active in the field of research and development;

2018/01/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2158(DEC)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Jens ROHDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)

8 c. Supports the establishment of a working group to look into the potential risks and impact of Brexit; recommends the Agency to work closely together with the other European Institutions regarding this matter; proposes that the Agency presents the outcomes of this working group to the European Parliament in due time;

2018/01/26
Committee: TRAN

2017/2136(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Regrets that ~~for~~, at the ~~area of "Competitiveness for growth and employment", to which transport belongs~~time when the next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) is under preparation, the Court did not provide any comprehensive information regarding the audits performed for transport sector under the area of “Competitiveness for growth and employment”, in particular regarding the ~~Connecting Europe Facility (~~CEF);

2018/01/25
Committee: TRAN

2017/2136(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Takes note of the Court’s observation as concerns the risk of backlog of unpaid claims in the final years of the current MFF and in the early years of the next MFF; invites the Commission to present to the Parliament and the Council an assessment of the implications with sector-specific recommendations;

2018/01/25
Committee: TRAN

2017/2136(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Regrets the fairly limited progress made in the completion of the TEN-T strategic networks planned under the European Regional Development Fund and Cohesion Fund; asks the Commission to investigate how problems related to implementation rates and imbalance between Member States could be improved; invites the European TEN-T Coordinators to conduct a thorough assessment of the projects completed and the improvements achieved along the TEN-T corridors under the current programming period, and to present it to the Commission and the Parliament;

2018/01/25
Committee: TRAN

2017/2136(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. ~~Regret~~Notes that the number of financial instruments has increased considerably, which allows for new blending opportunities in the transport sector, while at the same time creating a complex web of arrangements around the Union budget; is concerned that these instruments alongside the Union budget could risks undermining the level of accountability and transparency, as reporting, audit and public scrutiny are not aligned; regrets furthermore that with the use of the EFSI funds, implementation powers are delegated to the EIB with more limited public scrutiny than for other instruments supported by the Union budget;

2018/01/25
Committee: TRAN

2017/2136(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Calls upon the Commission to clearly present for the sector of transport an assessment of the impact of EFSI on other financial instruments, in particular with regard to the CEF as well as on the coherence of the CEF Debt Instrument with other Union initiatives in good time before the proposal for the next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) and for the next CEF; requests that this assessment presents a clear analysis on the geographical balance of investments in the transport sector; recalls, however, that the amount of money spent under a financial instrument should not be considered as the only pertinent criteria to assess its performance; invites, therefore, the Commission to deepen its assessment of the achievements completed under Union funded transport projects and measure their added-value;

2018/01/25
Committee: TRAN

2017/2136(DEC)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Mairead McGUINNESS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 13

13. Notes that research and innovation accounts for 59% of spending of the MFF sub-heading "Competitiveness for growth and jobs"; is concerned that the level of errors is high (4,1%); emphasises that innovation is a cornerstone to ensure sustainability of transport; calls on the Commission to put forward further simplification measures and ensure that a technical and financial support is provided so that funding is adequately used and more participants, in particular SMEs, would profit from Union funds; reiterates the need to secure enough Union funds in the form of grants in the next MFF for research and innovation;

2018/01/25
Committee: TRAN

2017/2128(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the implementation of the Regulation ~~is not~~should be in line with related EU policies, including in the field of pesticides;

2018/06/13
Committee: ENVI

2017/2128(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Mairead McGUINNESS

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the available evidence shows that the practical implementation of the three main instruments of the Regulation – approvals, authorisations and enforcement of regulatory decisions – ~~is unsatisfactory and does not ensure the fulfilment of the purpose of the Regulation~~could be improved;

2018/06/13
Committee: ENVI

2017/2128(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Ulrike MÜLLER

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

~~D. whereas there are concerns associated with the evaluation approach, as established by law, in particular as regards who should produce the evidence for evaluations and the hazard-based approach;~~deleted

2018/06/13
Committee: ENVI

2017/2128(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Ulrike MÜLLER

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. Considers that the burden of proof should remain on the applicant, so as to ensure that public money is not spent on studies which can eventually benefit private interests; at the same time, stresses that transparency must be ensured at each step of the authorisation procedure fully in line with intellectual property rights while ensuring that good laboratory principles are consistently upheld throughout the Union;

2018/06/13
Committee: ENVI

2017/2128(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Mairead McGUINNESS

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas there are concerns associated with the practical implementation of the established evaluation approach; whereas in particular there are major concerns associated with the incomplete harmonisation of data requirements and methodologies used ~~in some scientific fields~~ that may hinder the evaluation process ~~and thus may lead to direct negative effects on public health and the environment~~;

2018/06/13
Committee: ENVI

2017/2128(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Mairead McGUINNESS

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas the performance of national competent authorities was found to be a ~~major~~ factor influencing the evaluation of active substances; whereas there are substantial differences among Member States as regards available expertise and staff; whereas the Regulation and relevant supporting legal requirements are not uniformly implemented across Member States ~~with relevant health and environment implications~~;

2018/06/13
Committee: ENVI

2017/2128(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Mairead McGUINNESS

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas transparency in all stages of the approval procedure ~~is insufficient and leads to negative effects on health and the environment and provokes~~could be improved, which would lead to increased public ~~mis~~trust in the system regulating pesticide substances; whereas the transparency of the authorisation related activities of competent authorities iscould also ~~unsatisfactory~~be improved; welcomes the proposed changes to the General Food Law to address this problem;

2018/06/13
Committee: ENVI

2017/2128(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Ulrike MÜLLER, Carolina PUNSET, Mairead McGUINNESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses the importance of a regulatory framework on plant protection products at EU level, that protects the environment and human health, and also stimulates research and innovation in order to develop effective and safe plant protection products;

2018/06/13
Committee: ENVI

2017/2128(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Ulrike MÜLLER, Mairead McGUINNESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Highlights that special attention should be given to the role of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in the development of new plant protection products, as SMEs often lack the significant resources that are necessary it develop new substance;

2018/06/13
Committee: ENVI

2017/2128(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Mairead McGUINNESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 d (new)

1d. Underlines that there is always a certain amount of risk involved when one interferes in nature, whether it is with chemical, biological or low-risk plant protection products. Risks can never be excluded, however, they can be managed. Therefore, legislation on plant protection products should set criteria and levels for acceptable risk;

2018/06/13
Committee: ENVI

2017/2128(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Ulrike MÜLLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 e (new)

1e. Emphasises that special attention and support should be given to plant protection products for minor uses, as there is currently little economic incentive for companies to develop these products;

2018/06/13
Committee: ENVI

2017/2128(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Ulrike MÜLLER, Mairead McGUINNESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that the objectives and instruments of the Regulation and its implementation are not in always sufficiently streamlined with EU policies in the fields of agriculture, food security, water quality, climate change, sustainable use of pesticides and maximum residue levels of pesticides in food and feed;

2018/06/13
Committee: ENVI

2017/2128(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Ulrike MÜLLER, Mairead McGUINNESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Is concerned by the steadily increasing use and identified cases of misuse of emergency authorisations granted under Article 53;~~ Considers that further efforts are needed to ensure that both Union and national agencies have sufficient capacities to process applications for PPP authorisations in order to avoid frequent use of emergency authorisations; Is concerned that Article 53 has been misused for the authorisation of plant protection products;

2018/06/13
Committee: ENVI

2017/2128(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Ulrike MÜLLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Is concerned that the incomplete harmonisation of data and testing requirements in ~~some scientific fields may lead to direct negative effects on health, the environment and agricultural produc~~the evaluation of plant protection products has not been fully achieved, leading to inefficient working methods, lack of trust among national authorities, and unnecessary delays of authorisations;

2018/06/13
Committee: ENVI

2017/2128(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Ulrike MÜLLER, Carolina PUNSET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Is concerned that, in some cases, the PPPs available on the market and their application by users do not necessarily comply with the relevant authorisation conditions as regards their composition and usage; underlines the importance of training for professional users; emphasizes that non-professional use should be limited when possible in order to reduce misuse;

2018/06/13
Committee: ENVI

2017/2128(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Ulrike MÜLLER, Carolina PUNSET, Mairead McGUINNESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Stresses the added value of biological products to the market of plant protection products; acknowledges the need for more research into these products as their composition and functioning is radically different from conventional products; underlines this also includes the need for more expertise within EFSA to evaluate these biological active substances; and more expertise in the national competent authorities to evaluate these products;

2018/06/13
Committee: ENVI

2017/2128(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Mairead McGUINNESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Highlights that many authorised PPPs have not been evaluated against EU standards for more than 15 years, as a consequence of delays in the authorisation procedures;

2018/06/13
Committee: ENVI

2017/2128(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Ulrike MÜLLER, Mairead McGUINNESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Calls on the Member States to ~~limit the authorisations granted under~~ better implement the national authorisation procedures, in order to limit derogations u~~sing~~nder Article 53 of the Regulation;

2018/06/13
Committee: ENVI

2017/2088(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Believes that it is crucial for the EU farming sector to support a new generation of environmentally conscious and global minded young farmers in tackling the many challenges ahead, such as climate change, preserving natural resources (soil, water and air), increasing biodiversity and promoting sustainable agricultural production;

2018/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2017/2088(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI, Frédérique RIES, Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights that current common agricultural policy (CAP) instruments for young farmers should be improved in the future~~; notes that these tools must be targeted to young farmers’ specific needs, including their economic and social needs, and promote projects with the highest added value for farmers~~ and underlines that the administrative procedures for young farmers should be efficient and simple in order to minimize the administrative burden on applicants and public authorities; notes that these tools must be targeted to young farmers’ specific needs, including their economic and social needs, and promote projects with the highest added value for farmers; believes that the use of the environmentally-friendly and climate-smart innovative solutions and technologies in order to strengthen farming competitiveness and long-term food security is a key issue;

2018/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2017/2088(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI, Frédérique RIES, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises that young farmers must be trained and skilled to enable them to find the ever-more complex solutions required to face current and future environmental challenges, including the use of the latest technological developments in farming; therefore advanced training and exchange between young farmers across the European Union is needed;

2018/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2017/2088(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Recommends that the support to the ‘Young Farmer Scheme’ should ~~continue and the maximum level of national funding allocation be increased beyond 2 % in order to encourage generational renewal~~be reviewed within the framework of the CAP reform;

2018/01/26
Committee: AGRI

2017/2088(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Pavel TELIČKA, Hilde VAUTMANS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Welcomes the creation of an agricultural guarantee instrument, proposed by the Commission and the European Investment Bank (EIB) in March 2015, which should make it easier for young farmers to access credit; ~~recommends that access to finance be improved through subsidised interest rates on loans for new entrants;~~ calls for improved cooperation with the EIB and the European Investment Fund (EIF) to foster the creation of financial instruments dedicated to young farmers across all Member States;

2018/01/26
Committee: AGRI

2017/2088(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Notes that most newly set-up farms are placed in a competitive environment with fast-changing conditions; recommends giving EU farmers more flexibility to respond to changing conditions on the markets in their business plans; urges a result-driven approach which stimulates the development of new innovations and better resource management thereby empowering motivated young farmers; believes that changes in the payment instalments should be considered;

2018/01/26
Committee: AGRI

2017/2088(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Pavel TELIČKA, Hilde VAUTMANS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Urges a result-driven approach which stimulates the development of new innovations and better resource management thereby empowering motivated young farmers;

2018/01/26
Committee: AGRI

2017/2088(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Pavel TELIČKA, Hannu TAKKULA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Notes that access to land is the largest barrier to new entrants to farming in Europe and is limited by the low supply of land for sale or rent in many regions, as well as by the competition from other farmers, investors and residential users; considers that the land access problem is exacerbated by the current direct payment structure, which requires minimal active use of the land and allocates subsidies largely on the basis of land ownership; believes that the existing farmers are incentivised to retain land access in order to retain subsidy access instead of ensuring the best use of the land; recommends ~~increasing the activity levels required to receive payments and~~ to target subsidy payments towards the achievement of particular outcomes ~~(e.g. production of specific environmental or social goods)~~;

2018/01/26
Committee: AGRI

2017/2088(INI)

Jan HUITEMA, Pavel TELIČKA

11. Notes that in many Member States the generational renewal and the access of young people to agricultural land is hindered by late succession; considers that the current CAP lacks any incentives for older farmers to pass their businesses to younger generations; recommends reconsidering the implementation of measures that would motivate older holders to pass their farms to young farmers, such as the ‘farm-exit scheme’ and other incentives for retirement;deleted

2018/01/26
Committee: AGRI

2017/2087(INI)

Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recommends that more consumer products are included within the scope of the Ecodesign Directive (2009/125/EC); emphasises that priority should be given to ICT products, which are sold in large numbers and replaced frequently; ~~highlights, in particular, the urgent need to improve the sustainability of mobiles/smartphones~~the Commission should carefully assess and evaluate such product groups and indicate those with the highest potential;

2018/01/25
Committee: ITRE

2017/2087(INI)

Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Considers that the Ecodesign Directive has been an important tool for the energy efficiency of products and believes that future coordination with initiatives connected to circular economy could enhance this further; calls therefore for an ambitious plan concerning ecodesign and the circular economy which will provide both environmental benefits and a unique opportunity for job development;

2018/01/25
Committee: ITRE

2017/2087(INI)

Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Calls for the ecodesign criteria to be broadened to include resource efficiency, the circular economy and health aspects of products; considers it necessary to combine resource efficiency and circularity of materials with continuous energy savings; stresses that energy should be considered a key resource and that products should be optimised for both energy consumption and material use; believes that focusing on ~~the~~developing criteria ofn durability, upgradability, reparability and recyclability ~~will also provide a unique opportunity for job development~~must be given priority;

2018/01/25
Committee: ITRE

2017/2087(INI)

Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Points out that a broader scope including more criteria must be developed in a way that drives innovation and does not create unnecessary administrative burden; the inclusion of new products must be done gradually in order to develop the necessary expertise to set verifiable and enforceable criteria; in this regard other measures such as producer responsibility schemes should also be considered as long as they can be properly monitored;

2018/01/25
Committee: ITRE

2017/2087(INI)

Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses the need to optimise and safeguard the decision-making process; emphasises that ecodesign measures should be adopted individually and within the deadlines; calls on the Commission to justify delays and to set aside the necessary resources for implementation; ~~believes, in addition, that voluntary agreements should no longer be given priority;~~

2018/01/25
Committee: ITRE

2017/2087(INI)

Frédérique RIES, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Pavel TELIČKA, Carolina PUNSET, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)

Ha. whereas one of the priority objectives of the General Union Environmental Action Programme to 2020 (7th EAP) is to turn the Union into a resource-efficient, green and competitive low-carbon economy; whereas the EAP states that the Union policy framework should ensure that priority products placed on the Union market are ‘eco- designed’ with a view to optimising resource and material efficiency;

2018/03/09
Committee: ENVI

2017/2087(INI)

Frédérique RIES, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Pavel TELIČKA, Carolina PUNSET, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Recital H b (new)

Hb. whereas the EU action plan for the Circular Economy includes the commitment to emphasise circular economy aspects in future product design requirements under the Ecodesign Directive by systematically analysing issues such as reparability, durability, upgradability, recyclability, or the identification of certain materials or substances;

2018/03/09
Committee: ENVI

2017/2087(INI)

Frédérique RIES, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Pavel TELIČKA, Carolina PUNSET, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Recital H c (new)

Hc. whereas the Paris Agreement sets out a long-term goal in line with the objective to keep the global temperature increase well below 2°C above pre- industrial levels and to pursue efforts to keep it to 1,5°C above pre-industrial levels; whereas the EU is committed to contributing its fair share towards these goals through emissions reductions in all sectors;

2018/03/09
Committee: ENVI

2017/2087(INI)

Frédérique RIES, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Pavel TELIČKA, Carolina PUNSET, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Considers that the Ecodesign Directive has been a successful instrument for the improvement of energy efficiency and has resulted in a significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and in net economic gains for consumers;

2018/03/09
Committee: ENVI

2017/2087(INI)

Frédérique RIES, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Pavel TELIČKA, Carolina PUNSET, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Underlines that the Ecodesign Directive improves the functioning of the EU internal market through the definition of common product standards in an area where otherwise diverging national standards would be inevitable; therefore calls on the Commission to maintain an ambitious approach to the setting of new standards and the update of existing standards in order to reap the full potential of the Directive’s scope and objectives;

2018/03/09
Committee: ENVI

2017/2087(INI)

Pavel TELIČKA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls for ~~the development of structural~~proper funding so that Member States can ensure adequate monitoring of policy development, undertake market surveillance, consult at national level and design proactive communication strategies.

2018/01/25
Committee: ITRE

2017/2087(INI)

Frédérique RIES, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Pavel TELIČKA, Carolina PUNSET, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Emphasises the need to base the eco-design requirements on solid technical analysis and impact assessments taking the best-performing products or technologies on the market and the technological development in each sector as a reference;

2018/03/09
Committee: ENVI

2017/2087(INI)

Frédérique RIES, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Pavel TELIČKA, Carolina PUNSET, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Is concerned that the resources devoted by the Commission to the implementation of the Directive does not fully correspond to its importance and its technical challenges; calls on the Commission to deploy sufficient resources, including staff in the relevant DGs, to the eco-design process given the significant EU added value of the legislation;

2018/03/09
Committee: ENVI

2017/2087(INI)

Frédérique RIES, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Pavel TELIČKA, Carolina PUNSET, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 – indent 2 a (new)

– that national authorities be required to draw up specific plans for their market surveillance activities in the area of ecodesign, to be notified to other Member States and to the Commission as set up under Regulation (EC) 765/20081a; _________________ 1aRegulation (EC) No 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 July 2008 setting out the requirements for accreditation and market surveillance relating to the marketing of products.

2018/03/09
Committee: ENVI

2017/2087(INI)

Frédérique RIES, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Pavel TELIČKA, Carolina PUNSET, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 – indent 4 a (new)

– that coherence is applied with the European Commission’s Goods Package proposal on enforcement and compliance in the EU single market, which scope includes ecodesigned products;

2018/03/09
Committee: ENVI

2017/2087(INI)

Frédérique RIES, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Pavel TELIČKA, Carolina PUNSET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Stresses that the use of materials of critical importance, such as Rare Earth Elements (REE), or substances of very high concerns, such as Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) and endocrine disrupters, shall be considered under the broadened ecodesign criteria in order to restrict their use or at least to ensure the possibility of extracting them at end-of- life, to take into account the objective on non-toxic materials cycles as laid down in the 7th Environmental Action Programme;

2018/03/12
Committee: ENVI

2017/2085(INI)

Jens ROHDE, Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the installation of driver assistance systems in vehicles for persons ~~of restrict~~with reduced mobility and the elderly enables their safe~~, active~~ participation in road traffic;

2017/07/17
Committee: TRAN

2017/2085(INI)

Jens ROHDE, Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas intelligent driving systems reduce congestion, warn drivers of hazards on their route, and consequently help to lower the risk of causing an accident;

2017/07/17
Committee: TRAN

2017/2085(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Observes that nearly half of all pedestrians and cyclist~~s killed on the road~~ deaths resulting from traffic accidents are aged over 65, and calls on Member States to ~~make it possible for older people to use the roads safely by developing programmes to avert age-specific risks of accidents;~~improve the conditions for all pedestrians and cyclists to safely use the roads.

2017/07/17
Committee: TRAN

2017/2085(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Observes that ~~relatively fast~~new means of transport, such as e-bikes and ~~also~~ electric unicycles, are becoming increasingly popular, and calls on the Commission ~~therefore to examine the safety requirements for them without delay and to make proposals relating to safety, taking due account of subsidiarity~~and the Member States to initiate steps for their safe integration on the road;

2017/07/17
Committee: TRAN

2017/2085(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses that some 95% of all accidents are due to human error and that therefore it should be compulsory to incorporate driver assistance systems which promote safety, a requirement that should apply only to those driver assistance systems which improve road safety significantly, as demonstrated by scientific evidence, and which have a favourable cost- benefit ratio ~~and which have attained market maturity.~~, that is to say, the resulting purchase price increases would not be so inordinate that the intended customers for given vehicles could not afford to buy them;

2017/07/17
Committee: TRAN

2017/2085(INI)

Jens ROHDE, Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. ~~Calls for incentives for measures to promote road safety based on insurance or taxation aspects, such as the installation of additional safety-relevant driver assistance sys~~Notes that financial incentives, e.g. tax or insurance-based, can facilitate the market uptake of vehicles with advanced safety features and invites Member Statems ~~or driver training~~to consider putting into place such mechanisms;

2017/07/17
Committee: TRAN

2017/2085(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Stresses that a high level of data protection as required by Regulation (EU) 2016/679 on the General Data Protection ~~Regulation~~ and by the right to protection of privacy and personal data should be ensured, as should high IT security, so that the possibility of new accident risks due to remote manipulation of on-board systems or conflicts of compatibility is excluded;

2017/07/17
Committee: TRAN

2017/2084(INI)

Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas a fully functioning and competitive internal energy market is essential for further stimulating R&D and maximising the market uptake of new technologies across all EU regions by providing economies of scale and regulatory and investment certainty, thereby enabling the EU to reap the full potential of energy innovation and fostering efficiency, a sustainable and efficient technology-neutral use of indigenous sources, and storage and transport solutions;

2017/10/25
Committee: ITRE

2017/2084(INI)

Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas the EU’s energy policy and financing instruments should primarily focus on a gradual transition to high- efficiency, low-emission systems and avoid setting technology-specific benchmarks that distort market mechanisms and limit the use of subsidies to that of a temporary instrument facilitating the market-uptake of new technologies;

2017/10/25
Committee: ITRE

2017/2084(INI)

Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas innovation is driven first and foremost by innovators and market demand; in that sense calls on the Commission to focus its efforts primarily on creating an enabling framework for innovators, ranging from simplifying access to research financing to turning knowledge into commercially viable products; partnerships between researchers and relevant industrial partners can be helpful in that regard;

2017/10/25
Committee: ITRE

2017/2084(INI)

Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas energy-related research and innovation was recognised as a priority area under FP7 and Horizon 2020, and should continue to be so in the upcoming EU Framework Programme;

2017/10/25
Committee: ITRE

2017/2084(INI)

Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Recognises that the successful deployment of energy innovation is a multidimensional challenge that encompasses supply chain, value chain, human capital, market dynamics, regulation, innovation and industrial policy issues; stresses that this challenge requires the engagement of citizens – consumers and prosumers –, as well as a wide ecosystem of stakeholders, including academia, research and technology organisations (RTOs), start- ups, energy and construction companies, mobility providers, service suppliers, equipment manufacturers, IT and telecoms companies, financial institutions, public authorities at all levels, NGOs, educators and opinion leaders;

2017/10/25
Committee: ITRE

2017/2084(INI)

Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – introductory part

9. ~~Calls on the Commission to set up a dedicated inter-service team that would, inter alia~~In order to make the existing financing instruments at EU and Member State level more comprehensible, highlight investment opportunities and maximize the uptake of new technologies, calls on the Commission to:

2017/10/25
Committee: ITRE

2017/2084(INI)

Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – point b

(b) ~~reinforce~~identify existing stakeholder fora on energy research and innovation ~~and establish new ones where necessary~~; provide tools for inter-sectoral, inter- disciplinary and inter-regional exchanges, including on energy innovation projects, national and local long-term energy innovation policies, joint investment opportunities, the appropriation of the energy transition by citizens and grass-root initiatives;

2017/10/25
Committee: ITRE

2017/2084(INI)

Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Reiterates Parliament’s call for an increased overall budget of EUR 120 billion for FP9 and urges the Commission to ~~increase by 50 % the proportion of~~set an ambitious target for energy- related financing under FP9 from the corresponding H2020 level, so as to ensure sufficient funding to support effective implementation of the Energy Union;

2017/10/25
Committee: ITRE

2017/2084(INI)

Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Considers that citizen-driven energy innovation opens untapped opportunities for innovation financing~~; calls on the Commission to explore effective ways to promote energy innovation crowdfunding and to consider the setting up of a clean energy innovation crowd equity fund;~~, for example through crowdfunding; however citizen-driven innovation can only take place if barriers for market entry are lowered.

2017/10/25
Committee: ITRE

2017/2084(INI)

Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Recognises the need for systemic education and engagement schemes designed to enable society to fully engage in the transformation of the energy system and enable Europeans of all ages to gradually progress from awareness and understanding to active involvement and taking a guiding role; calls on the Commission, the Member States, local authorities and the private sector to promote conscious consumer choices and energy-related citizens’ engagement through, inter alia, EU-supported awareness campaigns, comprehensive information on energy bills and price comparison tools, the promotion of cooperative sharing schemes, participatory budgets for energy-related investments, tax and investment incentives, as well as by steering technological solutions and innovations; however, the effective implementation of this transformation can only happen if the internal energy market is an open, transparent and level- playing field characterised by fair competition;

2017/10/25
Committee: ITRE

2017/2067(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas the combination of C-ITS and environmentally-friendly cars will lead to a higher level of sustainability;

2017/11/27
Committee: TRAN

2017/2067(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Urges the European Union, for the sake of economic growth and competitiveness, to support its leading global position in the field of C-ITS through the promotion of European standards at international fora; encourages all stakeholders to speed up the deployment of C-ITS technologies; underlines, in this respect, the need for high-quality, safe, competitive, accessible, continuous and reliable services throughout the Union;

2017/11/27
Committee: TRAN

2017/2067(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Calls on car manufacturers to inform consumers adequately and in a clear manner about their rights as well as the benefits and limits of new C-ITS technologies in terms of safety; calls furthermore on them never to sell, keep, use or process for any other purpose in- car data without explicit prior consent;

2017/11/27
Committee: TRAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22a. Voices its profound solidarity with the entire Cuban people and its support for them in their progress towards democracy and respect and promotion of fundamental freedoms;

2017/05/11
Committee: AFET

Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Jozo RADOŠ

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41 a (new)

(41a) Although this Regulation aims to reduce CO2 emissions from light duty vehicles, it must not lose sight of the overall carbon balance in the ‘manufacture – use – scrapping’ cycle of the vehicles concerned and the ‘extraction/production – transportation – consumption’ cycle of the fuel used (well- to-wheel). In this respect, the Commission should develop a harmonised methodology for reporting the carbon balance of the life-cycle of such vehicles and the energy consumed in order to obtain a full picture of their environmental impacts and thus ensure consistency of the means deployed in pursuit of the Union’s climate objectives.

2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN

2017/0293(COD)

(12) Setting minimum targets for clean vehicle procurement by 2025 and by 2030 at Member State level should contribute to policy certainty for markets where investments in low- and zero-emission mobility are warranted. The minimum targets support market creation throughout the Union. They provide time for the adjustment of public procurement processes and give a clear market signal. The Impact Assessment notes that Member States increasingly set targets, depending on their economic capacity and how serious the problem is. Different targets should be set for different Member States in accordance with their economic capacity (Gross Domestic Product per capita) and exposure to pollution (urban population density). Considering that these parameters are quite often not uniform within a Member State, an assessment of their reliability will be necessary so that the methodology can eventually be complemented. Minimum procurement targets should be complemented by the obligation of the contracting authorities, entities and operators to consider relevant energy and environmental aspects in all their procurement procedures. The Territorial Impact Assessment of this amended Directive illustrated that the impact will be evenly distributed among regions in the Union.

2018/06/11
Committee: TRAN

(10) ‘European cybersecurity certificate’ means a document issued by a conformity assessment body attesting that a given ICT product, process or service fulfils the specific requirements laid down in a European cybersecurity certification scheme;

2018/04/30
Committee: ITRE

2017/0225(COD)

Pavel TELIČKA, Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Gesine MEISSNER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 16 a (new)

(16 a) ʽself-assessmentʼ is defined on the basis of Regulation (EC) 768/2008, module H Or. en (768/2008/EC, module H http://eur- lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2008:218:0082:0128:en:PDF)

2018/04/30
Committee: ITRE

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. The Agency shall assist and advise Member States and Union institutions in establishing policies and practices for the responsible management and coordinated disclosure of vulnerabilities in ICT products and services that are not publicly known, inter alia, by establishing government vulnerability disclosure review processes and coordinated vulnerability disclosure policies.

2018/04/30
Committee: ITRE

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 2

2. assisting Member States to implement consistently the Union policy and law regarding cybersecurity notably in relation to Directive (EU) 2016/1148, including by means of opinions, guidelines, advice and best practices on topics such as secure software and systems development, risk management, incident reporting and information sharing, technical and organisational measures, in particular the establishment of coordinated vulnerability disclosure programmes, as well as facilitating the exchange of best practices between competent authorities in this regard;

2018/04/30
Committee: ITRE

Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 1 – point c

2018/04/30
Committee: ITRE

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 1 – point j

(j) rules ~~concerning how previously undetected cybersecurity vulnerabilities in ICT products and services are to be reported and dealt with;~~ requiring vulnerabilities in ICT products and services that are not publicly known to be reported expeditiously by the appropriate authorities to relevant vendors and manufacturers using a coordinated vulnerability disclosure process.

2018/04/30
Committee: ITRE

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

Regulation (EU) No 165/2014
Article 3 – paragraph 4

(-1) In Article 3, paragraph 4 is amended as follows: "15 years after newly registered vehicles are required to have a tachograph as provided in Articles 8, 9 and 10, vehicles operating in a Member State other than their Member State of registration shall be fitted with such a tachograph. ~~(http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32014R0165&rid=1)~~In the meantime vehicles not fitted with such tachograph shall maintain the use of logbook." Or. en

2018/02/27
Committee: TRAN

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Member States shall not apply points (b) and (c) of the first subparagraph of Article 3 (1) of Directive 96/71/EC to drivers in the road transport sector employed by undertakings referred to in Article 1(3)(a) of that Directive, when performing international carriage operations as defined by Regulations (EC) No 1072/2009 and 1073/2009 where the ~~period of posting to~~ international carriage operation eitheir ~~territory to perform these operations is shorter than or equal to 3 days~~begins or ends in the Member State where the place of business through which the duri~~ng a period of one calendar month~~ver was engaged is situated.

2018/02/23
Committee: TRAN

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Proposal for a directive
Recital 5

(5) The level of road transport taxation still differs considerably within the Union. Therefore, certain restrictions, which also indirectly affect the freedom to provide vehicle hiring services, remain justified in order to avoid fiscal distortions. Consequently, Member States should have the option to limit, under conditions, the length of time a vehicle hired in a Member State other than the one of establishment of the undertaking hiring it can be used within their respective territories.

2018/02/23
Committee: TRAN

2017/0113(COD)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

2017/0035(COD)

Angelika MLINAR, Pavel TELIČKA

Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a b (new)

Directive 2003/59/CE
Article 2 – point c

(a b) point c) is replaced by the following: " (c) vehicles undergoing road tests for technical development, repair or maintenance purposes, or of new or rebuiltd vehicles which have not yet been put into service~~; content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32003L0059&qid=1498658676377&from=EN)~~, or of vehicles without passengers driven back to and/ or out of their depot by maintenance personnel " Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-

2017/06/29
Committee: TRAN

2017/0015(COD)

Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a directive
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b – point c

Directive 2003/59/EC
Annex 1 – Section 4 – paragraph 1

Compulsory periodic training courses must be organised by an approved training centre. Their duration must be of 35 hours every five years, given in periods of at least seven hours which may be split over a period of three days maximum. Such periodic training may be provided, in part, on top-of-the-range simulators and by use of information and communication technology tools such as e- learning, while ensuring the quality of the training. At least one of the seven hour periods shall cover a road safety related subject. The content of the training shall take into account training needs specific to the transport operations carried out by the driver and relevant legal and technological developments. The seven hour periods shall cover different subjects.

2017/06/29
Committee: TRAN

2017/0015(COD)

Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a directive
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b – point c

Directive 2003/59/EC
Annex I – Section 4 – paragraph 2 (new)

Completed specific training as required under Directive/2008/68/EC for driving of dangerous goods may count as two of the seven hour periods. Completed specific training as required under other Union legislation may count as one of the seven hour periods. This includes, but is not restricted to, training required ~~under Directive 2008/68/EC for driving of dangerous goods~~, training on animal transport under Regulation (EC) 1/2005, and for the carriage of passengers training on disability awareness under Regulation (EU) 181/2011.;

2017/06/29
Committee: TRAN

2017/0003(COD)

Morten LØKKEGAARD, Gérard DEPREZ, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30

(30) Publicly available directories of end-users of electronic communications services are widely distributed. Publicly available directories means any directory or service containing end-users information such as phone numbers (including mobile phone numbers), email address contact details and includes inquiry services. The right to privacy and to protection of the personal data of a natural person requires that end-users that are natural persons ~~are asked for consent before~~have the possibility of objecting to their personal data ~~are~~being included in a directory. The legitimate interest of legal entities requires that end-users that are legal entities have the right to object to the data related to them being included in a directory.

2017/07/03
Committee: IMCO

2017/0003(COD)

Morten LØKKEGAARD, Gérard DEPREZ, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31

(31) If end-users that are natural persons ~~give their consen~~do not object to their data being included in such directories, they should be able to ~~determine on a consent~~make an objection on basis which categories of personal data are included in the directory (for example name, email address, home address, user name, phone number). In addition, providers of publicly available directories should ~~inform~~provide accessible information to the end-users of the purposes of the directory and of the search functions of the directory before including them in that directory. End-users should be able to ~~determine by consen~~object on the basis of which categories of personal data their contact details can be searched. The categories of personal data included in the directory and the categories of personal data on the basis of which the end-user's contact details can be searched should not necessarily be the same.

2017/07/03
Committee: IMCO

Gérard DEPREZ, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c

2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/0003(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Petr JEŽEK, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d

2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/0003(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Petr JEŽEK, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1

1. The definition of and conditions for consent provided for under Articles 4(11) and 7Article 7 (1), (2), and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679/EU shall apply.

2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE

Gérard DEPREZ, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Petr JEŽEK, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1

2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/0003(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Petr JEŽEK, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2

2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/0003(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3

2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/0003(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1

2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE

2016/2327(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Citation 3 a (new)

– having regard to its Resolution of 9 July 2015 on “Implementation of the 2011 White Paper on transport”1a; __________________ 1a Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0310

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)

– having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on Union guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network and repealing Decision No 661/2010/EU1a, __________________ 1a OJ L 348, 20.12.2013, p. 1.

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 a (new)

– having regard to Communication from the Commission COM(2016)766, A European strategy on Cooperative Intelligent Transport Systems, a milestone towards cooperative, connected and automated mobility,

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas ~~road~~ transport ~~is responsible for over 70 % of overall g~~plays a significant role in climate change, accounting for some 23.2% of EU Greenhouse gGas total emissions ~~in transport and much of air pollution, and whereas action is mainly needed in this area, while efforts should be intensified in all sectors of~~, and road transportation for 72.8% of the EU transport ~~to reduce~~GHG emissions in 2014;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)

Bb. whereas direct emissions from the aviation sector accounts for about 3% of the EU’s total greenhouse gas emissions and more than 2% of global emissions;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)

Bc. whereas ambitious low-emission strategies, in among others China and India, illustrate that it offers major economic opportunities;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that the shift towards low- emission mobility offers major opportunities for ~~car~~vehicle manufacturers, suppliers and for innovative energy and service providers;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Underlines that the implementation of new innovative technologies, in a market-driven approach, is a key element to achieve an effective reduction of the GHG emissions within the transport sector;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Encourage the Commission to act as the leading actor for global, harmonised measures, with regards to more sustainable and efficient transport;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Recognises the need for a clear change in transportation demand management in order to make the necessary shift to a~~n inter~~ multimodal approach; reiterates that transport should be seen as a service and not a goal as such; supports to this end the full implementation of Trans- European Transport Network (TEN-T);

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Underlines the importance of Research & Development for tackling technological challenges regarding low- emission mobility; urges the Commission to continue its strong support for research programmes, such as CleanSky and SESAR;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Invites the Commission to ensure full implementation of existing legislation ~~and to come forward with a ‘transport and climate’ legislative package with a view to achieving the climate objectives, covering all modes, including urban mobility~~;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to review the EU approach to aviation connectivity and explore the possibility of developing a connectivity index; stresses that air connectivity should ~~focus on connecting remote and disadvantaged regions of the Union; underscores that this should be combined with investments in green alternatives such as cross-border (night) trains~~be comprehended in the context of an integrated, modern and complementary transport network and take into account territorial continuity, network integration and the availability of alternative modes of transport; underscores that this should be combined with investments in smart technologies aiming at reducing emissions in the aviation sector;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Stresses the potential benefits of light-weighting and of a more efficient use of the current infrastructure, including better distribution of traffic and enhanced inter-modal solutions;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Welcomes the Commission’s efforts at developing standards for inter- operable electronic tolling systems in the EU and the forthcoming revision of the Eurovignette Directive, which should include distance-based charging and differentiation on the basis of ~~carbon dioxide~~ emissions; calls for the extension of distance-based charging to cover all passenger cars and vans, and for the principle to be extended to urban areas;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Stresses that kerosene taxation needs to be introduced for aviation, which represents the mode furthest away from internalising its external costs; calls, furthermore, for the removal of the VAT exemption on air passenger tickets; encourages Member States to introduce or retain flight ticket taxes and/or levies in the interim, building on the momentum of the adoption of the global market-based measure (GMBM) during the 39th Assembly of ICAO, the EU should actively engage with its international partners and seek a common basis for environmental charges and taxes;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Considers that autonomous vehicles can be an important asset in improving the efficiency of transport; ~~insists, however, that autonomous vehicles should be electric, shared, and include smart measures to mitigate increasing use;~~

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Supports initiatives on mobility management for achieving more efficient and environmentally friendly intermodal transport services and smart mobility~~, which can be key to promoting the shift from car ownership to~~ and to increase the promotion of mobility as a service;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Encourages the shift towards Cooperative Connected and Automated mobility, and supports the Commission’s European Strategy in this regard;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Matthijs van MILTENBURG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Welcomes efforts to ~~ensure~~deploy comprehensive and interoperable infrastructure for ~~electric vehicle charging~~supplying energy and/or sustainable alternative fuels for vehicles;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Considers that an obligation for fuel suppliers to reduce the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of energy supplied through renewable electricity, sustainable advanced biofuels or synthetic fuels, and more generally through positive carbon balance energy sources, would be the most effective approach for reducing the climate impact of road transport;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. ~~Urg~~Welcomes the Commission's and the Member States to limit European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI), Trans- European Transport network (TEN-T), Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) and Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) financing to initiatives that contribute to climate action' initiative to introduce financial incentives for projects which contribute to climate action in the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) and Connecting Europe Facility (CEF);

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Matthijs van MILTENBURG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 – point 1 (new)

(1) Stresses that research and development are vital to attaining the Union’s objectives in terms of decarbonisation of transport and clean mobility; calls on the Commission, in its Horizon 2020 research programme, to pursue its efforts to encourage European innovation and the new technologies in all areas of transport;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Stresses the opportunities of Green Public Procurement for more sustainable transport, in particular for (sub)urban buses;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Dominique RIQUET, Pavel TELIČKA, Matthijs van MILTENBURG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 – point 1 (new)

(1) Endorses the priority given by the Commission to investments in rail infrastructure, in particular regarding missing links and cross-border connections; recalls in this context that for freight transport in particular, rail is an efficient and sustainable mass transport system;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Asks the Commission to improve aviation efficiency, including by means of the proposal on landing fees and CO2 standards beyond those enshrined in the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) agreement;deleted

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)

28a. Recalls that airspace is also part of the EU single market, and that any fragmentation resulting from its inefficient use, as well as diverging national practices (concerning, for instance, operational procedures, taxes, levies, etc.), causes longer flight times, delays, extra fuel burn, and higher levels of CO2 emissions, in addition to negatively impacting the rest of the market and hampering the EU's competitiveness; urges therefore the Council and Member States to make swift progress for the completion of the Single European Sky;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. ~~Considers that the EU should implement the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for I~~Welcomes the agreement reached by the 39th Assembly of ICAO on 6 October 2016, with the adoption of a Global Market-Based Measure to reduce international Aaviation ~~(CORSIA) through the Union Emissions Trading System (ETS), while allowing for 50 % of the journeys to be excluded, prov~~emissions, and considedrs that the ~~destination is implementing CORSIA through national measures; proposes that the EU ETS should be retained for flights within the European Economic Area (EEA)~~EU should implement the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation and should be fully engaged within ICAO to define its operationalization;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)

29a. Asks the Commission to continue promoting and financing programmes such as Clean Sky and SESAR and to encourage Member States and the industry to fully benefit from European satellite-based technologies such as EGNOs and Galileo which allow more efficient navigation and approach procedures;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 b (new)

29b. Invites the Member States and the aeronautic industry to encourage the development of further measures to promote smart initiatives aiming at reducing emissions in the aviation sector, from, to and within airports;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Gesine MEISSNER, Pavel TELIČKA, Dominique RIQUET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Stresses that, in the absence of an international agreement on an emissions reduction objective for the shipping sector and IMO measures to mitigate emissions in the international maritime sector, the Union shoulde need for the Union, in the framework of the International Maritime Organisation (IMO), to secure an international agreement on maritime emission reduction targets inc or~~porate international shipping into th~~der to significantly reduce Eemissions ~~Trading System from 2023~~in this sector;

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2327(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 b (new)

31b. Underlines that innovative financing solutions and the use of the EU investment support facilities available from the European Investment Bank should provide useful tools to help ship- owners to shoulder/cover the initial cost in order to reduce GHG.

2017/05/23
Committee: TRAN

2016/2325(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Dominique RIQUET, Lieve WIERINCK, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 a (new)

– having regard to the The Hague Manifesto on Space Policy of June 2016;

2017/04/28
Committee: ITRE

2016/2325(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Gesine MEISSNER, Dominique RIQUET, Lieve WIERINCK, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas the benefits of space for society are manifold and can lead to a more competitive economy for Europe, through developing many new products and services and supporting agriculture, forestry, fisheries and maritime transport; whereas satellite technology can lead to better access to communication technologies, high-resolution Earth Observation systems that allow for the exchange of information in real-time, a rapid response to natural disasters and more effective border and security controls;

2017/04/28
Committee: ITRE

2016/2325(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Gesine MEISSNER, Dominique RIQUET, Lieve WIERINCK, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas space technologies, data and services can support a variety of EU public policies and key political priorities, such as boosting the Digital Single Market, stimulating the European economy and tackling climate change;

2017/04/28
Committee: ITRE

2016/2325(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Dominique RIQUET, Lieve WIERINCK, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Reminds the Commission that continuity in EU space programmes is imperative, in particular in order to create a positive and predictable investment climate in the downstream sector; considers that this can only be achieved if public funding of the ~~respective infrastructure and services is guaranteed in the long term, including in areas with significant private sector involvement~~space flagship programmes and a downstream data infrastructure is guaranteed in the long term possibly through Public-Private Partnerships;

2017/04/28
Committee: ITRE

2016/2325(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Dominique RIQUET, Lieve WIERINCK, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Believes that it is necessary to evaluate the ~~governance of the~~ Galileo and Copernicus programmes before the presentation by the Commission of its new legislative proposals as part of the next MFF; considers that this evaluation should address amongst other matters the future role of the European GNSS Agency (GSA) in Galileo and a potential role in Copernicus, how to simplify the GSA’s relationship with the European Space Agency (ESA) and the current split between the Agency’s core and delegated tasks;

2017/04/28
Committee: ITRE

2016/2325(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Gesine MEISSNER, Dominique RIQUET, Lieve WIERINCK, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Asks the Commission ~~to review the adequacy of resources allocated to the GSA, taking into consideration its current and future tasks and the risks of conflicts of interest resulting from the outsourcing of tasks~~, in cooperation with ESA, to study different options by which the complicated institutional landscape in European space governance can be simplified, improving effectiveness and cost efficiency; stresses that a multiplicity of agencies and organisations does not lead to better space policy;

2017/04/28
Committee: ITRE

2016/2325(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Dominique RIQUET, Lieve WIERINCK, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission for a fast implementation of the space strategy to allow the transport sector to benefit immediately from improved maritime surveillance, multimodality, passenger experience and parcel delivery; believes that GALILEO and EGNOS can greatly contribute to the proper enforcement of EU transport legislation;

2017/04/19
Committee: TRAN

2016/2325(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to accelerate the full economic exploitation of the Galileo and Copernicus programmes by setting adequate targets for market uptake and by simp~~lify~~roving the access to and the processing of Copernicus data in order to enable enterprises and SMEs in particular to develop applications based on space data;

2017/04/28
Committee: ITRE

2016/2325(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Dominique RIQUET, Lieve WIERINCK, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission to support the EU space sector in anticipating the full deployment of GALILEO and to incentivise the development of compatible products such as chipsets and receivers; asks the Commission to encourage investments in space activities for transport through smart financing (e.g. EFSI);

2017/04/19
Committee: TRAN

2016/2325(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Welcomes the Commission's actions in procuring cloud platforms for Earth Observation data, to ensure that Europe reaps the full economic benefit of its flagship space programmes and to establish sustainable user access and competence building; urges the Commission to speed up its work in this area so that the first data platforms can be operational in 2018; believes that all tenders for these platforms should be open to private actors;

2017/04/28
Committee: ITRE

2016/2325(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Dominique RIQUET, Lieve WIERINCK, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Welcomes the Commission's intention to take concrete measures, including regulatory ones, to ensure Galileo market up-take and insists that these measures should cover all transport modes; shares the view of the Commission on the necessity to further facilitate and promote the use of Copernicus data;

2017/04/19
Committee: TRAN

2016/2325(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7b. Stresses the need for 'space proof' legislation; calls on the Commission to remove barriers to use of space technologies by the public sector, e.g. for monitoring compliance with new and existing European legislation; Believes that public policy can be improved considerably by using space technology; asks the Commission and Member States to stimulate uptake of space technology by European, national, regional and local authorities;

2017/04/28
Committee: ITRE

2016/2325(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Dominique RIQUET, Lieve WIERINCK, Pavel TELIČKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Acknowledges the potential of EGNOS-based landing procedures for aircrafts, which are more precise, resulting in better efficiency, higher air traffic capacity, safety benefits as well as reduced flight cancellations and noise;

2017/04/19
Committee: TRAN

2016/2325(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Stresses that the widespread use of the Galileo signal is a precondition for the development of a strong downstream market for space-based applications and services and that adequate measures~~, including regulatory ones,~~ should be taken in order to make full compatibility with Galileo and EGNOS the standard for devices sold in the EU;

2017/04/28
Committee: ITRE

2016/2325(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Gesine MEISSNER, Dominique RIQUET, Lieve WIERINCK, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Highlights the ability of satellites to provide uninterrupted very high capacity connectivity, in particular in remote areas and outermost regions, which will be essential for the development of ~~5G networks, enabling services such as autonomous driving~~high- speed networks and the expansion of the Internet of Things, enabling services such as autonomous driving; emphasizes the complementarity of terrestrial and space- based technologies for delivering Very High Capacity networks; asks the Commission to recognize this and to ensure a technology neutral communication technology mix; stresses also the need to reserve adequate frequency bands for the operation of these satellite services; calls for this to be addressed in legislative work on telecommunication networks;

2017/04/28
Committee: ITRE

2016/2325(INI)

Gesine MEISSNER, Lieve WIERINCK, Pavel TELIČKA, Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Highlights the importance of a European space strategy for a comprehensive EU maritime policy, in particular of a more coordinated use of satellites to facilitate maritime research and to improve maritime surveillance.

2017/04/28
Committee: ITRE

2016/2325(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Gesine MEISSNER, Dominique RIQUET, Lieve WIERINCK, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Stresses that ~~SME~~users such as SMEs and local and regional authorities are still not sufficiently aware of funding opportunities, including those by the EIB, for projects with a link to Galileo or Copernicus, and that the targeted dissemination of information about these opportunities has to be urgently improved;

2017/04/28
Committee: ITRE

2016/2325(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Dominique RIQUET, Lieve WIERINCK, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Welcomes the announcement of the Commission to aggregate its demand ~~for launchers and launching service~~in space-based services and infrastructures to mutualize costs and risks and to help reach a critical mass allowing economies of scale; believes that this should happen on a cross-DG basis; calls on the Commission to ensure fair treatment of EU enterprises vis-à-vis enterprises from third countries in public procurement, specifically by working towards a global level playing field, and by taking into consideration the prices that companies charge to other customers worldwide; welcomes the Commission proposal to strengthen use of innovative procurement schemes;

2017/04/28
Committee: ITRE

2016/2325(INI)

Dominique RIQUET, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Pavel TELIČKA, Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16a. Notes a lack of visibility as to the continuation of the launch vehicle programme in Europe beyond the next 3 to 4 years (Ariane 6 and Vega C) and as to the financial situation for this programme; expresses concern at the lack of any mid- to long-term launch programme; urges the Commission to come forward with a work programme for launch vehicles in Europe for the next 20 years;

2017/04/28
Committee: ITRE

2016/2325(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Dominique RIQUET, Lieve WIERINCK, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16a. Calls on the Commission to act as a 'launching customer' for the European space sector, for example by buying European Earth Observation data for policy objectives or Galileo-enabled smartphones for EU-officials;

2017/04/28
Committee: ITRE

2016/2325(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Dominique RIQUET, Lieve WIERINCK, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Emphasises that cyber crime is a very fast going sector worldwide; underlines that a large part of our economy is relying on space-related services and that cyber attacks therefore pose a large threat; asks the Commission to ensure that all the relevant agencies have contingency plans in place for possible cyber attacks;

2017/04/28
Committee: ITRE

2016/2325(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Gesine MEISSNER, Dominique RIQUET, Lieve WIERINCK, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Notes the increased use of small satellites, which are frequently operated in constellations; stresses the importance of the availability of smallsat-launchers as well, so that Europe will have cost- efficient methods to launch small satellites; asks the Commission to become more active in stimulating R&D&I projects in this regard;

2017/04/28
Committee: ITRE

2016/2325(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Dominique RIQUET, Lieve WIERINCK, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)

24a. Underlines that space is traditionally a sector where good international cooperation is taking place; emphasises the importance of international cooperation on all non- sensitive space issues, such as placing dedicated Copernicus servers in third countries for exchanging data, as long as the principle of reciprocity is assured;

2017/04/28
Committee: ITRE

2016/2325(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Gesine MEISSNER, Dominique RIQUET, Lieve WIERINCK, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Asks the Commission to ~~examine~~monitor existing private sector ambitions in the area of space mining and to work towards a respective international agreement in order to avoid a race for depletable resources in space;

2017/04/28
Committee: ITRE

2016/2325(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Gesine MEISSNER, Dominique RIQUET, Lieve WIERINCK, Pavel TELIČKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)

27a. Considers that democratic support is important for investing in space; Calls on the Commission to present a well- designed and comprehensive communication strategy about the benefits of space technologies for citizens and businesses; Urges the Commission to implement three pillars in its this strategy, in order to more effectively address three important groups of people: 1. Raising awareness with the general public of the necessity of investments in space; 2. Informing SMEs and entrepreneurs about the opportunities of the Space flagship programmes; 3. Including space in education in order to close the skills gap; Asks the Commission to present the European Parliament with a roadmap on the creation of this communication strategy as soon as possible;

2017/04/28
Committee: ITRE

2016/2305(INI)

Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Gesine MEISSNER, Dominique RIQUET, Jozo RADOŠ

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. Insists that within the current international technological race, achieving a dynamic European Gigabit Society is indispensable to maintain competitiveness and prosperity of the EU, as well as to unleash the potential for innovation and transformation in the transport sector;

2017/03/08
Committee: TRAN

2016/2305(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Kaja KALLAS, Angelika MLINAR, Pavel TELIČKA, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas 5Gthe Gigabit Society and Very High Capacity (VHC) networks will be an engine for innovation in Europe, bringing disruptive change across industries and creating new use cases, high-quality services and products, revenue streams and business models, boosting the competitiveness of industries and consumer satisfaction; whereas 5G will be a key building block of the Gigabit Society, representing the standard for the future in mobile communication technologies;

2017/03/02
Committee: ITRE

2016/2305(INI)

Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Gesine MEISSNER, Dominique RIQUET, Jozo RADOŠ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Agrees that deployment of 5G networks is a necessary condition for the development and the uptake of existing and new business opportunities and models in the transport sector; underlines that effective use of the potential of very high-capacity internet networks is key to the process of digitisation of transport modes and services and the wide use of innovative means of transport for people and goods, such as increasingly connected and autonomous vehicles or drones;

2017/03/08
Committee: TRAN

2016/2305(INI)

Lieve WIERINCK, Kaja KALLAS, Angelika MLINAR, Pavel TELIČKA, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

B a. whereas policy actions related to the Gigabit Society and 5G should be demand-driven, based on sound analysis of the current and future needs of consumers and businesses;

2017/03/02
Committee: ITRE

2016/2305(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Kaja KALLAS, Angelika MLINAR, Pavel TELIČKA, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)

B b. whereas a technology neutral approach will ensure that an optimal combination of the best technologies is deployed to deliver the Gigabit Society to European users across regions and sectors;

2017/03/02
Committee: ITRE

2016/2305(INI)

Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Gesine MEISSNER, Dominique RIQUET, Jozo RADOŠ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Underlines that progress in the building of the European Gigabit Society can only be made with appropriate high levels of investment in network infrastructure in all the Member States; doubts whether financing models based only or primarily on investment funds will be sufficient to upgrade infrastructure where necessary and will help fill existing gaps in the level of development of network infrastructure, and even out differences in the availability of high- capacity internet connections in border and outlying areas, as well as in non-urban areas; highlights in this respect the added value of blending of financial instruments to trigger the necessary additional private investments;

2017/03/08
Committee: TRAN

2016/2305(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Kaja KALLAS, Angelika MLINAR, Pavel TELIČKA, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas the development of the Gigabit Society and VHC-networks is a necessity for the transition to a modern, data-driven economy for Europe by enabling, inter alia, the Internet of Things and cloud computing;

2017/03/02
Committee: ITRE

2016/2305(INI)

Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Gesine MEISSNER, Dominique RIQUET, Jozo RADOŠ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Encourages the Commission to pay more attention, in the development of the European Gigabit Society, to the issues of data privacy, cybersecurity and cybercrime and their specificities in the transport sector; notes that any progress in this area cannot be made without giving adequate priority to the security of users of digitised transport systems;

2017/03/08
Committee: TRAN

2016/2305(INI)

Pavel TELIČKA, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Gesine MEISSNER, Dominique RIQUET, Jozo RADOŠ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Encourages the Commission to consider ~~adjust~~clarifying the provisions of Commission Regulation (EU) No 651/2014 of 17 June 2014 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EUEU guidelines for the application of State aid rules in relation to the rapid deployment of broadband networks, in order to facilitate construction of high-speed internet networks;

2017/03/08
Committee: TRAN

2016/2305(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – point 1 (new)

(1) Stresses that, in parallel with the development of 5G, the general introduction of the internet of things will have a major impact, inter alia, on goods transport and logistics;

2017/03/08
Committee: TRAN

2016/2305(INI)