5 Amendments of Dita CHARANZOVÁ related to 2015/2041(INI)
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that the Treaty on European Union (TEU) marked a new stage in the process of creating an ever closer union in which decisions are taken as openly and as closely as possible to the citizen (Article 1 TEU); notes that there is a considerabledue to a lack of trust among EU citizens in EU trade-policy making, and believes that a radical shift is neededthere has been a considerable shift in the way that information about trade negotiations is communicated to the public, in order to ensure their legitimacy;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that, pursuant to the principle of sincere cooperation, the Union and the Member States must, in full mutual respect, assist each other in carrying out certain tasks (Articles 4 and 13 TEU), which is a precondition for Parliament to adequately exercise its legislative and budgetary functions, and those of political control and consultation (Article 14 TEU); calls on the Council and the Commission to commit fully and seriously to this principle of sincere cooperation with Parliament by immediately providing, through the relevant channels and where appropriate, full and accurate information pertaining to the Union’s external action, including its Common Commercial Policy (CCP), in regard to decision-making and implementation of primary and secondary legislation; notes that, even though an interinstitutional cooperation agreement exists between Parliament and the Commission, the same does not exist between Parliament and the Council, which creates certain hurdles for scrutiny; calls on the Commission to take into full consideration; recalls Parliament’s requests concerning the interinstitutional agreement, in particular as regards provisional application and implementation of trade agreements;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the fact that the Committee on International Trade (INTA) and the Commission’s Directorate-General for Trade have been collaborating pro-actively to enhance cooperation, establish best practices and improve communication channels, and that this collaboration has been especially useful for monitoring trade negotiations through INTA Standing Rapporteurs and targeted monitoring groups; welcomstresses recent efforts by the Commission to increase the transparency of trade negotiations; believes, nevertheless, that the Council and the Commission can stillhave improved their working methods to better cooperate with Parliament as regards access to documents, information and decision-making for all issues and negotiations related to CCP (such as information relating to negotiations – including scoping, mandates and evolution of negotiations – provisional application of trade agreements, activities and decisions taken by bodies created by trade and/or investment agreements, expert meetings, and delegated and implementing acts); notes with regret that after one year of negotiations between the Commission and Parliament on access to documents related to the TTIP negotiations, there is still no agreement about access to confidential documents;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that, as pointed out by the European Court of Justice (ECJ), imperatives for transparency derive from the democratic nature of governance within the EU, and that, where confidential information is beyond the reach of public access, as in the case of trade negotiations, it must be available to parliamentarians who scrutinise trade policy on behalf of citizens; considers therefore that access to classified information is essential for scrutiny by Parliament, which in return should abide by its obligation to manage such information properly; considers that there should be clear criteria for labelling documents as ‘classified’; notes that the case law of the ECJ makes it clear that where a document originating in an EU institution is covered by an exception with regard to the right to access, the institution must clearly explain why access to this document could specifically and effectively undermine the interest protected by the exception, and that the risk must be reasonably foreseeable and not purely hypothetical; calls on the Commission to implement the recommendations of the European Ombudsman of July 2015 with particular regard to access to documents for all negotiations, and calls on the Commission to convincediscuss with EU negotiating partners to increase transparency at their endransparency measures;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls the importance for the CCP legislative process to count on Union statistics consistent with Article 338(2) TFEU and on impact assessments conforming to the highest standards of impartiality and reliability; calls forwelcomes further reflection on further promoting a mandatory legislative (and lobbying) footprint throughout the legislative process, which would further legitimise it by to makinge it more fact based and transparent for citizens and stakeholders;