4 Amendments of Martina DLABAJOVÁ related to 2014/2252(INI)
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the closer participation of national parliaments in the European legislative process, which has resulted in a positive increase in awareness of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality in the interinstitutional context; notes however, that further work still needs to be done in this context; Suggests therefore that the Commission engages in a yearly debate with each of the national parliaments in the national parliament in order to strengthen the dialogue between the Commission and the national parliaments;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Reminds that according to Article 5 in the Maastricht Treaty the European Union shall only act if and in so far as the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Stresses that the principle of subsidiarity is an important tool to balance the exercise of power and to ensure genuine European added value and thereby promoting growth and job- creation; stresses that in respecting the principle of subsidiarity it is key to consider the role of the social partners and to ensure their autonomy according to Member States' customs and traditions, believes in this regard that breaches of the principle of subsidiarity can lead to unintended consequences such as undermined faith in the European Union for European citizens and that breaches of the principle of subsidiarity should therefore be avoided;
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the increasing emphasis placed by the Commission on the policy cycles, and calls on the committee responsible to systematically review Commission impact assessments and to review Parliament’s ex-ante impact assessment analysis as early as possible in the legislative process; reminds in this regard that every Commission proposal should have a European added value and a positive impact on European citizen's lives, European competitiveness and European job-creation; calls therefore for better and more ambitious impact assessments to be done throughout the political cycles and for the impact assessments to prove that a proposal have a genuine European added value and a positive impact on European citizens' live, European competitiveness and European job-creation; suggests that if this positive impact cannot be proven through impact assessments the proposal in question should be withdrawn.