Activities of Enrico GASBARRA related to 2014/2150(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Regulatory Fitness and Performance Programme (A8-0208/2015 - Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann) IT
Amendments (9)
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 3 a (new)
Citation 3 a (new)
- having regard to its report of 25 February 2012 entitled ‘Follow-up on the delegation of legislative powers and the control by Member States of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers’,
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
- having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘Better regulation for better results - An EU agenda’,
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Welcomes the Commission proposal concerning better regulation, in particular with regard to its substantive measures concerning transparency and the reduction of red tape; still has reservations, however, about the operation and effectiveness of the proposed Regulatory Scrutiny Board and independent panel as well as the entire impact assessment mechanism, the function of which should be not only to reduce costs for businesses and to aid economic recovery, but also to monitor the impact of legislation on social, environmental and employment-related matters;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Points out that during the previous parliamentary term, the choice between implementing acts and delegated acts caused numerous interinstitutional disputes; considers it important, therefore, for specific guidelines to be drawn up, as requested by the European Parliament in its report adopted on 25 February 2012;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Is convinced that impact assessments constitute an important tool for supporting decision-making in all EU institutions and play a significant role in better regulation; remains, however, conscious of the fact that such assessments are not a substitute for political assessments and decisions and should be conducted in advance of democratic and interinstitutional debates on proposals; is convinced that, in any case, a negative impact assessment cannot automatically be considered a veto on a legislative proposal;
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Urges Parliament’s specialist committees to make more consistent use of in-house impact assessment instruments, particularly where substantial changes to the original Commission proposal are being envisaged; calls for the operational ability of the institutions – and of Parliament in particular – to be taken into account with a view to bringing a more effective new approach to bear on impact assessments;
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Welcomes the fact that the Commission is making ex-post analysis an integral part of better regulation; stresses that, in the interests of legal certainty for citizens and businesses, such analyses should be carried out within a sufficient time-frame, preferably several years after the deadline for transposition into national law; considers it important to improve the arrangements for consulting and informing Parliament about ex-post analyses;
Amendment 198 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Acknowledges that, in most cases, it is the prerogative of the Member States to decide whether to adopt higher social and environmental standards at national level than those agreed upon at EU level, and welcomes any decision to do so; calls, however, on the competent national authorities to be aware of the possible consequence of the so-called practice of ‘gold plating’, by which unnecessary bureaucratic burdens are added to EU legislation, since this may lead to a misconception of the legislative activity of the EU, which in turn might foster EU scepticism; accordingly considers that Commission assessments of transposition by Member States should also cover gold plating; recommends, for the sake of transparency and user-friendliness, that any additional innovations introduced at national level be clearly identified as such; points out to the Council that documents relating to law-making, in many cases, remain under restriction, notwithstanding the commitments entered into under the 2003 Interinstitutional Agreement;
Amendment 207 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Again calls on the Member States to draw up annual reports and correlation tables on the transposition of directives, which should be made public and be verifiable;