Activities of Josep-Maria TERRICABRAS related to 2016/2146(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Activities of the Committee on Petitions 2015 (debate)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the activities of the Committee on Petitions 2015 PDF (761 KB) DOC (199 KB)
Amendments (35)
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the European Parliament is the only EU institution directly elected by citizens, and whereas the right to petition offers them the means to draw the attention of their elected representatives to matters that concern them; whereas unfortunately the committee on Petitions does not have sufficient inquiry capacity by itself at the moment;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the Committee on Petitions is best able to show citizens what the European Union does for them and what solutions it can provide at European, national or local level; whereas the Committee on Petitions can do excellent work explaining and eventually proving the successes and benefits of the European project;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas the right to petition should enhance the European Parliament’s capacity to react, helping to resolve problems relating mainly to how EU legislation is applied, as petitions constitute a valuable source of first-hand information inbased on own experiences which help detecting deficiencies in how EU legislation is appliedimplemented at national level, and ultimately monitored by the Commission in its role of guardian of the Treaties; whereas petitions are a basic tool in the early detection of those Member States lagging behind in transposition and actual enforcement of EU law;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital L a(new)
Recital L a(new)
La. whereas besides providing relevant feedback on the application of existing legislation, petitions can also help identifying loopholes within the EU law as well as to assess the impacts of absence of regulation in certain fields, hence becoming a trigger for further legislative efforts;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
O. whereas petitioners actively contribute to the work of the Committee, providing additional first-hand information to its members, the Commission and representatives of the Member States who may be present; whereas petitioners, by taking part in these discussions and presenting their petitions along with more detailed information, contribute to establishing a fluid dialogue with Members of the European Parliament and with the European Commission; whereas in 2015, 191 petitioners attended and were involved in the Committee’s deliberations; whereas although this number seems relatively low, the meetings of the Committee on Petitions are broadcast, enabling petitioners to follow live discussions both in real time and delayed by means of internet streaming;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital U
Recital U
U. whereas the Commission intends to strengthen the application of EU legislation on the basis of transposition and systematic checks on compliance of national legislation; whereas the Commission stated that it will take appropriate measures, including launching new EU Pilot cases and infringement procedures, when it detects possible breaches of EU law;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital X
Recital X
X. whereas the key issues of concern raised in petitions pertain to a wide range of issues, such as environmental legislation (in particular, waste water treatment, waste management, river basin management, gas and hydrocarbon prospection and extraction), fundamental rights (in particular the rights of the child and of persons with disabilities), the free movement of persons, discrimination, immigration, employment, animal welfare, the application of justice (in particular custody rights regarding minors) and breaches of consumer rights;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Y
Recital Y
Y. whereas the web portal of the Committee on Petitions which began to operate in late 2014 is up and running, yet not finalized; whereas the portal is aimed at providesing EU citizens with an electronic tool that enables them to file and continuously track petitions, electronically sign their own petitions and add their support for other petitioners whose issues are of interest to them; whereas the shortcomings in some basic functionalities such as the search engine which persisted throughout the whole 2015 and until very recently undermined the role of the portal as an interactive space of exchange among citizens; whereas this problem has been finally resolved;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Z
Recital Z
Z. whereas this portal is conceived to makes the petition procedure more transparent and more interactive and also ensures more effective administration in the interest of petitioners, Members and the general public; whereas the second phase of the project, intended mainly to enhance the administrative handling of petitions but also enabling a real-time follow-up of petitions by the original petitioners and the latter supporters, had no substantial progress during 2015, when according to initial planning it should have been already completed by then;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital AA
Recital AA
AA. whereas all open petitions received in 2013, 2014 and 2015 were uploaded to the portal and work is currently under waythe successive delays in the further phases of the project have generated an additional workload within the Secretariat of the committee on Petitions, due to the need to manually upload relevant files in the different data- bases; whereas there are still petitions pending to be uploaded, since only open petitions received in 2016 thus enhanc3, 2014 and 2015 have been included ing transparency and improving access for petitioners to information on the status of their petitionshe portal so far and work is currently under way to upload petitions received in 2016;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital AB
Recital AB
AB. whereas the shortcomings in some basic functionalities such as the search engine, which persisted throughout the whole 2015 and until very recently, severely undermined the role of the portal as an interactive space of exchange among citizens; whereas certain deficiencies have been remedied, particularly in the search function and regarding petitioner confidentiality, and whereas work is under way to remedy certain shortcomings andexpectedly under way from the second half of 2016 to make the service more useful and visible to citizens;
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital AB a (new)
Recital AB a (new)
ABa. whereas admissibility of petitions is grounded on the criteria set in article 227 of the TFEU; whereas the concept of field of activity of the Union goes much beyond the simple aggregation of competences; whereas a declaration of inadmissibility can be subject to judicial review if not duly justified according to these criteria;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital AB b (new)
Recital AB b (new)
AB b. whereas the national courts have primary responsibility for ensuring that EU legislation is properly implemented in the Member States; whereas, in this context, a preliminary ruling from the European Court of Justice is a useful tool available to national judicial systems; whereas this procedure has been little used, if at all, in some Member States; whereas petitions provide an alternative and independent avenue for inquiry and for checks on compliance with EU legislation, and whereas these two alternative procedures should therefore not be mutually exclusive;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital AD
Recital AD
AD. whereas the Committee on Petitions is of the opinion that, three years after the entry into force on 1 April 2012 of Regulation (EU) No 211/2011, its implementation should be assessed in order to identify weaknesses and propose concrete viable solutions for its swift revision so that its implementafunctioning can be improved;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a(new)
Paragraph 1 a(new)
1a. Invites the Commission to make greater use of its powers when it comes to ensuring an effective implementation of the EU legislation, for instance by pursuing a more swift use of the infringement procedure under articles 258 and 260 TFEU;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights the fact that the Committee on Petitions has an opportunity and the huge challenge of maintaining a trustworthy and fruitful dialogue with citizens as it has the possibility to bring the EU’s institutions and citizens together once again; considers that for this purpose providing an adequate response to their petitions is crucial, both in terms of timing and quality of the answer;
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that petitions are very important for the legislative process, as they detect existing loopholes and deficiencies in the transposition of Community legislation and provide other Parliament committees with useful and direct input for their legislative work in their respective fields; welcomes an increased interaction of the committee on Petitions with the rest of the parliamentary committees, as well as a more frequent presence of matters related to petitions in plenary; applauds the setting up of an informal petitions network within Parliament, with the participation of Members representing every committee of Parliament, in order to ensure smooth and effective coordination of petitions work; considers that petitions are not solely the responsibility of the Committee on Petitions, but should be a shared endeavour of all of the European Parliament’s committees; urges all parliamentary committees concerned to pay due attention to the petitions forwarded to them and to undertake the necessary efforts so as to provide the information necessary for petitions to be processed properly;
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the fact that in 2015 the time taken to process petitions fell, maintains nonetheless that the Secretariat of the Committee on Petitions is in need of greater technical resources and personnel in order to guarantee a reduction in the time taken to process petitions while ensuring the quality in their treatment;
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that, as mentioned by Vice- President Timmermans at his meeting with the Committee on Petitions on 5 May 2015, the Commission is involved with and committed to the petition process and responds as quickly as possible to new petitions forwarded to it by Parliament; points out that Commission replies are usually detailed and pertain to the petitions for which it has jurisdiction; recalls however that on many occasions the Commission does not bring any new information in its replies to petitions for which a review has been requested owing to a change in their status and context; notes that the written responses are monitored, as are explanations given during oral debates held by the Committee on Petitionsregrets the occasions where the Commissions focuses essentially on procedural aspects and does not enter in the substance of the matter; notes that wthen the Commission cannot provide a detailed response to a request from the Committee on Petitions, it is because it has no jurisdiction in the matter written responses are monitored, as are explanations given during oral debates held by the Committee on Petitions; notes the Commission’s commitment in sending generally competent officials to meetings of the Committee on Petitions; regrets that during public debates with petitioners and Members of Parliament the officials sent by the Commission do not always provide any new or relevant information that might enable a solution to the issues raised; insists that the quality of the overall treatment of petitions increases when the highest-ranked officials possibly available represent the Commission in the debates;
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Considers that in its role of guardian of the treaties, and particularly when it refers to environmental matters, the Commission should go beyond a mere formal examination of procedural compliance, and focus more on the actual content of the core issue; recalls the precautionary principle and the ultimate spirit of the EU environmental legislation to prevent irreversible damage on ecologically sensitive areas, and urges the Commission to adopt an approach that allows to make use of its powers and prerogatives on an ex-ante basis;
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Confirms that, in the interests of transparency and in a spirit of faithful cooperation between the EU institutions, and pursuant to the Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission, upon request and where required the Commission will provide the European Parliament with a synthesis of the individual cases related to the EU Pilot procedures; notes that, according to confirmation from the Court of Justice,beyond the confidentiality requirements which apply to dialogue between the Commission and Member States concerning open EU Pilot cases, and also notes that such information is confidentialrelevant information concerning these exchanges should be provided to the Parliament upon request, at least after the closure of the procedure;
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Considers that the necessary information concerning infringement procedures initiated as a result of inquiries related to petitions should be timely provided to the Parliament, and particularly upon the request of the committee on Petitions;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Notes the restrictive and narrow interpretation of the European Commission in relation to Article 51(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights which states, inter alia, that the Charter is addressed to the Member States ‘only when they are implementing Union law’; notes that Article 51(2) of the Charter states that the Charter ‘does not extend the field of application of Union law beyond the powers of the Union’; notes, however, that this does not mean that citizens are unprotected if they believe that their fundamental righturges for a broader interpretation of the scope of application of the Charter, and to ultimately reassess the pertinence of this article in future revisions of the Charter and the treaties; underlines thave been violated in cases where EU law is not applied, as in such cases it is up to the Member States to ensure the protection of fundamental rights in accordance with their national legislation andt nothing prevents Member States to engage in a full application of the provisions of the Charter in their national legislation in order to ensure the protection of fundamental rights of their citizens beyond the implementation of Union law and reminds that they are bound also by other international obligations;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Deplores the strict way in which the Commission has interpreted Article 51 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights with its stipulation that ‘the provisions of the [...] Charter are addressed to the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union with due regard for the principle of subsidiarity and to the Member States only when they are implementing Union law; recalls that, owing tonotwithstanding the existence of Article 51 of the Charter, the expectations of citizens often go beyond what the Charter’s legal provisions strictly allow for; calls on the European Commission to adopt a new approach that is more consistent with those expectations;
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Urges for a prompt ratification at the EU level of the Marrakech Treaty to facilitate access to published works for persons who are blind, visually impaired, or otherwise print disabled, regardless of the conflict over competences before the CJEU; reminds that in its 'Concluding Observations' in September 2015, the CPRD Committee pointed out some deficiencies within the EU for full compliance of the Convention; notes that the EU is required to swiftly adopt an amended European Accessibility Act including effective and accessible enforcement and complaint mechanisms; notes the requirement to decouple the roles of the European Commission by removing it from the independent monitoring framework, to ensure that the framework has adequate resources to perform its functions;
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Regrets the very restrictive approach of the Commission in its responses to petitions relating to different aspects of animal welfare, when it comes to the interpretation of its responsibilities under article 13 TFEU; urges the Commission to reconsider the current approach and to explore further its legal basis to play a role in ensuring a better protection of animal rights across the EU;
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Believes that the organisation of public hearings is an important way of examining problems raised by petitioners more in depth, as well as general aspects of the functioning of the EU as underlying shortcomings therein; draws attention to the public hearings organised on 26 February 2015 with the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety in response to the ECI on ‘Water is a Human Right’, and with the Committee on Legal Affairs for the ECI entitled ‘One of Us’;
Amendment 185 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Deplores the fact that the Commission considers that it is too early to revise Regulation (EU) No 211/2011 of 1 April 2012 which entered into force three years ago; considers that it is necessary to thoroughly evaluate its implementation to identify possible deficiencies and propose workable solutions with a view to revising it soon; welcomes the Commission’s report of 31 March 2015 on the ECI, and the European Ombudsman’s Decision OI/9/2013/TN, and calls on the Commission to ensure, in its revision of this instrument, that all the appropriate legal measures are taken with a view to providing proper follow-up when an ECI is deemed to have been completed successfully; regrets currently existing lack of legal clarity and the rejection to register a massive initiative opposing the TTIP within this framework; calls on the Commission, in view of the various weaknesses identified, to present a proposal for reform of Regulation (EU) No 211/2011 as soon as possible;
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Draws attention to its resolution of 8 October 2015 on mortgage legislation and risky financial instruments in Spain in the light of the petitions received, concerning which Parliament issued a series of recommendations for the proper application of EU mortgage legislation and combatting banking abuses; calls on the Commission to supervise closely the implementation in all Member States of Directive 2014/17/EU on credit agreements, Directive 93/13/EEC on unfair terms in consumer contracts, and to share best practices in order to improve protection for citizens in financial difficulties;
Amendment 190 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Is concerned with the evidences of shortcomings on proper access to justice in certain Member States unveiled as a result of the processing of petitions; considers that this is an essential issue to be addressed without delay in order to guarantee a proper democratic functioning of the Union and the exercise of fundamental rights by its citizens and residents; considers that example should be provided by the Union by deploying the pillar of the Aarhus convention on access to justice on environmental matters;
Amendment 193 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Welcomes the resumption of a more normal level of activity in the field of fact-finding visits, and expects that the full potential of this specific prerogative of the committee on Petitions will be exploited in the upcoming years until the very end of the legislative period; underlines the importance of the Working Documents produced after each visit, including specific recommendations, and urges the different authorities concerned to take them into due consideration; considers that the degree of compliance with these recommendations should be periodically appraised;
Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Urges the competent administrative bodies to expedite the steps still needed to conclude the introduction of the remaining project phases of the Petitions web portal, whereby petitioners will be able to receive real-time information on the status of their petition, be notified of changes in the processing procedure such as the declaration of admissibility, the reception of a response from the Commission or the inclusion of their petition in the agenda of a committee meeting with a web- streaming link, all this through automated e- mail messages, and directly contact officials of the Committee on Petitions for clear, direct information on the evolution of the issue concerning them;
Amendment 201 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Is concerned that the procedure known as 'List 3', whereby registered petitions are flagged preliminary as potentially inadmissible, may result in weakened monitoring of a relevant amount of petitions by the expertise present in the committee on Petitions; considers that the lack of translation of petitions in this list, aimed at diminishing partially the overall processing workload of petitions, entails a higher risk of inadequate decisions on admissibility by Members of the committee, which are the ultimate liable parties on the matter;
Amendment 206 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Stresses the importance of cooperation with the European Ombudsman, and the involvement of Parliament in the European Network of Ombudsmen; applauds the good relations maintained within the institutional framework between the European Ombudsman and the Committee on Petitions; commends the work of the Ombudsman so as to improve good administration in the EU, and appreciatesd in particular the Ombudsman’sr regular contributions to the work of the Committee on Petitions throughout the year;