[ParlTrack]

I do not support the role of Eurojust and therefore felt it appropriate to vote against this proposal.

2016/11/22

As I oppose harmonisation, I cannot support the principle of coordination of social security systems across the EU. On the amendments, I sought to vote to minimise the scope, and then I voted against on the final vote.

2016/11/22

I remain concerned by the nature of the European Union’s policies in regards to climate change. I still believe that they are not the right ones to achieve the stated aims, and therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I remain concerned by the nature of the European Union’s policies in regards to climate change. I still believe that they are not the right ones to achieve the stated aims, and therefore I voted against.

2016/11/22

As this ultimately seeks to harmonise company law across the EU, it is consistent with the principles upon which I was elected to vote against.

2016/11/22

I cannot support harmonisation; I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

As I oppose the principle of a European Defence Fund, which would be a stepping-stone towards a fully-fledged European Army, I supported a vote to reject the Commission proposal. I then voted against the draft legislative act.

2016/11/22

I cannot support harmonisation; I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I cannot support harmonisation; I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I oppose this for the same reasons that I opposed the EFSI. I cannot support a huge new funding programme; the British people voted to leave the European Union. If it were guaranteed that we would have left before the start of the next MFF, and that this would not affect the UK, I might well have had cause to abstain on the grounds that this is none of the UK’s business.But that is not so, and I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I cannot support harmonisation; I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I cannot support harmonisation; I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I cannot support: granting additional powers to an EU agency; an increase in EU budgets, which ultimately come from taxpayers; some of the political direction of this agreement.Therefore, despite believing in strong legislation to ensure public health, I felt obliged to vote against.

2016/11/22

I cannot support harmonisation; I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I cannot support harmonisation; I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I cannot support harmonisation of the financial system. This is antithetical to the principles upon which I was elected, and to the result of the referendum in the United Kingdom; I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I abstained.I believe that, of the EU institutions, the European Parliament should (as the elected body) be stronger than the Council and Commission. I note that the Parliament wants this right of inquiry; the Council and Commission have blocked it for 25 years.Nevertheless, to vote in favour would still be to imply that the European Parliament should have rights that should only be afforded to genuinely democratic bodies such as national parliaments. It would create a veneer of accountability without actually making any difference.Furthermore, the report calls upon political parties to write manifestos accordingly. This should not form part of a Parliamentary vote.

2016/11/22

On this vote, I am torn between two conflicting principles.On the one hand, I do recognise the potential concerns over endocrine disruptors in relation to adverse developmental and reproductive effects.One the other hand, I oppose the principle of the European Union being the vehicle for such legislation. I believe in national parliamentary sovereignty.I therefore abstained overall, whilst supporting appropriate amendments in favour of transparency and to provide power to Member States.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Such proposals have been repeatedly rejected by Parliament in terms of changing Parliament’s rules. I believed this to be an attack upon the independence of the mandate, which cannot be policed effectively. To achieve something similar via a substantial re-interpretation of an existing rule seems to me to be fraught with dangers. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As this was instigated by the Danish Government and I am not opposed to data exchanges in principle, I felt it appropriate to abstain on the report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is a legislative report on Horizon 2020. I have always opposed the huge financial implications related to the implementation of this project. Consequently, I voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is a legislative report on Horizon 2020. I have always opposed the huge financial implications related to the implementation of this project. Consequently, I voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I voted against this report, as I have voted against similar reports over the past five years. Anything which strengthens the single market at the cost of creating new compliance obligations upon Member States can cause questions. The EUR 12 million direct cost is clear, but what is less clear is the compliance cost for SMEs in particular, which will dwarf this. Finally, I note that the British people voted to leave the European Union.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Whilst these proposals may seem fair, only big business will have the money to fund staff to carry out these obligations. This is unnecessary EU interference, which I voted against, even if the aim of transparency is positive. Had such proposals come at national level from within Westminster, I might well have supported them.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The UK already has high consumer protection standards and I cannot support the EU creating harmonised standards in this area.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I am in favour of transparency when it comes to food products. I also believe this is the responsibility of national parliaments and does not warrant further EU legislation. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain on the vote.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I have concerns surrounding bio-availability and the usage of machines to calculate the ratio of components by generic companies. For this to take place during the exclusive period allocated to the manufacturer of the original product, often in jurisdictions with lower standards than exist in the United Kingdom and the European Union, could lead to a lowering in the quality of patient care or a reduction in safety.There seems to me to be insufficient consumer protection in this case, and I felt bound to listen to the opinions of medical professionals who expressed significant concern about the potential lowering of standards. Consequently, I felt that this amendment to Regulation 469/2009 could prove to have negative effects and therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I do not support the EU Space Programme, and therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I oppose the legislative and financial implications of this project, and therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I oppose a EUR 339 million spend on the Fiscalis programme. In line with my previous votes on this subject, I voted against.

2016/11/22

I remain concerned by the nature of the European Union’s policies in regards to climate change. I still believe that they are not the right ones to achieve the stated aims, and therefore I voted against a doubling of the financial envelope for the LIFE programme.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The programme has a budget of approximately EUR 305 million over the period. This involves the EU spending taxpayers’ money to promote and establish common harmonised judicial systems and practices. Targeting the rule of law is clearly an attempt to infringe the sovereignty of certain Member States. For these reasons, I voted against the report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The legislation is rather broad so it is hard to pinpoint exactly where the EUR 443 million will go. Ultimately, however, this legislation is clearly an expensive propaganda programme that aims to promote specific world views. Taxpayers’ money should not be used in such a manner, especially considering the vote of the British people to leave the European Union. Accordingly, I voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I believe that too many such delegations are funded at taxpayers’ expense, and therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I oppose the principle of EU Delegated Acts; this enshrines those Acts through alignment to the Lisbon Treaty Framework. I therefore voted against all of the relevant measures relating to Articles 290 and 291 of the TFEU in this part-session.

2016/11/22

I oppose the principle of EU Delegated Acts; this enshrines those Acts through alignment to the Lisbon Treaty Framework. I therefore voted against all of the relevant measures relating to Articles 290 and 291 of the TFEU in this part-session.

2016/11/22

I oppose the principle of EU Delegated Acts; this enshrines those Acts through alignment to the Lisbon Treaty Framework. I therefore voted against all of the relevant measures relating to Articles 290 and 291 of the TFEU in this part-session.

2016/11/22

It seems to me that it is fundamentally wrong for the European Union to expect the UK to contribute further towards the EU’s 2019 budget even in the event of a no-deal Brexit. There is no legal obligation for the UK to do so; the MFF Regulation must be subservient in law to the Treaties, and Article 50(3) of the Lisbon Treaty is clear that the Treaties ‘shall cease to apply’.If a moral obligation exists, then it is a two-way process; the European Union should offer a deal in accordance with Article 8 of the Lisbon Treaty. That not having happened, there exists a possibility of a no-deal Brexit. The UK should rightly refuse to finance the EU budget further in the event of a no-deal Brexit. I therefore voted against this.

2016/11/22

I have significant concerns over the Russian government’s recent actions in many areas, not least in the Crimea and the Sea of Azov. Furthermore, Putin’s actions have not been particularly helpful for cross-border co-operation. However, I am far from convinced that cancelling existing cooperation in science and technology would make the current situation any better. I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

The UK’s withdrawal from the European Union will lead to the UK cutting its share capital. If Romania and Poland wish to be the countries to increase their share capital to compensate, I have no objections to that. However, as this is a matter which will take place following the UK’s departure from the European Union, it is not really my business to make the determination. I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This was an objection to a Commission delegated regulation, pursuant to Rule 105. It was not the subject of a roll-call vote; in the interests of transparency and democracy, I wish to confirm for the record that I voted in favour. Under normal circumstances I am minded to support objections pursuant to Rule 105, on the grounds that I do not believe that the unelected European Commission should pass legislation without full democratic scrutiny.In this case, there seems to be an even stronger case for doing so. There is a significant legislative overreach going beyond the normal usage of delegated legislation, and there exists significant opposition to the manner in which this is being propagated. The fact that the delegated regulation was proposed so late, and so close to the parliamentary recess for elections, is troubling. Greater democratic scrutiny is paramount.

2016/11/22

I oppose the European Coast Guard, not least given that the UK has voted to leave the European Union. This will lead to significantly increased powers for the EU, and consequently to a loss of sovereignty for the Member States. The cost to operate the agency in the next MFF is estimated at EUR 11.27 billion. I therefore supported the proposal to reject the Commission proposal, and opposed the Provisional Agreement and Joint Statement.

2016/11/22

This report ultimately further harmonises visa schemes and thus reduces the sovereignty of Member States to control their own borders. For this reason, I voted against.

2016/11/22

EU policy in the area of fishing has been disastrous; such policy-making should be left to Member States. The United Kingdom, post Brexit, must regain exclusive competence over our own fishing grounds, which provide a significant national resource and are currently being mismanaged by the European Union. Consequently, I voted against this report as a matter of principle.

2016/11/22

As this is seeking to harmonise rules, to impinge upon civil liberties and to strengthen Europol, I voted against the Provisional Agreement.

2016/11/22

Cybersecurity is a fundamental bedrock of our modern society. However, as an MEP elected on a mandate to oppose the UK’s membership of the European Union, I cannot support the creation of another EU body to take further sovereignty from Member States. This is only reinforced by the vote of the British people to leave the European Union.

2016/11/22

I oppose the Connecting Europe facility, and therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ There seem to exist some concerns surrounding civil liberties and freedom of speech with regard to this proposed legislation. I am a strong supporter of free speech, but there are well-established limits to such freedom of expression: there is the oft-quoted example of shouting ‘Fire’ in a crowded theatre; a claim of freedom of speech does not permit the impingement upon others. Terrorist content is more than merely shouting ‘Fire’; it is to shout for the fire to be lit. Consequently, it is absolutely right and just in my opinion for strong legislation on this subject.Terrorist content should be removed from the internet. I supported some amendments which sought to ensure that burdens upon SME web hosts would be proportionate and that the requirements would be realistic; some of the amendments were successful. Given that there was some movement in the direction of common sense, and given the gravity of the issue at stake, I felt it appropriate to abstain – even though the appropriate forum for such legislation is the nation state, not the European Union.

2016/11/22

I disagree with the Committee changes to this legislation, and consequently voted against. Whilst I am supportive of legal immigration, I am opposed to illegal immigration. To redefine illegal immigration as ‘irregular entry’ does a great service to hard-working immigrants who come to the UK through legal means.

2016/11/22

I do not believe that this should be an exclusive competence of the European Union. This, in effect, leads to the European Union taking on the trappings of a state. I therefore voted against the exercise of this competence.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I voted against the consent, I felt it consistent to vote against the provisional agreements as well.

2016/11/22

I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only a tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This report concerns the trade in olives, a trade that is of interest to countries in the Mediterranean. The report is very simple and concerns modernising the olive sector. I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only a tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

. ‒ It is now commonly accepted that whistle-blowers play a positive role in preventing and remedying acts prejudicial to the public interest. I believe that they should receive better protections than they do already. However, to vote in favour would be to imply tacit support for the legislation upon which this is based. I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I voted against further harmonisation of financial systems.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This amends existing legislation to further harmonise the financial system. Accordingly I voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I cannot support further harmonisation at a time when the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union. I therefore voted against this regulation.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I cannot support further harmonisation at a time when the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union. I therefore voted against this regulation.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I cannot support amending existing legislation to further harmonise the financial system at a time when the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union. I therefore voted against this regulation.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I cannot support amending existing legislation to further harmonise the financial system at a time when the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union. I therefore voted against this directive.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I voted against this for two reasons. Firstly, I do not believe that these matters should be legislated at European Union level. Secondly, I am concerned that encouraging banks to purchase these securitisations will lead to such bonds being subject to lesser regulation than common securitisations. This seems to me to replicate some of the risks associated with the US sub-prime mortgage market.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I cannot support amending existing legislation to further harmonise the financial system at a time when the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union. I therefore voted against this report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I cannot support amending existing legislation to extend the EU’s regulatory oversight of the financial system at a time when the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union. I therefore voted against this report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I cannot support amending existing legislation to further harmonise the financial system at a time when the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union. I therefore voted against this report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I cannot support augmenting existing legislation to further harmonise the financial system at a time when the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union. I therefore voted against this directive.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I cannot support augmenting existing legislation to further harmonise the financial system at a time when the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union. I therefore voted against this regulation.

2016/11/22

I do not believe in harmonisation of employment legislation. I support strong minimum standards, but the appropriate venue for decisions to be taken affecting the people of the United Kingdom is Westminster rather than Strasbourg. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I do not believe in harmonisation of employment legislation. I support strong minimum standards, but the appropriate venue for decisions to be taken affecting the people of the United Kingdom is Westminster rather than Strasbourg. I can therefore neither support the creation of a European Labour Authority, nor the EUR 50.9 million budget for it.

2016/11/22

EU policy in the area of fishing has been disastrous; such policy-making should be left to Member States. The United Kingdom, post Brexit, must regain exclusive competence over our own fishing grounds, which provide a significant national resource and are currently being mismanaged by the European Union. Consequently, I voted against this report as a matter of principle. Unusually, I also voted against a proposal to vote on amendments; the proposal concerned would protect pulse fishing, something which I oppose on moral grounds.

2016/11/22

This report states that European business statistics should be built upon a common and simple framework, with harmonised definitions that facilitate the understanding of the state of the EU’s economy. I voted against the proposals as I am against further EU harmonisation and the financial implications of this report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I oppose this legislation as it is helping to facilitate the creation of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.

2016/11/22

The funds allocated to this specific provision amount to EUR 1.3 billion, which the Commission says represents only a proportion of the investment gap. I voted against this report, as I do not agree with the harmonisation of customs and the financial implications of the report.

2016/11/22

A budget of EUR 950 million has been provided for 2021-2027. I voted against this report, as I do not agree with the harmonisation of customs and the financial implications of the report.

2016/11/22

This is legislative report that seeks to tighten controls on explosive precursors which are chemical substances that can have a legitimate purpose but are also used to make home-made explosives. According to statistics on terrorism, in 2015/2016 homemade explosives were used in 40% of all terrorist attacks. The proposed changes will clarify who needs to hold a license to purchase these explosive precursors and those who do not. The only concern regarding the legislation is the impact on a small number of the public who rely on these chemicals for their personal hobbies. This includes various chemicals that are used in pyrotechnics. On reflection I abstained on the provisional agreement.

2016/11/22

The legislation sets out the methodology and practice for the collection of social data. It also sets out what data is collected. I cannot support further EU harmonisation; accordingly, I voted against.

2016/11/22

The changes suggested in the report are set to cost EUR 460 million. Whilst the interoperability of these systems is probably a good thing for the EU, it comes at quite an expensive cost to taxpayers and legitimises the right of the EU to manage the external borders of the EU. For these reasons, I voted against.

2016/11/22

The changes suggested in the report are set to cost EUR 460 million. Whilst the interoperability of these systems is probably a good thing for the EU, it comes at quite an expensive cost to taxpayers and legitimises the right of the EU to manage the external borders of the EU. For these reasons, I voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The changes to this legislation are estimated to cost EUR 17 million. This legislation is clearly aimed at increasing the powers of unelected EU bodies in third countries and the further influence of the EU’s migration agenda. For these reasons, I voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Type-approval entails total harmonisation. It was therefore consistent with the basis upon which I was elected, and with the referendum result of June 2016, for me to vote against as a matter of principle.

2016/11/22

I do not believe that parliamentary immunity should extend to matters which go beyond what is necessary to perform the mandate effectively. Nevertheless, I also believe that Parliament must follow its own Rules of Procedure and act impartially in accordance with the rules to ensure that all Members are treated in the same way when accused.

2016/11/22

I do not believe that parliamentary immunity should extend to matters which go beyond what is necessary to perform the mandate effectively. Nevertheless, I also believe that Parliament must follow its own Rules of Procedure and act impartially in accordance with the rules to ensure that all Members are treated in the same way when accused.

2016/11/22

I do not believe that parliamentary immunity should extend to matters which go beyond what is necessary to perform the mandate effectively. Nevertheless, I also believe that Parliament must follow its own Rules of Procedure and act impartially in accordance with the rules to ensure that all Members are treated in the same way when accused.

2016/11/22

I supported the principle of this; it is convenient to have a visa-free scheme for travel. However, objectionable and offensive text describing Gibraltar as a ʻcolonyʼ of the UK was added. My position was therefore as follows:1. To abstain on the Provisional Agreement as a ʻbest fitʼ – approving of the visa waiver, but not of the Gibraltar text.2. To oppose the second part of the committee amendment 3cp2, which contains the offensive text.3. To vote in favour of the Commission proposal if 3cp2 fell, and to abstain on the Commission proposal for the same reasons as above if 3cp2 passed.I therefore voted accordingly.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I believe that the European Union should not interfere with the employment policies of Member States, I voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I abstained: I support action by Member States to prevent illegal dumping of waste, but – because I believe in the principle of subsidiarity – this should not be harmonised at EU level.

2016/11/22

Throughout this report, I supported amendments which aimed to limit the impact of the proposals on drivers and transport companies as I believe that (as written) the proposals would have caused more issues and compliance problems. Needless to say, I do not support harmonisation of this matter at European Union level, so I ultimately voted against the Commission proposal.

2016/11/22

I believe that this is a matter which should be legislated on at national level. Furthermore, given that the UK has voted to leave the European Union, it would be wrong for me to support further EU legislation.

2016/11/22

As with the previous votes, some of the amendments served to make the legislation less bad and I felt comfortable supporting those amendments. However, I note that cabotage has less impact upon the United Kingdom than it does on some other Member States. The principle of national sovereignty, however, should always be a strong one. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I do not support harmonisation of this matter at European Union level and oppose giving more power to the European Commission in the field of energy. I am also unhappy with some of the EU definitions of terminology used in this legislation.

2016/11/22

This is effectively the bill for the Common Fisheries Policy from 2021-7. I regard this as a very poor use of taxpayers’ money. EU policy in the area of fishing has been disastrous; such policymaking should be left to Member States. The United Kingdom, post—Brexit, must regain exclusive competence over our own fishing grounds, which provide a significant national resource and are currently being mismanaged by the European Union. Consequently, I voted against this report as a matter of principle.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is the plan for the next generation of the common fisheries policy in the western Mediterranean. EU policy in the area of fishing has been disastrous, and such policy-making should be left to Member States. Consequently, I voted against this report as a matter of principle.

2016/11/22

Whilst there is a relatively large opportunity for Member States to go above and beyond the scope of the legislation, this is ultimately another case of EU harmonisation. Consequently, I voted against.

2016/11/22

Though improved road safety is a laudable aim, I cannot support harmonisation of this matter at a EU level. There are various areas where Member States have different laws, and where citizens are accustomed to those differences. One-size-fits-all legislation is the wrong approach. In this case, the UK’s road signage is one of the best – if not the best – in Europe. I am concerned that harmonisation could lead to a lowering of standards to the lowest common denominator.

2016/11/22

As this entails further harmonisation of the single market in respect of authorisation, manufacture, distribution and supervision of PEPPs, I voted against. Pensions are a matter which should be determined by the Member States themselves.

2016/11/22

I might well support parts of such legislation if it were put before the UK Parliament in Westminster, which is the appropriate venue for determining the UK’s policies on employment. However, this is occurring at EU level. Furthermore, it fails to take into account the needs of small businesses. There should be a work-life balance for parents and carers. There should be a balance between employer and employee. The measures in this legislation might be reasonable for multinational companies, but they could destroy micro-businesses and severely damage SMEs. I therefore voted against the Provisional Agreement.

2016/11/22

This proposal is to strengthen EU action in cases where it is deemed Member States are not complying with ‘rule of law’. Specifically this proposal is dealing with EU funds given to Member States in such cases. This is clearly the EU looking to further punish countries that it deems have broken their ‘rule of law’ principles, such as Poland, Hungary etc. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I voted against because I oppose the establishment of this fund.

2016/11/22

The report seeks to assist in the cross-border transport of goods and so may assist avoiding a hard border in Northern Ireland. Accordingly, I felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

I fully support transparency and the right of access to information. I do not support the notion that the European Union should be the arbiter of how such data is made public. It should be the responsibility of sovereign national states to do that. There is also a cost implication because this seeks to increase EU funding for digitalising Europe. Furthermore, it would increase the EU legislative burden on Member States. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

Although I support good management and conservation, I oppose this specific legislation on the grounds that the EU is behaving like a state.

2016/11/22

There are two directives that govern this issue within the EU: Directive 2008/106/EC, which lays down minimum standards of training and education, and Directive 2005/45/EC, which fosters the professional mobility of seafarers within the EU by facilitating the mutual recognition of certificates issued by the Member States. Mutual recognition in fact leads to lower standards of training being accepted in Member States which have higher standards; this is therefore potentially harmful. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I believe that the reduction of annual pre-financing is correct, and therefore voted in favour of the proposal (and against the rejection amendment).

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I voted against closure of first reading. I believe that this proposal needs to be amended to provide greater flexibility to Member States, which is easier to do if the first reading has not been closed. I do not believe that it should be made more difficult for Member States to justify introducing temporary border controls.

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I abstained. Whilst I support the Convention, I do not support the principle of treating the European Union as though it were a sovereign state.

2016/11/22

As this entails further harmonisation of the Single Market and impinges upon national tax sovereignty, I voted against. Pensions are a matter which should be determined by the Member States themselves.

2016/11/22

I oppose EU-wide visa liberalisation. This is a question which should rightly be determined by sovereign nations. It is perfectly reasonable, for example, that Spain wishes to take a different political position on this to the UK because of differing views on international recognition of Kosovo.

2016/11/22

This was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I abstained. I do agree with the aim of greater transparency when it comes to drinking water and believe consumers have the right to know what are they drinking and which materials came into contact with their water. However, it would be inimical to my mandate to support calls for further EU intervention.

2016/11/22

This seeks to cement the so-called four freedoms, which the British people already voted against in a referendum. It logically followed that I should vote against this.

2016/11/22

The European Union’s approach to copyright has been particularly harmful, and therefore I voted against.

2016/11/22

I do not support taxpayers’ money being used to establish the Creative Europe programme, and therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

Whilst I fully support student exchange schemes, I cannot support much contained within this report – such as the ‘free InterRail ticket for 18 year olds’ and other uses of taxpayers’ money to effectively bribe young people into supporting the European Union. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This suggests that the European Union should define words such as ‘sustainable’ and ‘green’ in such a way as to impact upon businesses calling themselves sustainable. Many of the amendments to this report are neo-Communist in nature, seeking wealth redistribution by any other name. I suspect that this framework will have completely the opposite of its intended impact: that sustainable businesses will find themselves unable to comply with new, onerous, EU standards – and that we will end up with fewer sustainable businesses as a result. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

There are many reasons to oppose specific facets of this report, but the bottom line is simple: an inflation-busting increase of 3.58% (even if Brexit has been completed, and there are fewer MEPs) to take the European Parliament’s budget over EUR 2 billion per year. I cannot possibly support this; irrespective of my concerns with much of the rest of the text (and areas where I do agree with it), I had to vote against for that reason alone.

2016/11/22

I would have been keen to vote in favour of this resolution, as I have previously on Venezuela. I strongly support change in Venezuela given the appalling Maduro regime. Nevertheless, the calls for EU-wide action through the EEAS make this impossible for me and I therefore unfortunately had to abstain.

2016/11/22

I do not believe that the European Union should be the arbiter of how national sovereign governments apply the rule of law and fight against corruption, not least because the European Union is often culpable on such matters itself. Furthermore, it applies these standards capriciously, not complaining about serious breaches in larger Member States.

2016/11/22

I do believe that Volkswagen and others should bear primary responsibility for the Dieselgate scandal. However, it is also symptomatic of an over-regulated environment. The solutions proposed in this report fail to understand this problem, and propose yet more regulation and legislation at EU level. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I oppose the further development of EU foreign policy, and therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I oppose a EUR 116.7 million increase in funding for this initiative. Whilst of course I support measures to reduce youth unemployment, I believe that actions by Member States could, and should, be more efficient in meeting those aims directly. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This proposal includes, inter alia, use of cross—border ‘tax representatives’ and ‘automation of the exemption certificate and its handling for movements of excise products to consignees exempted from the payment of exercise duties’. As parts of this legislation could provide opportunities to assist with the question of avoiding a hard border in Northern Ireland post-Brexit, I abstained rather than vote against this legislation.

2016/11/22

I do not believe that the European Union should be determining such issues as dock dues in Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Martinique and Réunion. This merely serves to highlight the problems with the European Union as it has evolved through the Treaties: it acquires power from Member States and does not relinquish it. Nevertheless, I respect the request by a Member State to make these changes and note the possibility that this could potentially have a positive impact upon local productivity in those territories. I therefore abstained rather than voting against.

2016/11/22

I do not support the principle of establishing a new EU instrument, nor the suggestion that it should exist to promote the Union’s interests worldwide: as such, it risks becoming propagandist. I note the huge EUR 89 billion budget proposed for the next Multiannual Financial Framework. I oppose the development and promotion of EU foreign policy through trade. I therefore supported a rejection amendment tabled by the Greens, and opposed the draft legislative act.

2016/11/22

I note that re-establishing this fund will lead to more taxpayers’ money being spent on EU expansion, and that IPA III will continue to include Turkey as a potential beneficiary of funds. As I am against EU expansionism I supported the EFDD rejection amendment to the Commission proposal, and opposed the draft legislative act.

2016/11/22

I oppose any extension of the role of the European Securities and Markets Authority. I do not wish to see Member States set up authorities which would be subject to the ESMA. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I oppose further EU regulation in this field. It would have the effect of placing crowdfunding service providers under the control of ESMA, and it would permit the use of Commission delegated acts, which in general I oppose. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This was a difficult vote because of two competing principles. Firstly, there is a call upon the Commission to keep virtual currencies under constant review. I do not believe that the State should seek to legislate virtual currencies in the first place, but those decisions should be taken by Member States rather than the Commission. However, this does also have a positive impact: it would remove crowdfunding service providers from falling within the scope of the Directive. I oppose the former, support the latter, and consequently abstained overall.

2016/11/22

I supported a rejection amendment to the Commission proposal and opposed the draft legislative act because I cannot support the EUR 273 billion proposed spend on this area during the next Multiannual Financial Framework. Under normal circumstances, I would abstain upon matters which will not impact upon the United Kingdom post-Brexit as they are by definition not something which should concern a British MEP. However, the uncertainty surrounding Brexit leaves me in a situation where I have no guarantees that the United Kingdom will not be required to pay towards these funds. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I support lower emissions for new cars and light commercial vehicles, although I believe that the focus should be on all pollutants overall. Fuel economy is perhaps a better measure of this than the current g/km of CO2 emissions, because it encompasses other pollutants. In general I believe, though, that this is best handled through the tax system: more efficient vehicles should be treated more favourably for tax purposes than less efficient ones. Consequently, I view this as a matter for national governments to determine through their own taxation policies. In the United Kingdom, for example, we have seen subsidies for electric vehicles and (previously) for PHEVs. There may be better alternatives for achieving the same desired outcome, but the principle should be one for national governments to decide. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I did not want to vote against this report, because I agree that we must cut single-use plastics and that the impact of 150 000 tonnes of plastics being dumped into the sea annually has a huge impact upon marine life. I felt in the end that I had to oppose it because of the content:1. Given that it is legislative in nature, the problems will be practical rather than merely theoretical2. The legislation is being rushed through without waiting for the scientific report from the European Chemicals Agency3. The pace of change proposed will cost a substantial number of jobs in the UK by 20214. The legislative overreach prevents research into (inter alia) plastics which are biodegradableThe principle of legislation on this issue is sound; the actual legislation itself is not. I reluctantly voted against.

2016/11/22

This is a first reading, legislative report in which the Commission wishes to harmonise rules on organic or secondary raw fertilisers and label them as an ‘EC’ product. I oppose harmonisation and potential consequent increases in production costs for farmers. I am also concerned about diminishing the quality of fertiliser products. I voted against.

2016/11/22

I do not object to this legislation in any way, and therefore abstained. It would be inconsistent with my mandate to vote in favour of any EU legislation, years after the British people voted for Brexit. The UK should make its own rules. Nevertheless, I support the content.

2016/11/22

I oppose further EU legislation and the principle of creating a Single European Transport Area, especially in light of the United Kingdom’s decision to withdraw from the European Union.

2016/11/22

I oppose any erosion of national tax sovereignty; it was therefore a straightforward decision for me to vote against.

2016/11/22

Under normal circumstances, I would abstain upon matters which will not impact upon the United Kingdom post-Brexit as they are by definition not something which should concern a British MEP. However, the uncertainty surrounding Brexit leaves me in a situation where I have no guarantees that the United Kingdom will not be required to pay towards these funds during the next Multiannual Financial Framework. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This was an objection to a Commission delegated regulation, pursuant to Rule 105. It was not the subject of a roll-call vote; in the interests of transparency and democracy, I wish to confirm for the record that I voted in favour. Under normal circumstances I am minder to support objections pursuant to Rule 105, on the grounds that I do not believe that the unelected European Commission should pass legislation without full democratic scrutiny.Furthermore, such matters are supposed to be minor technical updates. In this case, the establishment of ‘controlled centres’ for migrants goes far beyond the remit of what we might expect from a delegated act. Regardless, I would oppose such centres being set up by the European Union within the territory of its own Member States because this will impact on those countries’ national sovereignty.

2016/11/22

This was an objection to a Commission delegated regulation, pursuant to Rule 105. It was not the subject of a roll-call vote; in the interests of transparency and democracy, I wish to confirm for the record that I voted in favour. Under normal circumstances I am minder to support objections pursuant to Rule 105, on the grounds that I do not believe that the unelected European Commission should pass legislation without full democratic scrutiny.Furthermore, such matters are supposed to be minor technical updates. In this case, the establishment of ‘controlled centres’ for migrants goes far beyond the remit of what we might expect from a delegated act. Regardless, I would oppose such centres being set up by the European Union within the territory of its own Member States because this will impact on those countries’ national sovereignty.

2016/11/22

Whilst I normally on principle would support objections pursuant to Rule 106, I am concerned in this case about the impact which that would have upon the UK and am receiving mixed advice as to whether there exist reasonable concerns about the particular variant mentioned. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

Whilst I normally on principle would support objections pursuant to Rule 106, I am concerned in this case about the impact which that would have upon the UK and am receiving mixed advice as to whether there exist reasonable concerns about the particular variant mentioned. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

Whilst I normally on principle would support objections pursuant to Rule 106, I am concerned in this case about the impact which that would have upon the UK and am receiving mixed advice as to whether there exist reasonable concerns about the particular chemical mentioned. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

Whilst I normally on principle would support objections pursuant to Rule 106, I am concerned in this case about the impact which that would have upon the UK and am receiving mixed advice as to whether there exist reasonable concerns about the particular chemical mentioned. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

Whilst I normally on principle would support objections pursuant to Rule 106, I am concerned in this case about the impact which that would have upon the UK and am receiving mixed advice as to whether there exist reasonable concerns about the particular chemical mentioned. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

This is part of an expansionist EU foreign policy, which I oppose because I believe that foreign policy should be a matter for sovereign national governments not the European Union.

2016/11/22

I do not believe that parliamentary immunity should extend to matters which go beyond what is necessary to perform the mandate effectively. Nevertheless, I also believe that Parliament must follow its own Rules of Procedure and act impartially in accordance with the rules to ensure that all Members are treated in the same way when accused. In this case, the matter appeared to be somewhat unusual, with questions of media intrusion and/or alleged actions by the MEP concerned. As I was not in the committee responsible, I was not sufficiently well informed to be able to make a detailed decision and therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

I believe that consumer rights should be a matter for national governments; redress is indeed important, but this does not require harmonisation across 28 different nations and legal systems.

2016/11/22

This being a technical update, I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only a tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

The EU is signing a new agreement with Uzbekistan. This is a non-legislative report making suggestions to the Council and Commission on the negotiations. I am opposed to the development and promotion of EU foreign policy and the signing of such third-party agreements.

2016/11/22

This proposal is looking to harmonise time across the EU. Member States should be given the time and opportunity to carry out their own public consultations and not have the one undertaken by the Commission (of which the vast majority of citizens were completely unaware) forced on them. I therefore voted against the proposal; this is frankly not a matter for the EU to legislate on.

2016/11/22

This report is critical of EU subsidies, addresses the intermittency of renewable energy and is in favour of free markets. There was much in the report that I could support, but I could not support the legislation which sought to centralise power at EU level and therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This report is critical of EU subsidies, addresses the intermittency of renewable energy and is in favour of free markets. There was much in the report that I could support, but I could not support the legislation which sought to centralise power at EU level and therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This legislative report refers to the EU Clean Energy for All package. Part of this text was the creation of ACER – an EU Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators. I am opposed to the creation of new EU agencies and therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This legislative report on risks of the electricity sector implies that EU regulatory gaps caused an electricity crisis in Bulgaria, Greece and Romania in 2017. I am against further harmonisation; it is more arguable that the electricity crisis is caused by unrealistic and unworkable EU policies and targets. I naturally voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Although I am strongly in favour of consumers’ information and transparency of all products, I believe the UK as well as other parliaments should be free to decide how to label their tyres. Accordingly I voted against on the final vote.

2016/11/22

. ‒ We all want a balance between protecting creators of copyrighted material, and protecting the lawful rights of citizens going about their daily business. However, this legislation does not deliver that balance. It is fundamentally illiberal because in practice, the big tech companies will have to treat average citizens as ‘guilty until proven innocent’. There are no cost-effective means of removing content which are not automated. Consequently, removal of allegedly-copyrighted material will be removed from large platforms automatically. Where is the consumer protection against big firms? How can it be ensured that fair-use is protected? These questions matter - and the legislation fails to answer them. Ordinary people will be penalised in practice, whatever the Commission has said about the theory of this legislation. I care far more about the voices and views of ordinary people than the views of lobbyists who are paid to tell us what they want us to think. I have had extensive contact from members of the public who are hugely concerned about this legislation.I had no hesitation in voting against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is a legislative, first-reading report, which is concerned with the harmonisation at EU level of contracts for the supply of digital content, the purpose of which is to expand and strengthen the single market. This will harmonise rules such as conformity of digital content over time and other relevant areas. I cannot support measures which propose substantial further EU harmonisation. The report itself reminds us that the UK (and the Netherlands) already have their own rules in this area. I therefore voted against this report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I believe that the British government has a responsibility to ensure that UK consumers are protected, but disagree with harmonisation at EU level. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is another example of when the EU seeks to behave like a state when it is not. Given the EU’s record on fishing policy and the manner in which it is acting, I voted against the agreement.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Although I appreciate the suggestions made by the rapporteur with regard to transparency and administrative procedures, I remain concerned by the nature of the European Union’s policies in regards to the environment. I still believe that they are not the right ones to achieve the stated aims, and therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Regulations regarding the aerodynamics of motor vehicles with regards to CO2 requirements should be the responsibility of sovereign governments. Whilst reduction of CO2 emissions is a reasonable goal, CO2 is not the only pollutant in our atmosphere. The EU´s obsessive short-term focus on that measure alone is seriously short-sighted. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I have consistently opposed the counterproductive and failing EU energy policy. Whilst reduction of CO2 emissions is a reasonable goal, CO2 is not the only pollutant in our atmosphere. Obsessive short-term focus on that measure alone is seriously short-sighted. I believe it to be consistent with the result of the UK referendum for me to vote against such action being taken at the European Union level; the people of the UK voted to repatriate sovereignty to our Parliament in Westminster.

2016/11/22

This is a legislative, first-reading report on the Interreg fund and the ERDF fund. These funds are in the field of cohesion, which deals with cross border cooperation and outermost regions, amongst other topics. I voted against this report, as I do not agree with EU funding mechanisms, and to delay the closure of first reading.

2016/11/22

While there might be much I agree with in this report, I am unable to vote affirmatively because the report contains so many further suggestions of action at EU level and harmonisation. I therefore thought it appropriate to abstain overall, but voted against an amendment which sought financial reparations for historic injustices: I do not believe that we can arbitrarily determine that one generation is responsible for the actions of ancestors many generations ago – and if that principle were to be applied, it could not be applied consistently or equally.

2016/11/22

This report seeks to maximise and centralise EU power, not only on taxation, but also in criminal law procedure. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I am concerned that this Framework Agreement could potentially impact upon Swiss sovereignty, and therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. This vote was to refuse discharge to the EU general budget - European Council and Council, and rightly so: it is appropriate that institutions spending taxpayers’ money should be subject to a full audit. Consequently, I voted in favour of the refusal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. This vote was to refuse discharge to the European Asylum Support Office (EASO), and rightly so: it is appropriate that institutions spending taxpayers’ money should be subject to a full audit. Consequently, I voted in favour of the refusal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I do not support the erosion of national sovereignty which this would entail, and therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

As this is essentially an extension of the mandate of Eurojust and the conclusion of an agreement between the EU and a third country, I felt it appropriate to vote against.

2016/11/22

I agree with much of the thrust of this report, but I believe that such matters should ultimately be the responsibility of Member States and therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

This entails a transfer of power to the Commission; accordingly, I voted against.

2016/11/22

I abstained on the Provisional Agreement because, although I disagree with the proposed applications, this technology would provide a technical solution to the Irish border question post-Brexit.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This matter was not put to a vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I would have abstained had the resolution not been approved without a vote – on the grounds that the UK will no longer be a member of the European Union in 2020.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The United Kingdom, post-Brexit, must regain exclusive competence over our own fishing grounds, which provide a significant national resource and are currently being mismanaged by the European Union. Consequently, I voted against this report as a matter of principle.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This report assists in the harmonisation of taxation across Member States. It was therefore consistent with the basis upon which I was elected, and with the referendum result of June 2016, for me to vote against as a matter of principle.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The clear intention of the legislators when lifting these questions out of the Rome I Regulation was that the Commission should return with a proposal at a later stage. The questions were raised again in the light of the 2015 Action Plan for a Capital Markets Union (CMU). In May 2017 the Commission’s mid-term review set out the remaining actions which will be taken to put in place the building blocks of the CMU by 2019, with the objective of removing barriers to cross-border investment and lowering the costs of funding. As an MEP elected upon a platform of withdrawal from the European Union, I cannot support measures that propose substantial further EU harmonisation.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Whilst the safeguarding of a currency is obviously in itself not a bad thing, this is a report to protect a currency that the UK is not part of, but still using British taxpayers’ money. If euro countries wish to protect their currency they would be better off funding efforts from their domestic budgets. For this reason, I voted against the report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As this report could become the template of a future Singapore-UK bilateral deal, I supported this agreement.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Whilst I supported the EU-Singapore Free Trade Agreement, the accompanying resolution contains too many amendments attacking Singapore’s free market values with the aim of politicisation of trade.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This report follows a Court decision, which saw the EU-Singapore deal being split in two. The first part deals only with free trade. The second part, which should not be confused with the ISDS of TTIP, is instead modelled more on CETA, with higher levels of transparency. As this was the case I felt I could vote in favour on this part of the Agreement, which will be a model for a future UK-Singapore agreement.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Whilst I supported the EU-Singapore Free Trade Agreement, this resolution contains too many amendments attacking Singapore’s free-market values with the aim of politicising trade. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain on the resolution as a whole.

2016/11/22

The vote on this political agreement differs from the previous votes in that this agreement further propagates the EU’s foreign policy and develops the economic and political framework between the EU and Singapore. I believe that such actions should fall within the purview of sovereign states and that the EU, by undertaking such an action, diminishes the sovereignty of the Member States. Accordingly, I voted against this cooperation agreement.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I voted against the agreement, it was logical to oppose the accompanying resolution too.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I voted against the proposal as I oppose further EU harmonisation and interference.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I oppose European Union enlargement and therefore I voted against this report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I oppose the EUR 330 billion proposed cost of the 2017-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework. Were it not for the uncertainty surrounding Brexit, and specifically the lack of any guarantee that the United Kingdom will not be part of these structures by the start of the next MFF, I might well have abstained. In the current political climate, I have no such guarantees and I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This will entail taxpayers’ money being used to promote and establish common harmonised judicial systems and practices, and to dilute the sovereignty of Member States. I therefore opposed the Commission proposal.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I completely disagree with this vision for the future of Europe. I believe in sovereign nation states cooperating on matters where it makes sense to do so and reducing barriers to trade. I do not believe in centralisation of power or loss of sovereignty. Given that I disagree with the principles underpinning this report, I had no choice but to vote against it.

2016/11/22

I cannot support any resolution which proposes further harmonisation at a time when the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union. I therefore voted against this report.

2016/11/22

I cannot support any resolution which proposes further harmonisation at a time when the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union. I therefore voted against this report.

2016/11/22

In the event of a no-deal Brexit, such contingency measures are necessary to ensure the continuation of trade. It is entirely logical to support such measures, and it is worth noting that the content of these common rules – taken together across various different policy areas – is something which UK pro-EU politicians consistently told us would not happen in that event. I therefore voted in favour.

2016/11/22

In the event of a no-deal Brexit, such contingency measures are necessary to ensure the continuation of trade. It is entirely logical to support such measures, and it is worth noting that the content of these common rules - taken together across various different policy areas - is something which UK pro-EU politicians consistently told us would not happen in that event. I therefore voted in favour.

2016/11/22

In the event of a no-deal Brexit, such contingency measures are necessary to ensure the continuation of trade. It is entirely logical to support such measures, and it is worth noting that the content of these common rules - taken together across various different policy areas - is something which UK pro-EU politicians consistently told us would not happen in that event. I therefore voted in favour.

2016/11/22

The adjustments only affect countries which joined the EU post 1994. Consequently, I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

As an MEP elected upon a platform of withdrawal from the European Union, I cannot support measures which propose substantial further EU harmonisation and an increase in EU spending.

2016/11/22

Whilst I am supportive of measures to help protect the victims of motor vehicle accidents, I cannot help but feel that this is a matter which should be one for Member States rather than harmonised action at European Union level.

2016/11/22

There were two motions for resolution available for vote. The one which I preferred could only be brought to a vote if the previous one were to fail. I cannot support, for example, the abortion-on-demand, which is a key component of this resolution and which pushes for such things to be determined across the European Union. Whilst I believe that there do exist certain circumstances in which abortion should be legal, that does not seem to me to be the tone of this report. It is not about the exceptional cases, but about every case. I therefore opposed the Joint Motion for a Resolution in the hope that I would then have the opportunity to vote on the other Resolution instead.

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I abstained on the resolution as a whole. Whilst I support increased investment in research programmes, better support and health infrastructure, I believe such matters should fall within the purview of Member States rather than pan-European harmonisation strategies.

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I abstained on the resolution as a whole. I am strongly opposed to the use of cannabis recreationally, which destroys lives and causes significant life-long health problems. Cannabis is not a safe drug, and its potency now is far higher than it was, say, 50 years ago.I do not object to the extraction of specific cannabinoids for use in medicines, from such time as there exists genuine peer-reviewed research to demonstrate that this would be more efficacious than existing medicines available on the market. However, ultimately, such matters should be discussed and debated in Member States rather than at EU level.

2016/11/22

I abstained for the same reasons as usual: I believe in the principle of citizens’ petitions, but I do not believe in the approach to EU-wide legislation. As a strong supporter of direct democracy, I cannot oppose anything to do with citizens’ petitions, although the mechanisms in practice are misguided. Equally, I cannot support it because this is not genuine direct democracy – or anything resembling it.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I am concerned that this agreement will lead to the usual problem: exploitation of the waters of a third country to the benefit, perhaps, of the European Union but to the detriment of the natural resources of another country.This is, essentially, a cash-for-access deal, an agreement to pay Côte d’Ivoire EUR 682 000 in return for 36 vessels from Spain, France and Portugal taking 5 500 tonnes of fish. The non-legislative resolution attempts primarily to justify the agreement as both sustainable and beneficial to Côte d’Ivoire. Coming from the UK, whose waters have been plundered by the EU, I oppose this despoliation of another country’s waters. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This resolution seeks to justify the agreement which I had previously voted against. I naturally voted against this resolution.

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I abstained on the proposal: I have concerns about both this proposal and the European Court of Justice.

2016/11/22

This is, essentially, a cash-for-access deal. The agreement pays approximately EUR 50 million per year to allow access for just over 100 vessels for a period of four years. The agreement is, however, particularly controversial because of the issue of whether it also covers the waters off Western Sahara. The legitimacy of this is a matter of dispute with strongly held feelings on both sides – and ECJ involvement. Coming from the UK, whose waters have been plundered by the EU, I oppose this despoliation of another country’s waters.I do not believe it to be appropriate for me to distinguish specifically between the Côte d’Ivoire vote and the Morocco vote. It was consistent for me to vote in the same way as I have for the last four and a half years, and consequently I voted against this too.

2016/11/22

This is a further example of the EU behaving as a state. Thus, even if the agreement itself has little within it to which I might object, it is unacceptable for the EU to be a signatory, reducing the Member States to the equivalent of its federal provinces. Consequently, I voted against.

2016/11/22

This report is a technical update recognising the fact Croatia has joined the EU since the original deal was signed with Mexico. As the report calls for nothing more than this fact to be acknowledged, I had no problem in supporting the proposal.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This legislation seeks to establish a new EU anti-fraud regime for the 2021-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework. I would like to vote for anything which seeks to combat fraud, but this particular package is problematic.I am concerned by the proposed EUR 181 million budget, and the requirements to ‘ensure the visibility of the EU’ for any organisation in receipt of EU funding. I am concerned likewise by the compulsion upon the Commission to implement an ‘information campaign’. I am also concerned specifically about providing power to the Commission to adopt delegated acts, and supported amendments seeking to curtail that power.There are, therefore, strong reasons to neither vote in favour nor against. Furthermore, the legislation impacts a Multiannual Financial Framework of which the United Kingdom will not be a part. I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is the plan for the West Atlantic, comparable to those for other waters. It also modifies the Baltic Plan. I oppose these agreements as the next generation of the discredited Common Fisheries Policy. Moreover, the plan, like others, begins the extension of the CFP into recreational fishing.EU policy in the area of fishing has been disastrous; such policy-making should be left to Member States. The United Kingdom, post Brexit, must regain exclusive competence over our own fishing grounds, which provide a significant national resource and are currently being mismanaged by the European Union. Consequently, I voted against this report as a matter of principle.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As an MEP elected upon a platform of withdrawal from the European Union, I cannot support measures which propose substantial further EU harmonisation and an increase in EU spending.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Though I am against further EU harmonisation, I recognise the problem of water scarcity and believe that Member States should consider investing in reclaimed water procedure. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain on the final report rather than vote against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This report clarifies two definitions of tractor categories and corrects some technical errors.Though this is a simple report that does not create new legislation, I am wary of type approval, which by its very nature entails harmonisation. It also allows the Commission to adopt delegated acts, which can only be prevented if the Parliament or the Council object to them. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I voted against this as I disagree with the concept and structures of European Union funding and the current protectionist nature of the single market; from that principle, opposition to these measures must surely follow.

2016/11/22

These proposals are part of continued attempts by the EU to harmonise VAT. Sovereign states should have the freedom to set their own VAT rates. The UK should not be subject to these systems post-Brexit.

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I abstained. Although I do not believe that the European Union should be the correct organisation to fight against anti-Gypsyism (that being a matter for independent nation states), discrimination against Roma people in certain Member States of the European Union is particularly concerning.

2016/11/22

These proposals seek to impose an EU identity upon citizens in countries across Europe. This is not a European identity: one can feel European whilst considering EU institutions and structures bad for democracy and bad for accountability. Furthermore, it should be obvious by now that the State attempting to impose identity on the populace is futile.I cannot support calls for further spending of taxpayers’ money on pro-EU propaganda: when the State dictates speech and opinion, it erodes democracy. I voted against the original text of paragraph 38, which called for an annual bank holiday across the European Union on 9 May.I voted against the report as a whole.

2016/11/22

Any move to exchange unanimity for qualified majority voting must necessarily impact upon national sovereignty; accordingly, it was a straightforward decision for me to vote against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ In a functioning democracy, the (elected) parliament should have greater power than the (unelected) civil service. Those involved in drafting should be politically neutral. It is unacceptable for a political (unelected) Commission to be the primary driver of new legislation. Therefore, I tend to support measures seeking to redress the balance. I would have liked, on this occasion, to vote in favour. However, some of the earlier votes on amendments to the text made it clear that to vote in favour in the final vote would also be to vote in favour of the false Spitzenkandidaten process. That process creates a veneer of democracy but it was lent no legitimacy in the United Kingdom because there are no MEPs from Parliament’s largest political grouping. I therefore abstained on the final resolution.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The report looks at the role of the Charter particularly in two areas of EU policy making: the conclusion of trade agreements with third countries and economic governance. The ‘national dimension’ of the Charter complements the EU one. Inadequate implementation of the Charter at national level undermines its overall consistency and effectiveness. I therefore voted against the proposals.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I support the principle that there should be greater scrutiny and accountability of European Union institutions. I therefore abstained, rather than voting against, on the final resolution, and I supported a number of amendments seeking to strengthen accountability.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is a non-legislative report on a common industrial policy on artificial intelligence and robotics. I am against harmonised EU law on this issue and I believe that this innovative technology should fall under the purview of national parliaments. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I abstained on this report as it is becoming more and more evident that citizens are increasingly concerned on the negative effects on human health that can derive from pesticides. On the other hand, I understand farmers and their need to use pesticides to keep plants healthy and prevent disease and infestation. Decisions should be made on the basis of sound scientific information, and I am less than convinced that this is currently the case. Furthermore, decisions should be made by nation states rather than by the European Union.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is a report on patients’ rights in cross-border healthcare: it makes recommendations for the improvement of the existing EU Directive on this issue. I voted against the proposals as I am against further EU harmonisation and the financial implications of this report.

2016/11/22

I supported amendments which sought to:1. Remove limitations upon the numbers of Parliamentary Questions which could be asked by MEPs2. Ensure fair distribution of speaking time and time for major interpellations amongst Parliamentary Groups3. Delete the possibility of a large political group forcing secret ballots upon the Parliament4. Require the Commission to respond faster to questions raised by MEPsI wished to support amendments regarding sexual harassment, which were unfortunately not voted on as a previous amendment (which I could not accept) had been carried.I opposed amendments seeking to regulate political affinity within Parliamentary groups (which would be fundamentally undemocratic), and to make it harder for political groups and groups of MEPs to force debates upon important issues.Whilst I had been considering an abstention on the final vote, ultimately some of the amendments which carried made it impossible for me to do so; accordingly, I voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is a legislative, first reading report amending the Union Customs Code. Firstly, it contains a number of technical amendments, which correct technical errors and omissions, including harmonising the legislation with international agreements, such as the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), which were concluded after the adoption of the Customs Code.Additionally it provides for the municipality of Campione d’Italia and the Italian waters of Lake Lugano to be added to the customs territory of the EU. The Italian Government has requested this in response to Switzerland wishing to include them in its customs territory and the fact that they are no longer isolated and economically disadvantaged. I voted against this report, as it entails expanding and adding to the functioning of the single market.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is a highly technical rushed vote, designed to address the fact that the regulations do not make proper allowance for the year 2020. It is not my role as a British MEP to assist the EU in coping with its poor planning and drafting. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I strongly support the accession of the Dominican Republic to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. I believe that the UK should sign such an agreement. I do not, however, see it as the role of the European Union to instruct the UK in that regard. I therefore abstained as a ‘best fit’.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I strongly support the accession of Ecuador and Ukraine to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. I do not, however, see it as the role of the European Union to instruct the Member States in that regard. I therefore abstained as a ‘best fit’.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I strongly support the accession of Honduras to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. I do not, however, see it as the role of the European Union to instruct the Member States in that regard. I therefore abstained as a ‘best fit’.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I strongly support the accession of Belarus and Uzbekistan to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. I do not, however, see it as the role of the European Union to instruct the Member States in that regard. I therefore abstained as a ‘best fit’.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This non-legislative vote was to approve the funding programme for overseas countries and territories (OCTs) of the EU Member States. The funding is largely used to promote the OCTs’ integration into regional economies, sustainable development and climate change mitigation and to reduce the risk of natural disasters.This entails taxpayers’ money being used to allow the EU to set the agenda and influence Member States’ OCTs. Sustaining and funding an OCT should be the responsibility of the nation state. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This non-binding report is the MEPs’ yearly assessment of fraud in the EU budget. The report notes that the total number of fraudulent and non-fraudulent irregularities reported in 2017 (15 213 cases) was 20.8% lower than in 2016 (19 080 cases) and that their value had decreased by 13% (from EUR 2.97 billion in 2016 to EUR 2.58 billion in 2017). The report goes on to assess that the VAT gap in 2016 amounted to EUR 147 billion, which represents more than 12% of total expected VAT revenue, and that the Commission estimates that intra-Community VAT fraud cases cost the Union around EUR 50 billion annually. The report points out that the average recovery rate for cases reported as fraudulent over the years 1989-2017 was only 37%.I cannot possibly support calls for harmonisation or action against the UK. Therefore, although stronger anti-fraud measures are indeed required, I had to oppose this report.

2016/11/22

I oppose the legislative and financial implications of this project. Consequently, although this would entail the repeal of some existing legislation, I had to vote against further spending of taxpayers’ money.

2016/11/22

Adjustments to Gross National Income (GNI) are made in order to increase Member State contributions to the EU, and will grant power to the Commission to make delegated acts. I oppose delegated acts in principle. Neither can I support any resolution which proposes further harmonisation at a time when the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union. I therefore voted against the report.

2016/11/22

Whilst I normally, on principle, would support objections pursuant to Rule 106, I am concerned in this case about the impact which that would have upon the UK, and am receiving mixed advice as to whether there exist reasonable concerns about the particular variant mentioned. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

Whilst I normally, on principle, would support objections pursuant to Rule 106, I am concerned in this case about the impact which that would have upon the UK, and am receiving mixed advice as to whether there exist reasonable concerns about the particular variant mentioned. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

Whilst I normally, on principle, would support objections pursuant to Rule 106, I am concerned in this case about the impact which that would have upon the UK, and am receiving mixed advice as to whether there exist reasonable concerns about the particular variant mentioned. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

Whilst I normally, on principle, would support objections pursuant to Rule 106, I am concerned in this case about the impact which that would have upon the UK, and am receiving mixed advice as to whether there exist reasonable concerns about the particular variant mentioned. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

I very much recognise the impact which that situation is having upon the daily lives of its people and the suffering which has been caused. Furthermore, the denial of free and fair elections is a serious issue. I have serious concerns about the current political situation in Venezuela and the impact of far-left ideologies on its people. The European Parliament’s resolution is reasonable, and calls for the European Union to take a position are equally matched with calls for the Member States to do likewise. Under the circumstances, it is important that the international community should be as united as possible. Unusually, therefore, I voted in favour of this resolution.

2016/11/22

Whilst I supported various amendments aimed at improving transparency and democratic accountability, and ensuring that third countries’ actions do not distort the free market, I had to oppose the report overall because it seeks to further EU power and Commission action.

2016/11/22

This report discusses what percentage of the cost of decommissioning a nuclear power plant in Lithuania should be met by the European Union. I do not believe that British taxpayers should fund such a project at all.Therefore, both a vote in favour and a vote against would send out completely the wrong message. I abstained.

2016/11/22

The UK being one of the largest shareholders of the European Investment Bank, it is important to ensure that the UK’s capital is returned in an appropriate manner post-Brexit. Yet the report highlights UK obligations to the EIB rather than the other way around. Furthermore, the EIB is used to implement EU policy. I therefore voted against, although there are elements of the report - such as those calling for greater accountability and transparency - that I could support.

2016/11/22

Where there is a clear debt owed due to the confiscation of art by the Nazi regime and others, it makes sense for civil restitution to permit the recovery.There are, of course, complex issues with regard to ownership - particularly in respect of claims dating back centuries or even millennia. People still alive today may well have lost property to the Nazis, and compensation should be possible.It is right for civil procedures to be streamlined in each Member State. This report is unclear in terms of precisely how it seeks to achieve change. Words such as ‘harmonisation’ are concerning.I support the principle of what the report is ultimately seeking to achieve, but am unclear about the mechanisms for it, and therefore abstained overall.

2016/11/22

As I am likely to oppose this directive regardless of the outcome of interinstitutional negotiations, it seemed appropriate to vote against the decision to enter into such negotiations I the first place.

2016/11/22

I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

This will centralise power in the hands of the Commission and permit the Commission to (in effect) sanction Member States. If this were referring solely to responding to cases of fraud, then there would be an argument for it – though the procedure would remain a flawed one.It seems, though, that this will go further: that it will be used against Member States whose policies the EU dislikes. There is little democratic accountability here. The Commission would be able to act, and could only be overruled by the Council acting by QMV within a month.This is insufficient as a democratic safeguard, and it is notable that the elected Parliament will have very little say under the legislation.

2016/11/22

I oppose the principle of the Fiscalis programme. I oppose the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base, which is mentioned in the Committee amendments. I oppose the principle of Commission delegated acts. I oppose the principle of harmonisation.I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I oppose the ‘Rights and Values’ programme because this will be a politicised use of taxpayers’ money for EU state propaganda. It is not an appropriate way to spend EUR 1.6 billion of taxpayers’ money, and I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

Whilst I am in favour of nuclear safety and international cooperation on safety rules, I believe Member States should independently deal with nuclear-related activities on their territories. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

Though there was much in this report I agreed with, as it called for EU intervention I felt it appropriate to abstain on the final vote.

2016/11/22

This report encourages the EIB to reduce exposure to the US dollar. In practice, this is an impossible aim: no organisation is able to eliminate trade in the world’s strongest currency. It is far from clear, in any event, that it would be in any way desirable to do so. This appears to be an attempt to circumvent US sanctions against nations and organisations acting in a manner incompatible with the principles of democracy. Likewise, this reasoning is concerning. Whilst I may have differences of opinion with the current US administration, it is strange to base long-term economic policy upon political differences with the current incumbent of the White House. The whole basis of this report being fundamentally flawed, I voted against.

2016/11/22

I cannot support any resolution which proposes further harmonisation at a time when the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union. I therefore voted against the report.

2016/11/22

Whilst there were positive aspects to this report, for example the Ombudsman confirming her findings of maladministration, I could not support the report as a whole, nor its recommendations.

2016/11/22

. ‒ In principle, I have concerns over granting discharge to institutions which cover matters which should properly be dealt with by national governments rather than by EU agencies. In this specific case, there were stronger reasons than usual for voting against:1. The ongoing OLAF investigations over a culture of bullying;2. The alleged irregular payments in 2016 amounting to EUR 1.5 million;3. The inadequate or total lack of internal control and governance highlighted by the 2017 Court of Auditors report;4. The inappropriate use of taxpayers’ money more recently (for example, the call to tender for expensive branded promotional items) which demonstrates that the EASO has learned little.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I am a strong supporter of free trade. I recognise the issues faced by Morocco especially in regard to migration. I am concerned about some aspects of this agreement, but overall I was sufficiently persuaded to abstain rather than vote against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I am a strong supporter of free trade. I recognise the issues faced by Morocco, especially in regard to migration. I am concerned about some aspects of this Agreement, but overall I was sufficiently persuaded to abstain rather than vote against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I am a strong supporter of free trade. I recognise the issues faced by Morocco, especially in regard to migration. I am concerned about some aspects of this Agreement, but overall I was sufficiently persuaded to abstain rather than vote against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I have concerns over the welfare of the animals and the standards in which these poultry products are produced, I voted against the report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The principle of subsidiarity dictates that decisions should be taken at the closest possible level to the citizen – in this case, at regional or national level. Therefore, these projects should not be funded by the European Union. The superficial changes suggested in this report do not solve any of the failings of the mechanism. There was a case for an abstention, on the grounds that the changes are due to come into effect only for the 2021—2027 framework, which is expected to be post-Brexit. However, following recent developments in the House of Commons in the UK, it seems more difficult to guarantee that any transitional period will have finished before this framework begins. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The European Social Fund Plus is designed to support the EU’s policies as identified in the European Pillar of Social Rights and in the European Semester. This ultimately amounts to improving labour mobility amongst the Member States and the design of increasingly intrusive policies in the internal affairs of Member States. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This report lays down the provisions for these funds, with an aim to simplify and ensure clarity whilst doing so. These funds are in the field of cohesion, which deals with cross-border cooperation and outermost regions, amongst other topics. As I do not agree with EU funding mechanisms, I felt it consistent to vote against the report. I supported amendments which would have respected national sovereignty in terms of setting their own domestic budgets.

2016/11/22

. ‒ It is clear that, post-Brexit, technical arrangements will be necessary to apportion quotas between the United Kingdom and the European Union in order to ensure the free flow of trade. The exact detail is subject to negotiations between officials. I recognise the need for this to occur, but do not have sufficient information on whether it is being done in a manner which is fair to both sides to be able to vote in favour. I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is a non-legislative report. Whilst I believe that matters such as the authorisation of pesticides should be subject to the subsidiarity principle and determined by individual nation states, the situation at present is that they are determined at EU level. There are aspects of this report which would be positive. I have commented previously on neonicotinoids and glyphosate, and have little further to add to my previous remarks on those subjects. Overall, it seemed appropriate for me to abstain.

2016/11/22

Whilst I am in favour of nuclear safety and international cooperation on safety rules, I believe Member States should independently deal with nuclear-related activities on their territories. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

Though I oppose the development and promotion of EU foreign policy through trade, the UK has voted to leave the European Union. I feel it is not for me, a British MEP, to seek to influence EU policy in this area. Consequently, I abstained.

2016/11/22

I would naturally oppose the establishment of a new EU investment programme. In addition to this, the report seeks to interfere with State Aid rules, which would disadvantage UK businesses. Given that it is not yet clear that the United Kingdom will definitely not participate in the next Multiannual Financial Framework, I naturally voted against.

2016/11/22

The rapporteur views this document as a symbol of ‘European citizenship and solidarity’. The notion of a shift from national embassies to EU embassies represents the changing nature of the European Union and the diminished role of nation states. It seemed automatic for me to vote against such a report.

2016/11/22

Whilst a strong case can be made for nuclear energy as a low-carbon power option, I am against the financial implication of this project and against EU interference. Given that it is not yet clear that the United Kingdom will definitely not participate in the next Multiannual Financial Framework, or participate in specific EU programmes such as this, I naturally voted against.

2016/11/22

Whilst I supported amendments critical of the ECB and highlighting the political rather than the economic nature of the project, ultimately the UK is not part of the ECB and I therefore abstained on the final vote.

2016/11/22

This report is supportive of the European Deposit Insurance Scheme (in which one country’s banking system will be used to subsidise another’s dysfunctional one), and the principle of the Commission using regulations rather than directives to implement banking union (which increases harmonisation and centralised control as regulations become law in Member States without national parliaments transposing them into domestic legislation). Accordingly, I voted against.

2016/11/22

Although I oppose the development and promotion of EU foreign policy through trade, I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

Whilst I am a strong advocate for ensuring fundamental rights for all, I do not believe further EU interference on this issue is the best way forward. National governments within Europe will always be the best way to enhance and protect rights without additional EU bureaucracy and unnecessary legislation. I therefore voted against this report.

2016/11/22

This report does not affect the UK due to its withdrawal from the European Union. I note that, as a supporter of Brexit, I believe in the principle that the European Union should not tell the UK what to do. This situation is the reverse: as a UK MEP, I should not cast an affirmative vote on issues which affect the EU27 but not the UK. I therefore abstained on the vote on this report.

2016/11/22

I oppose EU resources (in this case the European Border and Coast Guard Agency) being deployed in Albanian territory, so I naturally voted against the proposals.

2016/11/22

This being a technical update, I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only a tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

This being a technical update, I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only a tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

This report looks to address outstanding issues in data protection, vehicle and route data, and cyber security. I cannot support any report which proposes further harmonisation at a time when the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union. I therefore voted against the report.

2016/11/22

This report seeks further EU harmonisation in relation to the use of vehicles hired without drivers for the carriage of goods by road; accordingly, I voted against.

2016/11/22

This report concerns the concept of safeguarding clauses. This is quite a normal component in EU trade deals and is intended to allow the EU to react if there are sudden over supplies of products on the market. The Rapporteur wants all applications of this nature to be transparent. As these arrangements are normal in international trade, I therefore abstained on the final vote.

2016/11/22

This report does not affect the UK due to its withdrawal from the European Union. I note that, as a supporter of Brexit, I believe in the principle that the European Union should not tell the UK what to do. This situation is the reverse: as a UK MEP, I should not cast an affirmative vote on issues which affect the EU27 but not the UK. I therefore abstained on the vote on this report.

2016/11/22

The proposal is to remove the UK Director from the board as a consequence of Brexit. However, as representation of the UK is still required in light of the EUR 9 billion refund that is due to the UK and allegedly will not be paid back until 2054. It is therefore important that representation be maintained. Consequently, I voted against the report.

2016/11/22

The report concerns gender quality within Parliament, calling for gender quotas on the committees, the bureau, senior management and vice-presidents. There are addition calls for gender parity on electoral lists and political groups to elect two co-presidents (on female, one male).Because I believe in equality of opportunity, I oppose any gender-based discrimination. The best candidate should be chosen at the same pay – irrespective of gender, religion, sexuality, ethnicity or pretty much anything else. Whist I fully support tackling issues of gender discrimination, this should be done by national governments and not in the way prescribed in this report.

2016/11/22

The EU wants a new act to include the renovation of ITER (2021-2027) in the next MFF - with a budget contribution of EUR 6 070 000 000. I felt it necessary to vote against this report as in the event of our departure from the EU being delayed and we may face having to contribute to this project.

2016/11/22

This non-binding report discusses how EU funding is spent in reforming the public sector of Member States. It calls for responsibility for better public administration and governance to be given to an individual Commissioner. The report says that such reform is good for many reasons including expanding eGovernment and improving the delivery of services throughout the EU, especially with regard to new technology and IT systems and combatting fraud. Currently the EU allocates EUR 9 billion for public administration reform. This report encourages the EU to further interfere directly and indirectly in Member States public sector administration, which I oppose. I therefore voted against the report.

2016/11/22

Though I passionately campaign and advocate for freedom of religion in and outside the EU, I do not support the institutions of the EU. I therefore abstained on the final vote.

2016/11/22

This report discusses tax policies across the Member States, and the negative affects on women; particularly with regard to disincentivising women from joining the labour market.The report calls for EU legislation to be properly implemented against indirect and direct gender discrimination; criticism of the lack of gender mainstreaming in the next MFF, and for the Commission and Member States to implement gender budgeting.In summary, this calls for EU interference in Member State tax policy, I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I could not support the proposed harmonisation and therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

Given the referendum result in the United Kingdom, I should oppose anything which leads to further harmonisation. In this case, the proposal is to take harmonisation further with regard to civil procedures and therefore I voted against.

2016/11/22

I support national sovereignty; I cannot support the EU Space Programme or its financial implications. Consequently, I had to oppose this report.

2016/11/22

I would like to abstain on this as it should happen post-Brexit. However, given recent political events and the potential for the UK making payments to the EU budget beyond the start of 2021, I have little choice but to vote against.

2016/11/22

This being a technical update, in the context of Brexit I felt it appropriate to abstain on this Agreement.

2016/11/22

Naturally, I cannot support the EU seeking to insist upon additional taxation.

2016/11/22

This being intended to eventually form part of the CCCTB, I have no choice but to vote against. I cannot support the principle of tax harmonisation.

2016/11/22

My reasoning for my view as a whole on the EU’s position on blockchain remains identical to that on the previous month’s vote: I cannot support calls for Commission action and further spending. In this case, however, the issues are complex and sensitive ones surrounding data protection rather than relating to the entire policy. I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

I do not believe that the European Union should require, in effect, GDPR compliance from third countries. There are significant problems with GDPR; I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

Whilst I oppose the EU Budget in general, I must also oppose corruption.Money in the EU budget has, in part, come from British taxpayers. It is appropriate for this money to be recovered on behalf of British taxpayers.Therefore I voted in favour, because this principle must be a stronger one than the parts of this report with which I disagree.

2016/11/22

Unusually I voted in favour of this report, to make the political point that it is correct to criticise the manner of the appointment of the new Secretary-General of the Commission, Martin Selmayr.

2016/11/22

I abstained for the same reasons as usual: I believe in the principle of citizens’ petitions, but I do not believe in the approach to EU-wide legislation. As a strong supporter of direct democracy, I cannot oppose this – but equally, I cannot support it (this is not direct democracy).

2016/11/22

Given that this Draft Amending Budget lowers the overall EU budget and should cut EUR 1 billion from the UK’s contribution, I voted in favour of this rare reduction.

2016/11/22

I oppose in principle the use of financial instruments that operate outside normal budgetary limits and any increase in EU spending. Therefore, I oppose this additional EUR 1 billion of spending.

2016/11/22

I do not believe that this fund is necessary. EU Member States contribute to a fund from which they can then reclaim money in the event of a natural disaster. However, ultimately there will be no real net benefit to this system: the amounts of money are not so high as to have a significant overall impact upon national economies. Money is reclaimed much later, having already been spent and the administrative costs are significant. As I oppose the Solidarity Fund, it is consistent for me oppose the proposal to allow advance payments of EUR 50 million for the budgetary year 2019. Advance payments will not have the same checks applied and still suffer from my previous objections to the funds existence. I therefore voted against the proposal.

2016/11/22

The total commitments are set at €165.8 billion, an increase of 3.2% compared with the budget as amended over the past few months. Payments amount to €148.2 billion, 2.4% more than in 2018.I voted against the final resolution because I cannot support any increase in the budget of the European Union, especially considering that the British people have already voted to leave and expect to stop paying money to the EU altogether. I regularly vote against any measures which would add to the European Union budget, because it would be completely contrary to the decision of the British people on Brexit. In some cases, the additions would in any event appear to duplicate funding streams which already exist directly from the UK Government.

2016/11/22

Following the people’s vote for Brexit in the UK in 2016, it would be utterly wrong and immoral for me to do anything other than vote against an EU Budget in 2019 where the UK will be part of the EU for the first three months, and paying into the EU Budget through the financial settlement (the so-called ‘divorce bill’) for the remainder of the year.

2016/11/22

Whilst I would generally be supportive of free trade, I opposed this Agreement for similar reasons to my opposition to TTIP: the same questions as regards dispute settlement and democratic accountability apply.

2016/11/22

Whilst I would generally be supportive of free trade, I opposed this Agreement for similar reasons to my opposition to TTIP: the same questions as regards dispute settlement and democratic accountability apply. On the amendments, I voted in favour of amendments critical of Japan’s policy on whaling.

2016/11/22

The European Union has agreed a framework for political and economic cooperation with Japan. This is an advance on the Strategic Partnership signed in 2001 and a furthering of the development of the EU’s foreign policy. The vote in Parliament consists of two parts. This first part is the legislative procedure in which the Parliament is asked to give consent to the signing of the agreement. As I am against the development of any EU foreign policy, I voted against this agreement.

2016/11/22

The European Union has agreed a framework for political and economic cooperation with Japan. This is an advance on the Strategic Partnership signed in 2001 and a furthering of the development of the EU’s foreign policy. The vote in Parliament consists of two parts. The second part is a non-legislative report submitted by Parliament with its opinion on the agreement, aims for future development etc. As I am against the development of any EU foreign policy, I voted against the resolution.

2016/11/22

This being a technical update, I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only a tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

As I oppose the financial implications of Horizon Europe, I felt it appropriate to vote against the rules of participation and dissemination.

2016/11/22

As I oppose the financial implications of Horizon Europe, it is only logical for me to also vote against its programme of implementation.

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I voted against the resolution as a whole. This report calls for further harmonisation and Commission action, which I cannot support.

2016/11/22

This is a lengthy non-legislative own initiative report outlining the findings of the Special Committee on Terrorism over the last year. The report calls for vast amounts of EU legislation and harmonisation in a bid to tackle radicalisation, improve cooperation amongst Member States, support victims of terrorism, counter terrorist-related smuggling and strengthen EU police agencies to name a few. The report, however, fails to acknowledge that the Schengen area poses critical challenges for dealing with terrorism as it makes cross-border terrorism more likely.The UK is outside the Schengen Area and is leaving the European Union. In terms of counter-terrorism it is one of the world leaders. Harmonisation could potentially have a negative impact upon UK counter-terrorism measures. Furthermore, the UK has voted to leave the European Union: it would be inconsistent with that principle for me to do anything other than vote against.

2016/11/22

The European Parliament produces an annual report on the CFSP covering the EU’s foreign policy objectives and aspirations. The EU has focused increasingly on developing its own strategic autonomy. It discusses the possibility of an EU Security Council as proposed by Merkel and Macron and the introduction of Qualified Majority Voting in this area. This being antithetical to the vote of the British people in 2016, I had no choice but to vote against.

2016/11/22

Defence is, fundamentally, the preserve of the nation state. In seeking to encroach upon this role of the nation state, the European Union seeks to supplant national sovereignty. This is something that I could not support under any circumstances, especially since the referendum of 2016, and I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

Whilst I share some of the report’s concerns with regard to human rights and democracy in the world, I do not believe in an EU foreign policy: foreign policy should be a matter for national sovereign governments to determine.

2016/11/22

I cannot support the principle of an EU Defence Fund; the British people were repeatedly told that such things were a Euromyth. It is somewhat surreal to be voting upon something which pro—EU campaigners in the UK simply denied the existence of.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I am opposed to harmonisation, particularly in light of the referendum result in the United Kingdom in 2016. It logically follows that I must oppose this.

2016/11/22

I believe as follows regarding Ukraine:1. I support Ukraine’s territorial integrity and oppose Russian aggression, most recently its actions in the Sea of Azov.2. I am concerned about Ukrainian political prisoners, including Oleg Sentsov, currently held in Russia.3. Presuming that Brexit occurs as the British people voted, it is not my business to say whether or not Ukraine should join the EU; that is a matter for the EU27.4. I am also concerned about increasing erosion of fundamental freedoms within Ukraine, notably on the freedom of the press.I tried to vote according to those principles on the amendments; those principles also led me to an abstention as a ‘best fit’ on the final vote.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is a non-legislative report on the digitalisation of skills, jobs and education. It discusses the importance and need for digital literacy, for giving schools better access to the internet and for Member States to invest and educational institutions to better utilise EU and Member State funding.Whilst I agree with the principle of adapting to the digital age, through better digital literacy, I do not support the call for increased funding at the expense of the taxpayer. The UK Government has its own digital strategy, with various investments such as the ‘Digital Innovation Fund’ for local councils to access GBP 7.5 million for a grant in order to benefit local public services; as well as access to a fund for digital inclusion for the elderly and those with disabilities. This does not need to be conducted at EU level, I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Being opposed to harmonisation, in particular in light of the UK’s vote to leave the European Union, I naturally had little choice but to vote against this measure.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Being opposed to harmonisation, in particular in light of the UK’s vote to leave the European Union, I naturally had little choice but to vote against this measure.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is a legislative report which wishes to ring-fence EU funding allocated to the Asylum and Migration Fund. Given the European Union’s repeated failures in responding to the migration crisis, I voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ My rationale for opposing the European Union’s approach towards the environment and climate change has been explained in detail previously. I remain of the opinion that this approach is not likely to achieve the stated aims, largely because it cuts pollution within the EU at the expense of increasing emissions elsewhere. Whilst there are some positive points in this report, overall I cannot vote for something which continues with a misguided approach.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is one part of a package of proposals to amend legislation already in force on carcinogens in the workplace. This part introduces five new carcinogens with maximum standards of exposure at work and other safety standards in the original legislation. There is no other impact on legislation other than the introduction of these substances under the scope of the legislation. I therefore felt it appropriate to vote in favour, despite certain misgivings about the principle of action being taken by the EU rather than sovereign nations.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I support transparency. I recognise the necessity of a response by nation states following (for example, but not limited to) the horsemeat scandal. In April 2018, the Commission submitted a proposal for more transparency in EFSA (the European Food Safety Authority) and stricter rules to guarantee impartial food risk assessments. I supported many amendments to increase transparency across the sector but could not support the calls for further harmonisation and budgetary increases of up to 80%.There is, however, a clear need for the consumer to have greater confidence in products. I therefore abstained on the final Commission proposal, having previously voted in favour of amendments seeking to increase transparency.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Harmonisation of education and employment policies is antithetical to the UK’s vote to leave the European Union; consequently, I had little option but to vote against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The Commission is proposing amendments to the existing legislation governing the working of EU-OSHA. It attempts to harmonise health and safety standards to further facilitate labour mobility within the EU. As I believe that harmonisation is a waste of taxpayers’ money and the rightful responsibility of Member States, I voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Questions of living and working conditions vary wildly within the EU28, and different measures may be required in different countries. Harmonisation is antithetical to the UK’s vote to leave the European Union; consequently, I had little option but to vote against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This report amends legislation to allow manufacturers to apply to a different EU27 authority post-Brexit so that tests carried out by the UK do not need to be repeated, and type-approval may be granted. This legislation will avoid the situation where no type-approval authority is responsible. As this is a sensible measure which will make post-Brexit trade easier, I voted in favour of this report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of democracy and transparency, I would like to confirm that I abstained on the final vote following advice from colleagues.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I voted against this last month; my reasoning has not changed. I voted against it again this month.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is a legislative first-reading report that seeks to amend the EU’s Visa Code legislation, which harmonises procedures and conditions for processing visa applications and issuing visas. The legislation governing visas only applies to Schengen states and is only applicable to third countries with which the EU has not agreed visa-free travel.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This being an interim anti-avoidance measure intent upon closing VAT loopholes in the current system, I did not vote against (as I normally would, given the mandate I have to oppose a common system of VAT). I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I continue to disagree with the European Union’s approach to enlarging the disastrous Schengen area, and therefore I voted against this report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This own-initiative report sets out various proposals and priorities the EU wants from the Member States in order to improve the ability for the EU to carry out rapid operations, mobilisation and projection of force. This includes the improvement of physical infrastructure and legally with a freer ability of military forces to cross national boundaries. As I am concerned about British military involvement in such operations, I accordingly voted against this resolution.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is a non-legislative report on the EU’s plans to increase the cultural participation of EU citizens, via cultural policies and existing programmes such as Creative Europe and Europe for Citizens.There are calls for increased and adequate funding for programmes, for the creation of an ‘EU scoreboard’ to measure media pluralism and diversity, and the creation of an online directory of European films. I cannot support taxpayers’ money being spent on this, nor can I support the suggestion that the EU should interfere with the tax regulation and bilateral agreements of Member States. I naturally voted against the report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is a legislative, first-reading report, amending existing legislation. It concerns type approval of ‘L-category’ vehicles such as powered cycles and motorcycles. I welcomed some of the aspects of this report but on principle, I cannot support any resolution, which proposes further harmonisation at a time when the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union. I therefore voted against the report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I believe that it is consistent with the principles which I expressed in my explanation of vote from October 2016 on this subject for me to abstain on this subject. I am no fan of the death penalty in and of itself, but I have two concerns:1. The right of sovereign nations to determine policy for themselves2. The potential for unintended consequences: we could end up with a situation where methods used end up being more painful rather than less.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Samoa was benefiting from trade preferences for EU market access given its status as a less developed country (LDC). However Samoa’s economy has reached a sufficiently developed state that it no longer qualifies for these preferences. Until a more permanent trade deal is agreed between Samoa and the EU, the EU has offered an interim agreement. The EU has done this in the past with other countries in the region like Fiji and Papua New Guinea.Though I oppose the development and promotion of EU foreign policy through trade, the UK has voted to leave the European Union. I feel it is not for me, a British MEP, to seek to influence EU policy in this area. Consequently, I abstained.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The principle of subsidiarity dictates that decisions should be taken at the closest possible level to the citizen – in this case, at regional or national level. Therefore, these projects should not be funded by the European Union.It is absurd that the arbiters of whether this funding should, or should not, be given are Members of the European Parliament with no detailed knowledge of the situation. This project may well be of benefit to the people of Greece, but I am not best placed to judge. The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund should be scrapped, which would give money back to the Member States to decide for themselves about the appropriateness of such funding. Consequently, I had no option but to vote against – even though this may be a worthwhile project.

2016/11/22

. ‒ My first question concerning a resolution on the Schengen Agreement is whether it is appropriate for me to vote at all, given that the UK is not a part of it. I believe that there is a knock-on effect to the UK, and therefore concluded that it is appropriate for me to vote. I voted in favour of amendments to ensure longer time limits for the temporary reintroduction of border control, but against the final resolution.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This being a technical matter, referring to wet-lease agreements for aircraft registered in a third country when a specific wet-lease regime has been included in an international agreement concluded by the Union, I felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Whilst I would normally, on principle, support objections pursuant to Rule 106, I am concerned in this case about the impact which that would have upon the UK, and am receiving mixed advice as to whether there exist reasonable concerns about sodium dichromate. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

Whilst I am extremely concerned about the Cum Ex scandal, I cannot support calls for transfer of sovereignty to the European Union and further harmonisation. Better measures should be taken by the Member States. Nevertheless, there are certain points which are mentioned in this resolution which are positive, and do highlight measures which sovereign Member States should consider taking.

2016/11/22

This report concerns the German Youth Welfare Office. Many non-German parents in the system have complained about the rulings of this body. One of its main issues is the nature of its rulings being binding on judges in family cases. The German courts have been accused of ignoring and undermining other EU States’ rulings on family issues affecting their nationals. I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

The EU conducts annual reviews on the accession process of candidate and potential candidate countries. The process involves the opening and closing of chapters (areas of EU law) as they align towards the standards of the acquis. Serbia has opened 14 chapters and provisionally closed two. I voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report, as I am opposed to further accession of states to the European Union and the extensive interfering in the affairs of these states by the European Union during the process.

2016/11/22

The EU conducts annual reviews on the accession process of candidate and potential candidate countries. The process involves the opening and closing of chapters (areas of EU law) as they align towards the standards of the acquis. I voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report, as I am opposed to further accession of states to the European Union and the extensive interfering in the affairs of these states by the European Union during the process.

2016/11/22

I voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report as I am opposed to further accession of states to the European Union and the extensive interfering in the affairs of these states by the European Union during the process.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. I am opposed to further accession of states to the European Union, and to the extensive interference by the European Union in the affairs of these states during the process.

2016/11/22

I voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report, as I am opposed to further accession of states to the European Union and the extensive interfering in the affairs of these states by the European Union during the process.

2016/11/22

I voted against this non-legislative and non-binding recommendation. Whilst I support the principles of freedom of expression and thought, I am against the politicisation of the internal affairs of Hungary to attempt to discredit the democratically elected government by the European Union.

2016/11/22

This is a non-legislative resolution, based on an oral question submitted to the Commission. The question asks whether the Commission are bringing 2020-2030 disability strategies in line with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and how they aim to achieve this. The main premise of the question is whether such will focus on women and girls with disabilities, and whether there will be data sets for assessing discrimination. Furthermore, in preparation for the EU elections, it asks how the Commission plans on enabling the participation of women with disabilities and removing barriers to their right to vote.The resolution calls to ensure that more is done to tackle gender-based violence, that there is adequate access to healthcare, and that labour regulation, application for maternity and paternity leave and education are all tailored to the needs of those with disabilities. Though I agree with many of the aims of this report, I think such decisions should be left to sovereign democratic nations.

2016/11/22

The United Kingdom will no longer be a member of the European Union at the time when this Multiannual Financial Framework comes into force in 2021. Furthermore, the proposed transitional period will by that time have expired. The UK will not be making budgetary contributions to the European Union. I note that, as a supporter of Brexit, I believe in the principle that the European Union should not tell the UK what to do. This situation is the reverse: as a UK MEP, I should not cast an affirmative vote on issues which affect the EU27 but not the UK. I therefore abstained on every vote throughout this report.

2016/11/22

Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union have had a significant negative impact upon the ability of the British government to protect local businesses in specific circumstances where temporary assistance could save significant numbers of jobs. I believe that these Articles represent unnecessary intrusion. This vote relates to the Commission seeking additional powers for exemptions for European Union financing. It could result in additional control over Member States’ domestic policies by the European Union; accordingly, I voted against.

2016/11/22

I have sympathy with the position that nations should be far more careful with arms exports: there is a legitimate moral question about who we sell arms to. This vote, however, seeks to place power in the hands of the European Council and take it away from Member States. It seeks to extend Qualified Majority Voting over foreign affairs, an issue which should properly be one to be determined by sovereign nations themselves. I voted against the loss of sovereignty that this non-legislative own-initiative report would, if it were to ever be realised, entail.

2016/11/22

Ultimately, I voted against this because:1. It was legislative rather than non-legislative;2. It seeks to interfere with domestic policies of Member States;3. It entails loss of sovereignty.That said, I agree with the principle that competition authorities should be independent of political control.

2016/11/22

I cannot support any resolution which proposes further harmonisation at a time when the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union. Whilst this is an update to existing legislation, I believe that it should be for national authorities to manage the increasing use of data services.

2016/11/22

The Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) and the BEREC Office were established by EU law as part of the ‘Telecommunications package’. The BEREC Office is an EU decentralised agency, based in Riga. The main thrust of the Commission proposal is to convert BEREC and BEREC Office into a single EU Agency. I object to the financial implication caused by the centralising role of these bodies.

2016/11/22

I have consistently opposed the counterproductive and failing EU energy policy. Whilst reduction of CO2 emissions is a reasonable goal, CO2 is not the only pollutant in our atmosphere. Obsessive short-term focus on that measure alone is seriously short-sighted. I believe it to be consistent with the result of the UK referendum for me to vote against such action being taken at the European Union level; the people of the UK voted to repatriate sovereignty to our Parliament in Westminster.

2016/11/22

As a strong supporter of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights, I had to oppose this. Democracy requires a demos; self-governance is a fundamental right. Ultimately, this proposal would interfere with national sovereignty.

2016/11/22

The UK is leaving the European Union. The implementation of this Association Agreement is now a matter for the European Union and for Georgia, not one for the United Kingdom; I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

The UK is leaving the European Union. The implementation of this Association Agreement is now a matter for the European Union and for Moldova, not one for the United Kingdom; I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

I do not oppose humanitarian visas. I do, however, oppose the principle that visas should be coordinated at European Union level in such a way as to permit applicants to move freely across borders without detection. It would (effectively) provide financial incentives for Member States to use this procedure rather than their own asylum policies, because the cost would be borne by the European Union. I therefore voted against the final resolution, but in favour of some recitals and amendments.

2016/11/22

I do not believe that this fund is necessary. EU Member States contribute to a fund from which they can then reclaim money in the event of a natural disaster. However, ultimately there will be no real net benefit to this system: the amounts of money are not so high as to have a significant overall impact upon national economies. Money is reclaimed much later, having already been spent. The administrative costs are significant.Given that the fund exists, however, I see no reason to doubt that responding to a natural disaster in Latvia is a worthwhile cause and I have no specific objection to the proposal. I therefore felt, overall, that it was appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

I agree with certain sentiments expressed within this non-legislative report. Education is important, and the furtherance of education in some of the world’s poorest countries will form part of a strategy for them to increase their prosperity in the longer term.However, the specific recommendations are concerning. The European Union should not tell Member States how to spend their own overseas aid budgets. Likewise, whilst the provision of one year’s free pre-primary schooling in poorer countries may well be a laudable goal, there might be more pressing priorities.I therefore voted against the resolution.

2016/11/22

Whilst I am supportive of measures to increase energy efficiency, and indeed there are substantial energy savings which could be made (with consequent reduction of emissions), I cannot help but feel that this is a matter which should be one for Member States rather than harmonised action at European Union level.

2016/11/22

Whilst I strongly support research and development of renewable energy, I remain unhappy about the direction of public policy. This proposal for the adoption of a ‘carbon budget’ for the European Union is a legislative one. We should be seeking primarily to research technology in order to ensure that renewables become cost-efficient and, therefore, in the interests of private companies to produce without the need for subsidy. Current policies incentivise energy-intensive industry being outsourced to non-EU countries with lower environmental standards. Current policy, taken at a global level, is far less effective at reducing emissions.I cannot support measures which seek more of the same, and EU-wide harmonisation of action which is not only expensive but also counterproductive.

2016/11/22

Although this is a recast of existing legislation, I feel that it is unhelpful as it continues to codify the wrong approach towards energy development. We should be seeking primarily to research technology in order to ensure that renewables become cost-efficient and, therefore, in the interests of private companies to produce without the need for subsidy. Current policies incentivise energy-intensive industry being outsourced to non-EU countries with lower environmental standards. Current policy, taken at a global level, is far less effective at reducing emissions.I cannot support measures which seek more of the same, and EU-wide harmonisation of action which is not only expensive but also counterproductive.

2016/11/22

In principle, I felt it was appropriate for me to abstain on the final vote because it was a matter which does not impact upon the United Kingdom post-Brexit. The European Union’s decisions concerning fishing arrangements in the Adriatic Sea after March 2019 are really not my concern as a UK MEP. That being said, I felt it important for me to cast an affirmative vote on a number of the amendments. Given that there are moves at EU level to force the UK to remain a part of the disastrous Common Fisheries Policy post-Brexit, I felt it important to vote for amendments 85, 86 and 87 which proposed an overall reduction of the regulatory burden. Nevertheless, I abstained on the final vote.

2016/11/22

There may well be reasoned criticisms of the Romanian Government which can be levelled. I do have certain concerns over press freedom and the independence of the judiciary in Romania. Had the resolution been confined to merely these issues, and been couched in appropriate language, I might well have voted differently.But, as ever, the resolution was not. It included, inter alia, criticism of policy decisions which should fall squarely within the purview of Member States, and a call for establishing a new EU pact on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights.I therefore voted against on the final resolution.

2016/11/22

I support equal rights for all under the law. I cannot support the following:1. Calls for the European Union to define what constitutes a minority;2. State-funded ‘anti-hate speech campaigns’; it seems to me that words of hatred should be fought in debate not by the State;3. EU interference in domestic policing to insist upon anti-hate crime units - such matters should be decided by Member States;4. The notion that the EU should dictate that taxpayers’ money should be spent funding NGOs working with minority communities, and5. EU interference in the independence of the mediaI therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

There is indeed reasonable concern that artificial intelligence and automation is already beginning to replace low- and medium-skilled jobs. To that extent, I agree with the rapporteur. Indeed, this is one of many causes of substantial unemployment in working-class communities in the United Kingdom. It is also true to say that digitalisation can have enormous economic benefits to a nation. Furthermore, it is reasonable to suggest that this might be one approach to lift developing countries out of poverty. I differ, though, in suggestions that the Commission should ‘assist’ sovereign countries with drafting legislation. I cannot support calls for further EU funding. Therefore, although there are elements of this report which I agree with, I felt it necessary to vote against the report as a whole.

2016/11/22

This is a legislative, first-reading report which is concerned with terrorist organisations profiting from selling cultural goods (any object which is important for archaeology, prehistory etc. and in this case is more than 250 years old). The initiative intends to stop such goods being imported and stored in the EU. Whilst trying to cut terrorist financing is a laudable goal, this report includes harmonisation of laws which have not previously been introduced at EU level with monitoring carried out by the Commission. I am particularly concerned about the lack of a firm evidence base for the report, the wide range of cultural goods to which the regulation would apply and the disproportionate burdens that I believe the regulation will place on Member States’ border and customs authorities and on legitimate importers. For these reasons, I voted against the proposals.

2016/11/22

I support the real concerns over taxpayers’ money being lost to fraud, but this report goes too far in calling for EU harmonisation and regrets bilateral agreements. Whilst supporting reasonable measures to combat fraud, I cannot support this effective power grab by the European Union to set standards, sign treaties and expand the purview of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

Whilst I can agree on some points underlined by the rapporteur (including a co-decision process, and issues surrounding the affordability of fees for vet industry), I already disagree with the content of the existing legislation on this issue.

2016/11/22

Whilst I agree we should be much more ambitious in measures countering and relating to antibacterial resistance, these decisions should rightly be taken by the Member States.

2016/11/22

This highly technical measure to allow medicines to be given to animals in their food updates an existing directive. The rapporteur has added amendments to improve what she considers to be poor Commission drafting and thinking. Moreover, the rapporteur seeks to loosen the over-restrictive Commission text, which should reduce complex, prescriptive EU red-tape.

2016/11/22

This report seeks further EU harmonisation in relation to charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures policy; accordingly, I voted against.

2016/11/22

The draft report underlines that the Union budgetary and financial policy after 2020 should take the promotion of clean and energy-efficient road transport into consideration and provide sufficient financial support for contracting authorities and contracting entities. The promotion of clean and energy-efficient road transport should, however, be within the remit of Member States. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

EU policy in the area of fishing has been disastrous, such policy-making should be left to Member States. The United Kingdom, post Brexit, must regain exclusive competence over our own fishing grounds, which provide a significant national resource and are currently being mismanaged by the European Union. Consequently, I voted against this report as a matter of principle.

2016/11/22

The process of deciding on the relocation to Paris (which at one point seems to have descended to drawing lots between the final candidates) is heavily criticised as having presented the Parliament with a fait accompli that has prevented it having any meaningful role (despite its responsibility as co-legislator). This is by definition a move that will happen after we leave the European Union. However, given that the intention is for a lengthy transition period once the UK leaves the European Union, there is no requirement for the Authority to be moved immediately.

2016/11/22

This is by definition a move that will happen after we leave the European Union. However, given that the intention is for a lengthy transition period once the UK leaves the European Union, there is no requirement for the Agency to be moved immediately.

2016/11/22

This resolution is 100% correct to point out the appalling and terrifying rise of extremism in Europe. I utterly reject the vile neo-Nazi and so-called far-right ideologies, and actions causing violence based upon those ideologies. For that reason, I would have liked very much to be able to vote in favour of this resolution. Indeed, I voted in favour of amendments along those lines.However, there are two reasons why I could not support the final joint motion for a resolution: 1. The rise in extremism is not limited to neo-Nazi and far-right organisations. We have seen also a rise in violence committed by far-left organisations, and in terrorist acts committed by those who seek to destroy our way of life. A resolution which condemns one, but not the other, is imbalanced and sends out the wrong message. We should condemn ALL violence; 2. The resolution calls for consolidated EU legislation. I cannot, in all conscience, agree with this. Recalling the UK’s vote to leave the European Union on June 23 2016, it would be profoundly undemocratic to call for further EU legislation on matters which the British people should rightly determine themselves. I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

This report seeks further EU harmonisation in relation to animal welfare, antimicrobial use and the environmental impact of industrial broiler farming; accordingly, I voted against.

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I voted against the proposal.

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I voted against the proposal.

2016/11/22

This own initiative report analyses the EU’s fiscal policies effect on social and employment standards. It supports the Structural Reform Support Programme (SRSP) which has a stated aim of ‘fostering economic and social convergence throughout the EU’. It also supports the EU’s country specific recommendations and justifies continued interference in the domestic policies of Member States. I therefore voted against the proposals.

2016/11/22

The resolution attacks Facebook over lack of cooperation with the EU and for a weak approach to data protection. It suggests that Facebook should include more information about political advertising on its platform, including who has paid for the advert, and offer users additional ‘opt-out’ options from targeted advertising. I do not object to this in principle, but I do object to the European Union insisting upon this change.The resolution makes firm suggestions that there was ‘foreign interference’ in the US presidential elections and the EU referendum and that more must be done to tackle this type of advertising. It goes beyond that which is reasonable or proportionate to conclude from the available data.It proposes that the Commission should regulate a Code of Conduct on ethical campaigning. Again, without objecting in principle, the European Union should not regulate it.Lastly, the report calls for the suspension of the EU-US Privacy Shield agreement which could cause major disruption for many businesses in the EU. Whilst the protection of citizens’ data is important, I cannot support a report which calls for the EU to legislate to regulate online platforms and to launch investigations into election interference. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I have serious concerns about the case of the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. I find the various stances of the Saudi Arabian Government over this killing to have been disingenuous and not credible.Where there might be much which I agree with in that report, I was unable to vote for the motion as a whole because the report contains so many further suggestions of action at EU level. I therefore abstained overall.

2016/11/22

I have serious concerns about the current political and military situation between Ukraine and Russia in this part of the world. Consequently, where there might be much which I agree with in that report, I was unable to vote for the motion as a whole because the report contains so many further suggestions of action at EU level. This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I voted against.

2016/11/22

I have serious concerns about the current political situation in Venezuela and the impact of far-left ideologies on its people. I very much recognise the impact which that situation is having upon the daily lives of its people and the suffering which has been caused. Consequently, there is much which I agree with in that report, but I am unable to vote for it because the report contains further suggestions of action at EU level. I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

This non-legislative resolution is based on an oral question to the Commission, regarding the harmonisation of diplomas across the EU, in order to facilitate better mobility of students. The oral question asks what mutual agreements are in place between Member States, and any obstacles that may hinder such. As well as calls for a coordination between the EU’s ‘European Education Area’ and the Council of Europe’s ‘European Higher Education Area’.The EHEA, is a voluntary group of 48 countries who facilitate ideas regarding education and assess compatibility, member countries include Norway, Russia and Armenia, the EU appear to be replicating this. As it can be done without EU involvement I voted against the proposal.

2016/11/22

This report seeks further EU interference and harmonisation, I accordingly voted against.

2016/11/22

This report seeks further EU interference and harmonisation, I accordingly voted against.

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I voted against. I am concerned by the nature of the ‘offence’ alleged, which appears to be merely a call for French people to have priority for social housing in France. This should not be a criminal matter.

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I voted against. I am concerned by the nature of the ‘offence’ alleged, which appears to be merely a call for French people to have priority for social housing in France. This should not be a criminal matter.

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I abstained on this matter. Whilst there is no direct link with the mandate, I am concerned that this appears to be treated as a criminal matter rather than a civil one.

2016/11/22

The Commission proposal for 2019 is to have the EU budget set at EUR 166 billion (a 3% increase on last year). The Council proposal in this debate is to set the 2019 EU budget at EUR 164.1 billion (a 2.09% increase on last year). I voted against the final resolution because I cannot support any increase in the budget of the European Union, especially considering that the British people have already voted to leave and expect to stop paying money to the EU altogether. I voted against any measures which would add to the European Union budget, because it would be completely contrary to the decision of the British people on Brexit. In some cases, the additions would duplicate funding streams which already exist directly from the UK Government to the British people.

2016/11/22

The Commission proposal for 2019 is to have the EU budget set at EUR 166 billion (a 3% increase on last year). The Council proposal in this debate is to set the 2019 EU budget at EUR 164.1 billion (a 2.09% increase on last year). I voted against the final resolution because I cannot support any increase in the budget of the European Union, especially considering that the British people have already voted to leave and expect to stop paying money to the EU altogether. I voted against any measures which would add to the European Union budget, because it would be completely contrary to the decision of the British people on Brexit. In some cases, the additions would duplicate funding streams which already exist directly from the UK Government to the British people.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. This vote was to refuse discharge to the Council, and rightly so: it is appropriate that institutions spending taxpayers’ money should be subject to a full audit. Consequently, I voted in favour of the refusal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The report by the Committee on Regional Development seeks to reject the Commission proposal. This vote was on the Commission proposal rather than the Committee report, and I voted against the Commission proposal.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This being a technical update, I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only a tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This being a technical update, I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only a tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This being a technical update, I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only a tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I supported various amendments throughout this report. Some of them, including clarifying the position of balloons and balloon sticks which could potentially have been included within the scope of the SUP (single use plastics) directive, were of significant importance to small businesses.There is a genuine concern about overuse of plastics: plastic is responsible for 85% of marine pollution; by 2050 by some estimates, there will be more plastic than fish in the oceans.I believe that much more must be done for the recycling of plastics. However, setting up a ‘single market’ for recycled plastics or outright banning of products is not the answer – domestic legislation and targets is better. Furthermore, I believe that in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, Member States should set their own laws. This being legislative rather than non-legislative, I therefore voted against on the final vote.

2016/11/22

I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only a tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only a tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only a tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

I profoundly disagree with the principle of tax and excise harmonisation across the European Union. Consequently, I voted against.

2016/11/22

Whilst I normally on principle would support objections pursuant to Rule 106, I am concerned in this case about the impact which that would have upon the UK, and am receiving mixed advice as to whether there exist reasonable concerns about the particular variant mentioned. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

Whilst I normally on principle would support objections pursuant to Rule 106, I am concerned in this case about the impact which that would have upon the UK, and am receiving mixed advice as to whether there exist reasonable concerns about the particular variant mentioned. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms whereby decisions have been taken. I have always attempted to take a consistent approach to discharge – supporting any amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system (in this case there were none), and which remove politicised language. Consequently, on the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against the proposal to grant discharge.

2016/11/22

The waiver of Parliamentary immunity is not generally subject to a roll-call vote in the European Parliament. I feel that in all cases, it is appropriate to the interests of transparency and democracy that I should at the very least state how I voted as a matter of public record.I do not believe that defamation should be the subject of criminal proceedings. Nevertheless, it is not fully clear to me that the matters complained of relate to Alfonso Marra’s parliamentary duties; I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

The waiver of parliamentary immunity is not generally subject to a roll-call vote in the European Parliament. I feel that, in all cases, it is appropriate to the interests of transparency and democracy that I should at the very least state how I voted as a matter of public record.In this case, I felt that there were two conflicting questions. Firstly, the principle of fumus persecutionis. I have insufficient information to be persuaded, solely upon the basis of the JURI committee report, that this is present. Nevertheless, there appear to be questions which should be answered. Secondly, I am concerned that the public perception of justice would demand that an MEP accused of substantial fraud should result in a hearing.

2016/11/22

My principal objection is to the principle of using the self-amending powers of the Treaties under Article 352 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, rather than to the electronic publication per se. To utilise these powers sets a dangerous precedent for democracy; therefore, I voted against.

2016/11/22

This is a technical legislative report concluding short-stay visa waiver agreements. I would usually abstain on such matters, however, with the Schengen free zone; it is very easy for third country nationals to illegally stay longer than permitted. Whilst the United Kingdom is not a member of the Schengen Area, this does (for example as regards illegal immigration and trafficking) have a certain impact upon the UK. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This is a technical legislative report concluding short-stay visa waiver agreements. I would usually abstain on such matters, however, with the Schengen free zone; it is very easy for third country nationals to illegally stay longer than permitted. Whilst the United Kingdom is not a member of the Schengen Area, this does (for example as regards illegal immigration and trafficking) have a certain impact upon the UK. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This is a technical legislative report concluding short-stay visa waiver agreements. I would usually abstain on such matters, however, with the Schengen free zone; it is very easy for third country nationals to illegally stay longer than permitted. Whilst the United Kingdom is not a member of the Schengen Area, this does (for example as regards illegal immigration and trafficking) have a certain impact upon the UK. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This is a technical legislative report concluding short-stay visa waiver agreements. I would usually abstain on such matters. However, with the Schengen free zone, it is very easy for third-country nationals to illegally stay longer than permitted. Whilst the United Kingdom is not a member of the Schengen Area, this does (for example as regards illegal immigration and trafficking) have a certain impact upon the UK. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This is a technical legislative report concluding short-stay visa waiver agreements. I would usually abstain on such matters, however, with the Schengen free zone; it is very easy for third country nationals to illegally stay longer than permitted. Whilst the United Kingdom is not a member of the Schengen Area, this does (for example as regards illegal immigration and trafficking) have a certain impact upon the UK. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This is a technical legislative report concluding short-stay visa waiver agreements. I would usually abstain on such matters, however, with the Schengen free zone; it is very easy for third country nationals to illegally stay longer than permitted. Whilst the United Kingdom is not a member of the Schengen Area, this does (for example as regards illegal immigration and trafficking) have a certain impact upon the UK. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The principle of subsidiarity dictates that decisions should be taken at the closest possible level to the citizen – in this case, at regional or national level. Therefore, these projects should not be funded by the European Union. It is absurd that the arbiters of whether this funding should, or should not, be given are Members of the European Parliament with no detailed knowledge of the situation. This project may well be of benefit to the people of Portugal, but I am not best placed to judge. The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund should be scrapped, which would give money back to the Member States to decide for themselves about the appropriateness of such funding. Consequently, I had no option but to vote against – even though this may be a worthwhile project.

2016/11/22

I understand that access to high quality drinking water is of the utmost importance to citizens in their daily lives. I note that the Commission proposal was approved by 300 votes to 98, with a huge 274 abstentions. This reflects, in my view, serious problems with the Commission proposal. I voted on amendments in such a way as to seek to improve the text, then voted against the final text. I believe that, in general, water policy should be set by sovereign nation states. There may indeed be cross-border issues where supply crosses national boundaries, but that does not - in and of itself - imply the necessity of a single policy to cover 28 different nations. It merely suggests that bilateral co-operation between nation states (whether members of the EU or not) may be necessary.

2016/11/22

This report seeks to amend existing legislation and wishes to adapt the amount of resources available for the ‘investment for growth and jobs’ goal and for the European territorial cooperation goal. It would like to ‘front load’ funding from 2020 to 2018 amounting to EUR 116.7 million. This does not seem to me to be an appropriate means of redistributing taxpayers’ money; accordingly, I voted against.

2016/11/22

This report seeks further EU harmonisation in relation to reporting obligations in the field of environment policy; accordingly, I voted against.

2016/11/22

I very much approve of employee participation in the running of private companies. However, there are two questions:1. Should the State mandate such participation, and2. Even if such action should be taken, is it appropriate for that to be done at European Union level?I believe the answer to both questions should be ‘No’; government should seek to avoid interference with private companies wherever possible, and subsidiarity dictates that such decisions should be national. This report calls for an EU legislative initiative designed to create jobs and decrease unemployment, including interference with tax policy. I therefore had little choice but to vote against.

2016/11/22

I do not believe in the principle that public procurement rules should be harmonised across 28 nations. Consequently, it was consistent with this principle – and the mandate given by the people in the 2016 British EU referendum – for me to vote against.

2016/11/22

Being opposed to the principle of Eurojust (cross-border matters should be dealt with by agreements amongst Sovereign States, not the European Union), I voted against this report.

2016/11/22

Whilst I agree that freezing and confiscation of instrumentalities and proceeds of crime is important in fighting against organised crime, I believe that such measures should be employed at Member State level. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

Such matters should be determined through bilateral agreements between independent sovereign nations. It would be inconsistent with the principles upon which I was elected, and indeed with the EU referendum result in the UK, for me to do anything other than vote against.

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I abstained on the Committee and political group amendments, which broadly speaking overall did not appear to make the overall EU position either better or worse.

2016/11/22

I have serious concerns about the current political and military situation in Yemen and recognise the impact which that situation is having upon the daily lives of its people. Consequently there is much which I agree with in that report, but I was unable to vote for the motion as a whole because the report contains so many further suggestions of action at EU level. This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I abstained.

2016/11/22

Whilst I am supportive of the principle of fighting customs fraud, I have three concerns: the UK should not be subject to these systems post-Brexit. There is a huge risk of creating additional bureaucracy through these measures, particularly in terms of the procedures which it requires Member States to follow when dealing with each other. The report fails to address the structural failings of the system.I therefore felt it appropriate to vote against the final resolution.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This report calls for the creation of a single EU VAT area. As an MEP elected on a platform of withdrawal from the European Union, I cannot support measures which propose further EU harmonisation. Sovereign states should have the freedom to set their own VAT rates. The UK should not be subject to these systems post-Brexit.

2016/11/22

These mechanisms provided a time-limited tool for Member States to combat fraud. Nation states should have such powers; the EU ought to respect Member States’ tax sovereignty, including their right to set their own VAT rates.I supported the principle of extending the period of application, but disagree with the fundamental premise behind these matters being harmonised at EU level. I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

Whilst this report could potentially introduce a new regulatory burden, it also proposes technological updates to collection of customs and excise duties. This direction of travel could potentially be helpful when it comes to discussions on Northern Ireland’s border post-Brexit. On reflection, I felt the ‘best fit’ approach was to abstain on the final vote.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Decisions relating to health technology assessment are best left to Member States. Indeed, EU-level co-ordination can often create a significant bureaucratic barrier to the development of new technology. Whilst I support cooperation between Member States, I cannot support EU directives imposing new regulatory requirements. I felt it important to vote on the amendments in a manner which would provide more freedom to patients’ representatives before voting against on the final vote.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I believe this is a matter which should be legislated for at national level. Furthermore, given that the UK has voted to leave the European Union, it would be wrong for me to support further EU legislation on this matter.

2016/11/22

I cannot support measures which propose further EU harmonisation; rates of Value Added Tax should be set by Member States, and I voted accordingly on the amendments. The UK should not be subject to these systems post-Brexit.

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I voted against the proposal.

2016/11/22

Distributed ledger technologies (DLTs) and blockchains have the potential to improve and innovate in many sectors including finance, education, healthcare and public infrastructure. I welcome the report’s positivity and that it underlines that the Union should not regulate DLT per se.However, I note that the report also calls on the Commission to undertake initiatives for the education of citizens regarding the technology, policy initiatives and to assess and develop a European legal framework in order to solve any jurisdictional problems. I cannot support this. The matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that, because of the calls for Commission action and subsequent spending, I voted against the report.

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I voted against the motion.

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would like to confirm that I abstained on this matter.

2016/11/22

This being a technical codification which will, in any event, not impact upon the United Kingdom directly, I felt it appropriate to abstain although there are elements which I disagree with. Specifically, I am concerned by the change to Article 7(f) to refer to Article 10(7) rather than Article 10(5), which could lead to less consultation with Member States. Overall, though, as the UK will be leaving the European Union and setting its own visa requirements, an abstention felt appropriate.

2016/11/22

Although I am in favour of the principle of scientific and technological co-operation between the United Kingdom and Morocco, I voted against because:1. The financial budgetary implications are inconsistent with the UK referendum result;2. After the UK leaves the European Union, budgetary implications will continue to the extent that the UK continues to participate in Horizon2020;3. Such partnerships should not be arbitrarily established by the European Commission.

2016/11/22

This being a minor technical update, permitting the extension of EU Customs territory to two Italian enclaves within Switzerland, I considered an abstention to be appropriate.

2016/11/22

The principle of subsidiarity dictates that decisions should be taken at the closest possible level to the citizen – in this case, at regional or national level. Therefore, these projects should not be funded by the European Union. It is absurd that the arbiters of whether this funding should, or should not, be given are Members of the European Parliament with no detailed knowledge of the situation. This project may well be of benefit to the people of the Netherlands, but I am not best placed to judge. The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund should be scrapped, which would give money back to the Member States to decide for themselves about the appropriateness of such funding. Consequently, I had no option but to vote against – even though this may be a worthwhile project.

2016/11/22

I note that this is a particularly wide-reaching piece of legislation, which will apply to video-sharing platforms and social media services as well as to traditional audiovisual media. It extends advertising bans from cigarettes to e-cigarettes, which is of questionable benefit: there is a solid case which can be made that e-cigarettes reduce the use of more harmful traditional cigarettes. The principle of a mandatory quota of European works within any on-demand service is economic protectionism. Furthermore, decisions about when adverts can be screened on TV should surely be subject to the principle of subsidiarity. For these reasons, and in order to respect the UK’s vote to leave the European Union, I voted against.

2016/11/22

I agree with the principle that Turkey has failed to meet appropriate standards on the rule of law, human rights and democracy. It makes sense for EU pre-accession funding to Turkey to be withdrawn for that reason alone. Regardless, I do not support such funding in principle. Therefore, I would normally support a proposal to remove those commitments and payments from this year’s budget. However, that is not the full story. This Draft Amending Budget did not seek to return the balance to Member States, but to provide additional funding to other EU projects. Consequently, I abstained overall.

2016/11/22

Being opposed to the principle of Eurojust (cross-border matters should be dealt with by agreements amongst sovereign states, not the European Union), I voted against this report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Whilst the General Data Protection Regulation has had a profoundly negative effect upon businesses in the UK, with little tangible gain, this particular report requires EU institutions to protect citizens’ data which they hold. Naturally, I would prefer the EU institutions to hold less data on British citizens but, given that they do hold such data, I cannot oppose the principle of more stringent controls. I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The Single Digital Gateway has an initial estimated implementation cost of EUR 109 million, plus further costs of EUR 8 million per annum. I voted against.

2016/11/22

I believe that visa policy should be for Member States to determine; accordingly, I voted against.

2016/11/22

The Attica region of Greece recently faced devastating wildfires, resulting in the tragic loss of 98 human lives, with hundreds injured, and thousands made homeless. I welcome the Greek government’s announced package of measures designed to alleviate distress and repair the material damage; whereas a judicial investigation into possible faults by state officials and the causes of the devastating fires in Attica is under way. I supported some amendments which were critical of the EU’s handling of the Greek economy. The full report was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would therefore like to confirm that I abstained on the final vote.

2016/11/22

The vote on the threat of demolition of Khan Al-Ahmar and other Bedouin villages was not the subject of a roll-call vote. I do not believe that the resolution provides a workable solution to the issues raised, and therefore in the interests of democracy and transparency I confirm that I voted against this resolution.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I believe that much more must be done for the recycling of plastics. However, the report’s suggestion of a ‘single market’ for recycled plastics is not the answer – better domestic legislation is. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

The full report was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would therefore like to confirm that I voted against on the final vote. Whilst the principles of the report do indeed need to be addressed, they should be addressed by Member States themselves not at European Union level.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This report is, broadly speaking, scientifically sound. I do not wish to oppose good science, and therefore I abstained rather than voting against it. However, where multinational cooperation on antimicrobial resistance is necessary, the appropriate vehicle for that is the World Health Organisation. This is an own-initiative report which has no legislative force.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I opposed this own-initiative report because it calls for EU-level taxpayer subsidy of industry.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This report seeks further EU harmonisation in relation to plant-based products: accordingly, I voted against on the final vote.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This report seeks further EU harmonisation of goods within the single market. Accordingly, I voted against on the final vote.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Japan seeks to export shochu to the European Union under their free trade agreement. Historically and traditionally, this product is served in bottles of 720 ml. Therefore, an exemption to the usual bottle sizes is being sought. Whilst I recognise the value of the exemption, the bureaucratic nature of this situation demonstrates the issues caused by over-legislation at European Union level. Something has gone seriously awry with the principle of subsidiarity if selling goods in 720 ml bottles, rather than 700 ml, requires Member States to seek EU permission.

2016/11/22

In 2011, the European Union and the United States of America signed the Memorandum of Cooperation in civil aviation research and development. Such activities have, to date, addressed mainly air traffic management systems. This is an extension of that cooperation. I do not necessarily disagree with the principle, and it should make aviation somewhat easier, though I do question the basis upon which the agreement is being concluded. I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This being the conclusion of the Air Transport Agreement between Canada and the EU following the accession of the Republic of Croatia, it is little more than a technical update to existing legislation. Under such circumstances, it appears appropriate for me to abstain.

2016/11/22

This legislative first reading seeks additional controls on cash entering or leaving the EU in a bid to combat terrorism and serious organised crime. The principle is one of harmonisation: the EU wishes to legislate on such matters rather than letting Member States make their own decisions. This creates odd situations with seemingly-arbitrary limits for non-eurozone countries. It fails to account for disparities in income between EU Member States. Nor does it permit Member States the flexibility to respond appropriately to threats in a timely fashion through their own legislation. For these reasons, I voted against.

2016/11/22

This legislative report seeks to harmonise criminal law across the EU in relation to money laundering. Although the goal is laudable, the principle of undermining national sovereignty is not. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This non-legislative report is heavily and directly critical of the Trump regime. I myself often have criticisms of Donald Trump’s policies, but those criticisms are reasoned and proportionate. Furthermore, my criticisms are levelled as an individual MEP not on behalf of an organisation or institution such as the European Parliament. It is fundamentally wrong for the Parliament to take aim at an elected Head of State in this way. By all means, we should as individuals criticise Donald Trump when he is wrong – but the nature of this report associates the Parliament with such criticisms. The report takes those criticisms to an extreme in a number of areas, and thereby loses any semblance of balance or sense of authority. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

It is interesting to note that this report is less critical of a non-democratic Chinese regime than the previous report was of the democratic United States of America. This creates certain red flags about the proportionality of the European Parliament’s reports, political response and respect for democracy. In this report, the importance of relations between the EU and China is reiterated. I do not object to that, though I would rather see greater focus upon nation states. The report further comments upon certain internal Chinese security issues.However, it also proposes further EU strategic autonomy which would necessitate loss of national sovereignty. On that basis, I had little choice but to vote against.

2016/11/22

I am concerned that this legislation, on equivalence of field inspections, could lead to increased bureaucracy. Furthermore, the UK has voted to leave the European Union and consequently the Common Agricultural Policy. It seems in keeping with those principles to oppose this, because it is likely to come into force before Brexit. That being said, I do not oppose the principle of permitting the import of foreign seed. It should merely be a decision for the UK sovereign Parliament to take.

2016/11/22

Although I object to the increased burden of European Union legislation especially in light of the UK referendum result, there is some potential that this could lead to reduced costs for small businesses through the simplification of reporting standards. It is, perhaps, unlikely that this will have any pre—Brexit impact however. On balance, therefore, I abstained.

2016/11/22

I believe that the British Government should subject new psychoactive substances, in this case certain synthetic opioids, to control measures. This should be a national government decision, however, rather than a decision being taken for us by the European Union. Supporting the principle, but not the mechanism, I felt it was appropriate for me to abstain.

2016/11/22

I previously opposed the principle of setting up the Solidarity Fund, and of including that Fund within the general budget of the European Union because I believe that such matters are better handled by national governments rather than administered remotely by the European Union. However, this fund already having been established, and the money already being available, I then abstained upon the application of that fund. I do not object to the specific cause to which this money is being put, merely to the principle of the creation of the fund and the mechanisms by which it is applied.

2016/11/22

This vote relates to the specific changes to the budget lines regarding the Solidarity Fund; it seems consistent with my principles to vote against this as the Fund itself is an inefficient means of providing support.

2016/11/22

The Good Friday Agreement was between the British government, the Irish government, and the people of Northern Ireland. Whilst the European Union has been broadly supportive of the peace process, I am concerned that the European Union’s attitude towards Brexit has risked destabilising that Agreement.

2016/11/22

I believe that this report fails to understand the nature of EU-imposed austerity and the consequences of EU policies for the people of Greece. What is needed is not more European Union interference, but less. Whilst the underlying cause of economic problems in Greece is not the European Union, European Union rules leave Greece unable to devalue its currency and to boost competitiveness.

2016/11/22

This matter should not be determined at European Union level. Member States are perfectly capable of setting their own policies for the reintegration of workers recovering from injury into the workforce. Consequently, this report fails to respect the principle of subsidiarity. I voted against for that reason.

2016/11/22

This report provided an opportunity for the European Parliament to propose mutual recognition of standards between the UK and the EU following Brexit. That opportunity was missed, instead preferring to insist upon equivalence of regulation which would bind the UK’s policies for the foreseeable future after Brexit. The potential impact on UK sovereignty is such that I felt compelled to vote against.

2016/11/22

Once again, this is a question which should be determined by nation states and not by the European Union. The management of borders, and boosting growth in border regions, is properly a matter for domestic legislation rather than European Union.

2016/11/22

I oppose the principle of taxpayers’ money being spent on the EU Solidarity Corps, especially given that the amount is as high as EUR 341.5 million. It is likely to become a further vehicle for pro-EU propaganda to be disseminated, particularly amongst young people in the European Union. Regardless of this, it is consistent with the UK referendum result to vote against the spending of additional taxpayers’ money.

2016/11/22

I supported the rejection amendment to the Structural Reform Support Programme financial envelope on general principle, but specifically also because the Provisional Agreement seeks to increase funding to help non-euro countries to join the euro. The euro has been far from an economic and monetary success, and European taxpayers’ money should not be spent on supporting its expansion.

2016/11/22

I do not oppose nuclear power in principle. However, I do not seek a massive expansion in the use of nuclear power either. Decisions should be taken based upon a variety of factors, including cost and environmental impact. I note that nuclear is a much lower—carbon option than others, and that the levels of safety have increased dramatically in recent years. However, it is not quite as cost effective as it once was. Renewable technologies should be supported, but the key is not to introduce technologies before they have been made cost effective. We should focus upon research to ensure that cheap, sustainable, renewable energy is possible. Once this succeeds, market forces will then – without further subsidy being needed – ensure that renewable technologies replace older technologies for economic reasons. Attempts to establish an EU roadmap would continue to take energy policy down a cul—de—sac. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I would have liked to abstain on the own-initiative report on measures to combat mobbing and sexual harassment. I support such measures, yet oppose the principle that this should be done at EU level. The UK already has some of the highest standards in this respect, and standards must continue to improve. However, whilst voting it became clear that the Parliament was voting in favour of new EU legislation on the subject - violating the principle of subsidiarity. It voted in favour of gender discrimination through suggestions that Parliamentary lists should be chosen on the basis of gender rather than ability. It further sought to interfere in the policies of Member States. I therefore, reluctantly, voted against the report because I could not support the principles described.

2016/11/22

I am a strong supporter of the diversity of languages. However, the European Union seeks to centralise and ensure that this is done at taxpayers’ expense. Yet this is not appropriate: nations and regions where diverse languages are spoken should themselves know best how to promote those languages. This is a classic case of EU interference where it is not merited, and therefore I voted against.

2016/11/22

Whilst I strongly support the better management of forests in developing countries, this seeks further harmonisation at European Union level and seek to introduce the possibility of sanctions into free trade agreements with those countries. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I have huge concerns about the proposed directive on copyright, in particular focusing on Article 11 (described by opponents as a ‘link tax’), which would force online platforms to buy licences from media companies before linking to their stories, and Article 13 (an ‘upload filter’), which would require everything uploaded to certain platforms in the EU to be checked for copyright infringement.The policing of such vast quantities of content could only be achieved via automation. Crawling bots lack the discernment to be able to correctly identify fair-use exemptions (e.g. memes, parodies, etc.) and thus the proposed legislation will lead to content being wrongly taken down. This will have negative consequences on both creative expression and overall internet freedom. Typically for the EU, these changes will also benefit tech giants at the expense of small business: the cost of self-policing can easily be subsumed into a multi-national, multi-billion pound company; it is a huge deterrent to a small business. I therefore had no choice but to vote against these proposals.

2016/11/22

The European Citizens’ Initiative pays lip-service to the concept of wider public involvement in the EU institutions. The concept of the European Union itself is rather remote from the citizens of Europe. This proposal appears to water down, rather than strengthen, the involvement of citizens in these processes. Consequently, I felt obliged to vote against.

2016/11/22

This being a technical update, I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only a tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

This proposal concerns the amendment of financial rules governing the use of EU funding. It is a particularly complex piece of legislation. I note as follows:1. The United Kingdom is due to leave the European Union in March 2019;2. It is therefore unlikely that there will be any particular budgetary impact in respect of the United Kingdom;3. Some of the proposals may well simplify bureaucracy, accountability, and checks on EU spending;4. There is some element of harmonisation, but this is unlikely to impact upon the UK.On balance, it is difficult to be certain whether the new rules will make matters better or worse. As they do not apply to the UK anyway, I felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

This report seeks to establish a European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS), which is largely a replica of the US ESTA visa system and the current UK visa scheme. It seeks to ensure that all third country nationals will need to apply for travel authorisation into the Schengen Area prior to travelling to the area.As the UK is not part of the Schengen Area this is not directly applicable, but it will of course impact on UK citizens in the future who wish to travel to the Schengen Area. It will also cost EUR 200 million and is, of course, further EU harmonisation of its border policy. This ultimately involves UK taxpayers’ money being used to fund a project for the benefit of the Schengen Area. Additionally, the UK after Brexit will be a ‘third country’, which will require UK citizens to provide this biometric data to EU databases. It is also highly likely that the applicant will eventually fund such an operation. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This report focuses on the Europol aspects of the European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS). The regulation will necessitate additional powers for Europol, which is as an institution far too unaccountable.As the UK is not part of the Schengen Area this is not directly applicable, but it will of course impact on UK citizens in the future who wish to travel to the Schengen Area. It will also cost EUR 200 million and is, of course, further EU harmonisation of its border policy. This ultimately involves UK taxpayers’ money being used to fund a project for the benefit of the Schengen Area. Additionally, the UK after Brexit will be a ‘third country’, which will require UK citizens to provide this biometric data to EU databases. It is also highly likely that the applicant will eventually fund such an operation. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I voted against this report for two reasons: harmonisation, and budgetary impact. This legislation seeks to facilitate other legislation arising from the migration crisis, notably changes to the EU’s external border management and the rise in data exchanges and data protection. The agency’s new mandate will allow it to establish new systems such as the European Search Portal and a Common Identity Repository. The enhanced mandate will cost the taxpayer approximately EUR 78 million. This is a further strengthening of the powers of an EU agency, taking away the responsibility of Member States to manage their own IT systems.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I voted against the resolution primarily because I cannot support an increased EU budget for 2019, but also because I believe Parliament’s spending priorities are wrong. To do otherwise would fail to respect the fact that the British people have already voted to leave the European Union and should reasonably expect budgetary contributions to cease at that point. This report is to approve Parliament’s negotiating position to take to the Council regarding the EU budget 2019.The Commission proposal is to set the EU budget at EUR 165.6 billion for 2019, which starts the budgetary process. The report welcomes the 3.1% increase in the EU budget. It supports increased funding across various policy areas, supports the Juncker investment plan, supports the commitment for an EU defence agenda, supports target of 20% of the EU budget being used for climate spending, welcomes the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and the European Labour Authority, believes that the 5% staff reduction target has been achieved and there is no need to continue this policy.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This resolution sets out Parliament’s recommendations to the Council on Parliament’s proposed priorities for the upcoming session of the UN General Assembly. This coordination and participation limits the exercise of an independent foreign policy for the Member States, especially the UK and France. Article 34 obliges Member States to represent the EU and common interests on bodies where either the EU or not all Member States are not represented. When the Council comes up with a position we have to represent it at the UNSC and are even forced to request that the VP/HR be invited by the UNSC to present the EU’s position. Article 24(3) forces us to ‘comply’ with EU action and to refrain from positions that go against EU interests, with the Council and the VP/HR having power to ensure compliance.The report suggests several recommendations to which I object; a call for reform of the UN Security Council, a UN Security Council seat for the EU and for a legal definition for climate refugees/migrants. This is an attempt to transfer competence from Member States to the European Union: that runs contrary to the democratic mandate upon which I was elected; I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

The economic crisis brought about by the failed Socialist economic policies of successive regimes, despite the country’s rich reserves of natural resources, has resulted in a humanitarian crisis and the government continues to refuse outside aid. The EU has imposed targeted sanctions consisting of travel bans and asset freezes on 11 officials in retaliation to the re-election of Maduro, which has been contested as neither free nor fair. The opposition boycotted the elections following the barring of their most popular candidates and a crackdown on several opposition parties. The report should be far more critical of the Maduro regime; I voted against.

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. I voted against the final report, because in essence it represents the European Union seeking additional power to reduce the sovereignty of Member States concerning their own borders. Humanitarian assistance, of course, should not be criminalised. But assistance which refers not to humanitarian concerns but an illegal act should not be defined as humanitarian assistance. This report, in effect, conflates the two. I abstained on the ENF roll-call vote which exchanged one piece of bad text with another, the latter being irrelevant to the question.Furthermore, I am concerned that this resolution is specifically aimed at Hungary. This is, perhaps, not completely appropriate.

2016/11/22

Whilst being in favour of appropriate data exchange where necessary for reasons of security, I believe that such matters should be determined by national governments, not the European Union. The report, although correctly critical of the lack of safeguards in certain areas, is particularly EU-centric and overly demanding of the US Government. Overall I felt it appropriate to vote against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ There are genuine concerns about the FATCA legislation in the United States, because it is one of the only countries in the world which taxes those living and working abroad. Had the report highlighted only this, I would have been more amenable to it. Fundamentally, though, it is not appropriate for the European Union to tell the USA what its own policy should be.

2016/11/22

The report calls on the Commission to introduce a ‘European social label’ which should be available for organisations that satisfy a set of legal requirements, regardless of the legal form of their incorporation in a Member State, and that label should be optional for the undertaking. The financial implications of the request proposal are to be covered by the EU and the Member States. As an MEP elected upon a platform of withdrawal from the European Union, I cannot support measures which propose substantial further EU harmonisation and an increase in EU spending.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is a legislative, first reading report about the Structural Reform Support Programme, amending an existing Regulation. The programme aims to support Member States to improve their administration and structures so that they use EU funds more efficiently. The report wishes to add support to this legislation in order to help non-euro countries join the euro. In addition, as this new use of the funds has been added, along with increased requests for support from Member States, there is a request to have funds increased to a ‘sufficient level’. I cannot support any programme that aims to use taxpayers’ money to help nations adopt the disastrous euro, nor could I support calls for increased spending. Consequently I voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This recommendation will allow citizens to be more aware of the link between the national parties and candidates running in the elections and their affiliation with a European political party. This proposal may open the door for European issues to gradually replace national ones in the debate on European elections. As I respect the sovereignty of national governments, I felt it wise to vote against this proposal.I did consider an abstention on the grounds that this should not affect the United Kingdom as the UK is due to have left the European Union before the next European elections. However, given recent attempts by Remain politicians to water down or reverse Brexit – and given the fundamental importance of this issue – I ultimately felt it appropriate to cast a vote on this issue.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is Parliament’s consent to the ratification of an agreement signed between Armenia, the EU and the European Atomic Energy Community aimed at strengthening political relations between the EU and Armenia. I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is Parliament’s consent to the ratification of an agreement signed between Armenia, the EU and the European Atomic Energy Community aimed at strengthening political relations between the EU and Armenia. I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Parliament is being asked to give its consent to the ratification of an agreement signed between Iraq and the EU. It aims at improving the political dialogue between the two and providing a legal framework governing relations. I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Parliament is being asked to give its consent to the ratification of an agreement signed between Iraq and the EU. It aims at improving the political dialogue between the two and providing a legal framework governing relations. I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is a technical update reflecting Croatia’s accession to the European Union. I consistently abstain on such technical updates.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I oppose further EU control of clearing and payment systems.

2016/11/22

The public in the United Kingdom has been consistently opposed to the principle of distance-based road charging. Whilst this particular proposal impacts upon heavy goods vehicles only, the danger for this to be extended to private vehicles at a later date is clear. Any form of such road pricing will require, in some way, additional intrusion and monitoring. The cost of compliance is likely to be borne by the operators, and inevitably there exists a danger of additional taxation causing loss of competitiveness and higher prices in countries like the United Kingdom which do not generally operate a system of road tolls in the first place.Whilst the report does state that there should be some flexibility, this is not an own-initiative report: it is based upon a Commission proposal. I felt it was more important to vote on the principle of the proposal and to oppose this measure.

2016/11/22

This proposal is to transfer EUR 555 542 325 left over from the 2017 budget in to the 2018 budget. However it states that this will mean contributions from Member States will be reduced by this much. Whilst I have no political support for the EU budget, the proposal itself will mean a reduction in the amounts which the UK has to pay to the EU. Accordingly, I voted in favour.

2016/11/22

This proposal is to transfer an extra EUR 500 million to the Facility for refugees in Turkey. Believing that such matters should be determined by the Member States themselves, I voted against.

2016/11/22

This vote was an objection pursuant to Rule 105 against making Iran eligible for support from the European Investment Bank. Apart from my usual position of opposing any extension of the EIB mandate, I oppose delegated powers in principle as they go through very little democratic scrutiny. Additionally the EU should not be supporting the Iran regime and causing further diplomatic and trading problems with the USA.

2016/11/22

This report considers the issue of forced and underage marriage globally and its impact within the EU Member States, both in terms of illegal cases on member state territory and the marriages of migrants taking place outside of their legal jurisdiction. I did not feel comfortable with a vote against, on the grounds that this is a hugely important issue which should be considered by all nations and which does require a strong and robust response by Member States. It was also non-legislative in character. However, ultimately this matter should be determined by the nation states themselves rather than through one-size-fits-all EU legislation, and therefore I abstained.

2016/11/22

Small and medium sized enterprises account for 99% of European enterprises, providing over 90 million jobs and generating EUR 3.9 trillion in value added. SMEs remain disproportionately affected by administrative and regulatory burdens and must deal with challenging conditions including market failures. As the EU is no friend of SMEs, I voted against the potential for further bureaucracy that could stem from an EU definition.

2016/11/22

Although I oppose the development and promotion of EU foreign policy, I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

Throughout this report, I supported amendments which aimed to limit the impact of the proposals on drivers and transport companies as I believe that (as written) the proposals would have caused more issues and compliance problems. Needless to say, I do not support harmonisation of this matter at European Union level, so I ultimately voted against the Commission proposal.

2016/11/22

I believe that this is a matter which should be legislated on at national level. Furthermore, given that the UK has voted to leave the European Union, it would be wrong for me to support further EU legislation.

2016/11/22

As with the previous votes, some of the amendments served to make the legislation less bad and I felt comfortable supporting those amendments. However, I note that cabotage has less impact upon the United Kingdom than it does on some other Member States. The principle, though, of national sovereignty should always be a strong one. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This is one of a series of non-legislative own initiative reports which provides an opinion on the Commission’s proposal to begin negotiations on an agreement with a variety of third countries for the purpose of exchanging personal data to tackle serious crime and terrorism. Many of the reports highlight the lack of an impact assessment from the Commission on the risks posed by transfers of personal data to these countries. Many of the reports also highlight that these countries, currently, do not have the data protection standards required to handle and exchange data, which is why I ultimately voted against the resolution.

2016/11/22

This is one of a series of non-legislative own initiative reports which provides an opinion on the Commission’s proposal to begin negotiations on an agreement with a variety of third countries for the purpose of exchanging personal data to tackle serious crime and terrorism. Many of the reports highlight the lack of an impact assessment from the Commission on the risks posed by transfers of personal data to these countries. Many of the reports also highlight that these countries, currently, do not have the data protection standards required to handle and exchange data, which is why I ultimately voted against the resolution.

2016/11/22

This is one of a series of non-legislative own-initiative reports which provide an opinion on the Commission’s proposal to begin negotiations on an agreement with a variety of third countries for the purpose of exchanging personal data to tackle serious crime and terrorism. Many of the reports highlight the lack of an impact assessment from the Commission on the risks posed by transfers of personal data to these countries. Many of the reports also highlight that these countries, currently, do not have the data protection standards required to handle and exchange data, which is why I ultimately voted against the resolution.

2016/11/22

This is one of a series of non-legislative own-initiative reports which provides an opinion on the Commission’s proposal to begin negotiations on an agreement with a variety of third countries for the purpose of exchanging personal data to tackle serious crime and terrorism. Many of the reports highlight the lack of an impact assessment from the Commission on the risks posed by transfers of personal data to these countries. Many of the reports also highlight that these countries, currently, do not have the data protection standards required to handle and exchange data, which is why I ultimately voted against the resolution.

2016/11/22

This is one of a series of non-legislative own initiative reports which provides an opinion on the Commission’s proposal to begin negotiations on an agreement with a variety of third countries for the purpose of exchanging personal data to tackle serious crime and terrorism. Many of the reports highlight the lack of an impact assessment from the Commission on the risks posed by transfers of personal data to these countries. Many of the reports also highlight that these countries, currently, do not have the data protection standards required to handle and exchange data, which is why I ultimately voted against the resolution.

2016/11/22

This is one of a series of non-legislative own-initiative reports which provides an opinion on the Commission’s proposal to begin negotiations on an agreement with a variety of third countries for the purpose of exchanging personal data to tackle serious crime and terrorism. Many of the reports highlight the lack of an impact assessment from the Commission on the risks posed by transfers of personal data to these countries. Many of the reports also highlight that these countries, currently, do not have the data protection standards required to handle and exchange data, which is why I ultimately voted against the resolution.

2016/11/22

This is one of a series of non-legislative own—initiative reports which provides an opinion on the Commission’s proposal to begin negotiations on an agreement with a variety of third countries for the purpose of exchanging personal data to tackle serious crime and terrorism. Many of the reports highlight the lack of an impact assessment from the Commission on the risks posed by transfers of personal data to these countries. Many of the reports also highlight that these countries, currently, do not have the data protection standards required to handle and exchange data, which is why I ultimately voted against the resolution.

2016/11/22

This is one of a series of non-legislative own—initiative reports which provides an opinion on the Commission’s proposal to begin negotiations on an agreement with a variety of third countries for the purpose of exchanging personal data to tackle serious crime and terrorism. Many of the reports highlight the lack of an impact assessment from the Commission on the risks posed by transfers of personal data to these countries. Many of the reports also highlight that these countries, currently, do not have the data protection standards required to handle and exchange data, which is why I ultimately voted against the resolution.

2016/11/22

Whilst I strongly support the principle of this report, I am concerned on a more practical level about the financial implications and accountability.

2016/11/22

An agreement for scientific and technological co-operation between the USA and the European Union has been in force since 1998. The continuation of co-operation makes sense; the instruments by which this is funded at EU level do not.I support continued co-operation, but have some misgivings about the nature of this relationship. Furthermore, I note that the British people voted in June 2016 to leave the European Union. Consequently, on balance, I felt it was appropriate for me to abstain.

2016/11/22

I recognise the importance of high-performance computers; the rapporteur does correctly highlight their impact on industry, including significant reductions to design and production cycles, increasing the efficiency of resources, and cost minimisation (including through optimisation of decision-making). The question is not ‘is high-performance computing a good thing’, but ‘to what extent should the State, in particular the European Union, be involved in driving such technology?’In principle, I tend to oppose such measures because I am concerned at creeping EU harmonisation dictated by the EU Commission. In this specific case, I further note that the proposal is likely to have substantial financial implications on Member States and the EUR 486 million proposed budgetary contribution.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The principle of subsidiarity dictates that decisions should be taken at the closest possible level to the citizen – in this case, at regional or national level. Therefore, these projects should not be funded by the European Union. It is absurd that the arbiters of whether this funding should, or should not, be given are Members of the European Parliament with no detailed knowledge of the situation. This project may well be of benefit to the people of France, but I am not best placed to judge.The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund should be scrapped, which would give money back to the Member States to decide for themselves about the appropriateness of such funding. Consequently, I had no option but to vote against – even though this may be a worthwhile project.

2016/11/22

This proposal seeks new EU funding and structures to help cities to apply for EU funding. The circular logic here is not lost on me. Furthermore, the UK is leaving the European Union. National funding should be more efficient and more appropriately targeted than EU funding, and I therefore felt it appropriate to vote against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I see no reason why the European Union should seek to legislate for three-dimensional printing. Whilst there do arise some legal questions when a new technology becomes more prevalent, these should be determined by the nation states where possible. There is, in my view, an insufficient case made here to justify action which would bind all 28 Member States.I further note that the decision of the British people to leave the European Union must be respected: as a UK member of the European Parliament it would be wrong for me to support such a call for further legislation.

2016/11/22

Defence is, fundamentally, the preserve of the nation state. In seeking to encroach upon this role of the nation state, the European Union seeks to supplant national sovereignty. This is something which I could not support under any circumstances, and I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I suspect that the practical implication of this legislative report will be merely to support existing, failed, EU-wide agricultural policies. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

EU Regulation 256/2014 creates, in effect, duplication of other legislation and adds to the impact upon Member States without creating any added value. It is a particularly poor piece of legislation. The proposal is to repeal that piece of legislation. There is no proposal for an alternative regulation. Consequently, I voted in favour of the repeal.

2016/11/22

Whilst I am supportive of the principle of this report (the need to cut cross-border VAT fraud) and whilst I recognise that the measures described may well have some impact on reducing VAT fraud, I have three concerns:1. The UK should not be subject to these systems post-Brexit2. There is a huge risk of creating additional bureaucracy through these measures, particularly in terms of the procedures which it requires Member States to follow when dealing with each other3. The report fails to address the structural failings of the system itself which lead to cross-border fraudI therefore felt unable to vote in favour; the most appropriate approach was an abstention.

2016/11/22

I find this report particularly concerning: whilst we should be able to agree that the protection of rights of indigenous peoples is a laudable aim, it appears that this report seeks instead to foster division rather than unity. It contains substantial calls for EU action, for definitions such as ‘climate refugees’, to promote a specific world-view on abortion, and attacks so-called ‘neo-colonialism’. Instead of being a report which unites, it becomes in and of itself an example of the divisions of so-called ‘identity politics’. By rejecting consensus, it weakens its own aims.I therefore, with great sadness, felt it appropriate to vote against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This report calls for a strong leadership role for the EU. It calls for a stronger role for the Commission and the European External Action Service, focusing on a joint EU effort to set up an EU climate diplomacy strategy equipped with the necessary financial and human resources. I oppose the EU interfering with the policies of Member States and using taxpayer money to fund it.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Whilst there are some poignant aspects in relation to the field of culture, in relation to accessibility, financing and education, one fundamental point remains: it is not for the EU to dictate how much national governments should contribute to or invest in cultural services, nor how they should form policy in this area. Furthermore, there is the usual call for more EU investment, which will by definition be at the expense of the taxpayer.

2016/11/22

The Commission wishes to be able to apply a new proportionality test, so that they can make sure that no Member States are giving an unfair advantage to their own citizens compared with EU citizens. This level of regulation risks significant intrusion into national sovereignty, and is likely to lead to substantial litigation as the extent of such proportionality is tested in the courts over a period of time.

2016/11/22

I believe that this is a matter which should be legislated at national level. Furthermore, given that the UK has voted to leave the European Union, it would be wrong for me to support further EU legislation.

2016/11/22

I believe that this is a matter which should be legislated at national level. Furthermore, given that the UK has voted to leave the European Union, it would be wrong for me to support further EU legislation.

2016/11/22

I believe that this is a matter which should be legislated at national level. Furthermore, given that the UK has voted to leave the European Union, it would be wrong for me to support further EU legislation.

2016/11/22

I believe that this is a matter which should be legislated at national level. Furthermore, given that the UK has voted to leave the European Union, it would be wrong for me to support further EU legislation.

2016/11/22

This was an objection to a Commission delegated regulation, pursuant to Rule 105. It was not the subject of a roll-call vote; in the interests of transparency and democracy, I wish to confirm for the record that I abstained. Under normal circumstances I would support objections pursuant to Rule 105, on the grounds that I do not believe that the unelected European Commission should pass legislation without full democratic scrutiny.In this case, I am concerned that certain exemptions (albeit partial, and temporary) were provided by this delegated regulation, and I have some concern about the uncertainty which would be created for fishing by a vote in favour on this occasion. Therefore, reluctantly, I abstained.

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote; in the interests of transparency and democracy, I wish to confirm for the record that I abstained.

2016/11/22

The resolution concerns the on-going negotiations for a new EU-ACP (African, Caribbean and Pacific) agreement. This resolution asks the Commission to uphold these principles in any future agreement with ACP countries. It also requests regionalisation of aid and increased co-operation between the EU and the Pan-African Parliament. This agreement entails more money being spent overseas with the intention of strengthening the powers of the EU globally and using trade as a political weapon. I therefore voted against this resolution.

2016/11/22

Whilst this report in places is critical of the implementation of EU law, in the main it calls on the Commission to be more proactive in enforcement in respect of failures by Member States. The large number of infringement procedures creates a red flag, hinting perhaps at additional EU involvement in the domestic politics of sovereign nations.In 2016 there were 70 directives to transpose, up from 56 in 2015. I do not believe that the European Union should be interfering in the affairs of sovereign nations, and I therefore voted against it.

2016/11/22

As a supporter of Brexit, I believe in the principle that the European Union should not tell the UK what to do. This situation is the reverse: as a UK MEP, I should not case an affirmative vote on issues which affect the EU27 but not the UK. I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

Croatia, Bulgaria, Latvia and Portugal have all made internal amendments to insolvency procedures. This, in turn, necessitates technical amendments to the Regulation. As the amendments to the Annex do not affect the UK, I thought it only proper to abstain on these updates.

2016/11/22

This vote concerns only Schengen Area countries. It sets no precedent for the UK post-Brexit, as the United Kingdom is not a member of the Schengen Area. There is little reason to suppose that this could have any serious implications as regards the UK concerning illegal immigration and/or trafficking; Iceland does not form part of any particular major route for such criminal activity. It is also broadly similar to the UK in terms of economics and purchasing power per capita. This is merely a technical update, rather than new implementation. Furthermore, the UK has voted to leave the European Union and should not in principle be seeking to influence EU policy on matters which do not concern it. Consequently, I abstained.

2016/11/22

This vote concerns only Schengen Area countries. It sets no precedent for the UK post-Brexit, as the United Kingdom is not a member of the Schengen Area. There is little reason to suppose that this could have any serious implications as regards the UK concerning illegal immigration and/or trafficking; Switzerland does not form part of any particular major route for such criminal activity. It is also broadly similar to the UK in terms of economics and purchasing power per capita. This is merely a technical update, rather than new implementation. Furthermore, the UK has voted to leave the European Union and should not in principle be seeking to influence EU policy on matters which do not concern it. Consequently, I abstained.

2016/11/22

The Schengen Area leads to far too little scrutiny, and the lack of checks at national borders deprives European nations of their best opportunity for detecting cross-border criminal activity. Whilst the United Kingdom is not a member of the Schengen Area, this does (for example as regards illegal immigration and trafficking) have a certain impact upon the UK. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This is a non-legislative, own-initiative report on the relationship between Cohesion policy and the circular economy. Cohesion policy is the main source of funding for projects in the European Union, and the term ‘circular economy’ means moving away from a ‘throw away’ culture into one in which consumers recycle products which are more sustainable. Whilst I agree with the need for greater sustainability, this report calls for increased EU funding and Commission intervention.Believing that such matters should be determined by the Member States themselves, I voted against.

2016/11/22

Rampant corruption plagues Ukraine. Its 2017 Corruption Perceptions Index score is abysmal, ranking in the bottom quartile. This fact is reported and widely known. Yet, the EU parliament overwhelmingly rejected to state such facts in this report. Furthermore, when offered the addition of sensible anti-corruption measures as conditions to ‘Macro-finance assistance’ (an EU euphemism for throwing away money on buying goodwill in an effort to expand the EU), the EU parliament again said no.The EU thinks that by throwing money at the problem, as if with the wave of a wand, democratic norms, the rule of law, and sound financial practice will be practiced in Ukraine. The reality is that these funds will further incentivise widespread corruption.In the interests of sound financial management and reducing incentives for corruption I voted against this report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The UK will leave the EU in March 2019, after which, we will strive to make our own trade arrangements. One of these no doubt be with the EU. In accordance with this aim, I cannot reject the EU’s agreement with Chile as the UK seeks its own free-trade deal. However, as an MEP for the UK, I cannot endorse it. Therefore, I chose to abstain.

2016/11/22

. ‒ NATO is vital to maintaining the defence of the United Kingdom and our allies. However, it can be argued that NATO—EU defence cooperation undermines this as, by creating a military relationship with NATO, the EU reinforces its sense of statehood, thus adding an extra level of interference between NATO and its members, and opening the door to NATO serving EU interests.This relationship also violates a people’s right to self-determination. The EU has four Member States with a long—standing tradition of neutrality: Ireland, Austria, Finland and Sweden. While it may be true that countries such as Finland and Sweden have long discussed joining NATO, a consensus has not been reached. Cooperation with NATO is the means by which the EU seeks to circumvent their neutrality.Cooperation between NATO and the EU represents another milestone on the path towards an EU army. NATO, at its heart, is a defensive alliance between member states. Yet EU federalists yearn for the day when they can project their own power both at home and abroad through military means. I fear that NATO, under EU influence, would seek only to project power, rather than safeguard freedom.Accordingly, I voted against this report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Whilst the issue of cyber-security has rightly increased in prominence over the last couple of years, being highlighted as a result of credible and tangible threats, the defence against such threats is a matter for sovereign nations working together as part of any strategic or military alliance. The appropriate action should be taken firstly by sovereign nations, and secondly – where coordination is appropriate – the UK should be working together with the Five Eyes network and NATO.Information-sharing with the EU is one thing; this, however, is not the nature of the report. A new PESCO initiative will focus on cyber-defence. The report, in effect, provides internal market and military justifications for the EU’s expansion into this new policy area. As ever, the EU’s response to the existence of any public policy question appears to be a call for ‘more EU’.This is, in effect, an attempt to transfer competence from Member States to the European Union: that runs contrary to the democratic mandate upon which I was elected, and to the mandate of the British people at the EU referendum. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This report seeks to extend the scope of the Common Fisheries Policy into recreational fishing. I believe that the CFP has already caused sufficient damage to commercial fishing, and have zero desire to see similar damage inflicted upon those who fish recreationally.I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I oppose further legislation at EU level in this field; economic and financial policies should be the preserve of Member States.

2016/11/22

This legislation would transfer further power to the European Union from member states; therefore, I voted against.

2016/11/22

I believe that this is a matter which should be legislated at national level. Furthermore, given that the UK has voted to leave the European Union, it would be wrong for me to support further EU legislation.

2016/11/22

This report calls for more EU involvement at every level of the education system. It incorrectly defines the problems within education, and utilises generic language rather than defining the nature of actual issues: for example, the phrase ‘gender equality’ is used. Statistics are quoted suggesting that girls outperform boys academically; this is not perceived as a particular problem within the report. The gender employment gap, which occurs subsequently to education, is perceived as such. The use of such phrases, without specifics, risks creating further political correctness and a failure to respond robustly to actual issues. Education should, simply, treat everyone equally.I don’t support the creation of a ‘European Education Area’; I do support national sovereignty. I voted against.

2016/11/22

Unusually, this report does fairly accurately summarise many of the problems. Nevertheless, I do not believe that one-size-fits-all EU action is the correct response to them.

2016/11/22

The report is asking the Commission to submit a legislative framework that requires Member States to create legal, technical and operational barriers in order to make odometer manipulation impossible. Furthermore the report is calling on the Commission to ensure that the same legal and technical barriers are also applied to imports from non-EU countries. In addition this report is calling for the Commission to propose a legislative framework for Member States to set up comparable and mutually compatible national data collection mechanisms. I believe that the British Government has a responsibility to ensure that UK consumers are protected, but disagree with such harmonisation at an EU level.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As an MEP elected upon a platform of withdrawal from the European Union, I cannot support measures which propose substantial further EU harmonisation and an increase in EU spending.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The final report was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I would therefore like to confirm for the record that I voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ There are a couple of sentences with which I disagree in this report, but overall it is correct to draw attention to the abuses which have taken place. I therefore voted in favour.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The EU Youth Strategy does not, in my view, represent the principle of subsidiarity. There is no good reason why such matters cannot be dealt with at a more local level, by national governments, and therefore I voted against.

2016/11/22

This directive will have a negative impact on theatres and similar venues in Europe, especially smaller establishments which will be disproportionately affected. I sent a question to the Commission trying to secure an exemption for the creative industry from this legislation. Such arbitrary energy-related decisions should not be taken by the unelected Commission.

2016/11/22

Fixed-term contracts may often be necessary, but they are also subject to being abused. The necessity of zero-hours contracts is less obvious, but there are certain sectors where they may be needed, and casual labour may be attractive to students and others who are themselves uncertain as to what hours they will be available to work.However, the UK has seen an increase in the use of such contracts as a means to evade employment legislation. This is unacceptable, and the British Government should legislate on this.It is the role of a national government, not the role of the European Union, to act here: the policies involved generally fall within the competence of national parliaments anyway, even irrespective of the Brexit vote.

2016/11/22

I previously opposed the principle of setting up the Solidarity Fund, and of including that Fund within the general budget of the European Union because I believe that such matters are better handled by national governments rather than administered remotely by the European Union.However, this fund already having been established, and the money already being available, I then abstained upon the application of that fund. I do not object to the specific cause to which this money is being put, merely to the principle of the creation of the fund and the mechanisms by which it is applied.

2016/11/22

This draft amending budget accompanying the Solidarity Fund proposal seeks to spend money outside the normal EU budget levels. The proposal entails an increase in the special instruments budget by EUR 97 million. The reality of paying out the money outside the budgetary ceilings is that each Member State will have to contribute more money to the EU.Consequently, I voted against the mechanism by which this is to be paid whilst abstaining upon the principle of the usage of that fund itself.

2016/11/22

This proposal is to mobilise an extra EUR 345 000 not specifically for the benefit of redundant workers, as is the norm with the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, but for activities such as data gathering, information activities and online administration.The EGF should in my view be scrapped, with money then given back to the Member States to decide for themselves about the appropriateness of such funding. Consequently, I had no option but to vote against.

2016/11/22

Whilst I normally on principle would support objections pursuant to Rule 106, I am concerned in this case about the impact which that would have upon the UK, and am receiving mixed advice as to whether there exist reasonable concerns about the particular variant mentioned. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

Whilst I normally on principle would support objections pursuant to Rule 106, I am concerned in this case about the impact which that would have upon the UK, and am receiving mixed advice as to whether there exist reasonable concerns about the particular variant mentioned. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

This own—initiative report calls for strict compliance with the Common Fisheries Policy and other EU legislation and urges the Commission to promptly examine the possibility of creating a label to identify the EU’s fishery products. As I oppose the disastrous common fisheries policy and increased EU interference I voted against the report.

2016/11/22

I welcome the report’s admission that the recent CAP reforms have been a failure which in certain cases made things worse, and indeed there were some paragraphs even within the original text which I could support in separate votes. As usual, though, the proposed remedy for structural failings of the European Union is ‘more Europe’. The report rejects any return of power over agriculture to the Member States. I voted against this report because it demonstrates how impossible the EU makes real positive change.

2016/11/22

I am opposed in principle to the EU having any power to make and pass legislation – whether by directive, regulation or any other means – that would have primacy over UK law and override the sovereignty of the United Kingdom Parliament. Secondly, I do not believe that this agreement will alter in any way the profoundly undemocratic nature of the EU in general or the European Parliament in particular. The document is a singular and ringing indictment of the nature of the past 59 years of legislation by the EU and its predecessor organisations.

2016/11/22

The United Kingdom will no longer be a member of the European Union at the time when this Multiannual Financial Framework comes into force in 2021. Furthermore, the proposed transitional period will by that time have expired. The UK will not be making budgetary contributions to the European Union. I note that, as a supporter of Brexit, I believe in the principle that the European Union should not tell the UK what to do. This situation is the reverse: as a UK MEP, I should not case an affirmative vote on issues which affect the EU27 but not the UK. I therefore abstained on every vote throughout this report.

2016/11/22

I voted against this own-initiative report on a European Parliament recommendation to the Council of Ministers, Commission and the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs, in relation to Libya. It is my contention that the European Union has no right to act on behalf of, nor represent, the United Kingdom on the world stage. Our own democratically elected, and thus accountable, government, together with the United Nations, of which the UK is a permanent member of its Security Council, are the only authorities that I believe should act in our national interest.

2016/11/22

The Schengen Area leads to far too little scrutiny, and the lack of checks at national borders deprives European nations of their best opportunity for detecting cross-border criminal activity. Whilst the United Kingdom is not a member of the Schengen Area, this does (for example as regards illegal immigration and trafficking) have a certain impact upon the UK. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

The report itself asks for more Commission oversight of Member States judicial systems, calls for further harmonisation of judicial practices and also calls for things which go beyond the competency of the EU; for example, demanding ‘gender sensitive’ and ‘LGBTI’ training for professionals. As I do not agree with such harmonisation and EU interference, I voted against the proposals.

2016/11/22

This report covers a wide range of topics, such as the US withdrawal from TTIP, the Trans-Pacific Partnership and Brexit is also mentioned. This report covers everything from protection of geographic origin indicators, the use of FTA opportunities by EU companies and the desire of the EU Commission to see a more rules-based international trade system. As I am a proponent of pro-free trade and believe countries have the right to enter or leave any agreement they wish, I consequently voted against the report as I oppose the EU´s protectionism regarding trade.

2016/11/22

This matter was the subject of approval without a vote; had there been a vote, I would have abstained.

2016/11/22

Whilst I support the principle of sustainable management, I feel that this is something of a red herring. I am unable to support the Common Fisheries Policy, which is structurally incapable of achieving that aim.

2016/11/22

The Commission says it needs statistics concerning the transport of goods by inland waterways in order to monitor and develop the common transport policy. Member States should be responsible for their own transport policy. This matter does not require European Union involvement, so I voted against.

2016/11/22

Despite some minor concerns, the overriding principles are as follows:1. I am pro-free trade2. This should streamline the process of trade between EU countries and non-EU countries3. There is a question as to how this will affect BrexitAmong the improvements is the REX system, which will allow better confirmation of the countries of origin of products entering the European market. Given that this overall makes trade easier, I considered it appropriate to vote in favour.

2016/11/22

Despite some minor concerns, the overriding principles are as follows:1. I am pro-free trade2. This should streamline the process of trade between EU countries and non-EU countries3. There is a question as to how this will affect BrexitAmong the improvements is the REX system, which will allow better confirmation of the countries of origin of products entering the European market. Given that this overall makes trade easier, I considered it appropriate to vote in favour.

2016/11/22

Unlike the previous vote, I had certain concerns in respect of this particular report, in particular:1. It includes exchange of staff2. It includes reciprocal access to electronic systemsI am concerned that, should such principles form the basis for a post-Brexit deal, there could be substantial issues for the UK. I further note that this report misses the point: VAT fraud is, sadly, a consequence of the incredibly bureaucratic nature of VAT as opposed to other means of collecting indirect taxation.Overall, after giving lengthy consideration to an abstention on the grounds that we should seek to combat such fraud, I further noted that this was expected to pass by a wide margin. I felt it appropriate to vote against.

2016/11/22

This report calls for taxpayer subsidies, new standards, more bureaucracy and new non-tariff trade barriers. Furthermore, I am already opposed to the common fisheries policy. I voted against the report.

2016/11/22

The report sensibly criticises the CAP for incentivising farmers to hang onto land access and control in order to keep the subsidy money rolling in at taxpayers’ expense, and for being administratively cumbersome with complex bureaucracy. Unfortunately the solution drawn is the usual call of throwing more taxpayers’ money at the problem; it wants funding for young farmers’ tools to be increased by 2% and to create new forms of support whilst failing to recognise the fundamental systemic nature of the problems it identifies. I naturally voted against.

2016/11/22

The report perpetuates the wasteful, bureaucratic, discriminatory common fisheries policy in UK waters. The United Kingdom, post Brexit, must regain exclusive competence over our own fishing grounds, which provide a significant national resource and are currently being mismanaged by the European Union. Consequently, I voted against this report as a matter of principle.

2016/11/22

As the UK has voted for Brexit, it would seem consistent to vote against a report which introduces new legislation regarding workers across national boundaries. This should rightly be a matter for the British government post Brexit, not for the European Union. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I opposed the provisional agreement, which suffers from the usual structural failings and overextends European Union influence over other nations’ sovereign territory.

2016/11/22

This own-initiative report seeks further EU-level legislation to affect the financial sector, which leads to serious questions about the impact upon competitiveness. Should EU businesses lose out to others overseas, this will mirror the ‘outsourcing pollution’ issue which has occurred within heavy industries. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

It is inappropriate for the European Union to tell sovereign nations – especially Member States – what their own justice systems must be. The European Union should not seek to override, or be the arbiter of, sovereignty. It is ironic, too, that the European Union – which regularly overextends its own power – should lecture others. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This is a technical update reflecting Croatia’s accession to the European Union. I consistently abstain on such technical updates.

2016/11/22

This is a technical update reflecting Croatia’s accession to the European Union. I consistently abstain on such technical updates.

2016/11/22

I believe that such decisions should be taken by Member States, not by the European Union. I am therefore, on a point of democracy, highly concerned about the procedure by which this new psychoactive substance is to be controlled.However, there is ultimately a question of human lives being at risk. The psychoactive substance ADB-CHMINACA has been linked to many hospitalisations and deaths.Therefore, despite my procedural concerns, I felt I had to vote in favour.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I believe that decisions such as this should be taken by Member States, not by the European Union. I am therefore, on a point of democracy, highly concerned about the procedure by which this new psychoactive substance is to be controlled.However, there is ultimately a question of human lives being at risk. The psychoactive substance CUMYL-4CN-BINACA appears to have been a factor in at least 11 deaths in two Member States. Therefore, despite my procedural concerns, I felt I had to vote in favour.

2016/11/22

The principle of subsidiarity dictates that decisions should be taken at the closest possible level to the citizen – in this case, at regional or national level. Therefore, these projects should not be funded by the European Union.It is absurd that the arbiters of whether this funding should, or should not, be given are Members of the European Parliament with no detailed knowledge of the situation. This project may well be of benefit to the people of Belgium, but I am not best placed to judge.The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund should be scrapped, which would give money back to the Member States to decide for themselves about the appropriateness of such funding. Consequently, I had no option but to vote against – even though this may be a worthwhile project.

2016/11/22

This is a non-legislative report assessing how the EU is combatting fraud in its own budget.The report states that fraudulent and non-fraudulent irregularities had decreased by 15%, but still amounted to EUR 2.97 billion. Furthermore, the number of irregularities reported as fraudulent decreased by 3.5%, but again still amounted to EUR 391 million in 2016, and the increase in irregularities within the cohesion fund was acknowledged to be EUR 480 million in 2016.I welcomed the report’s criticism of the Commission, deploring the fact that they still do not feel the need to publish the anti-corruption report, and are no longer deciding to publish the figures relating to corruption from organised crime in the data report regarding EU’s Anti-Corruption policy.However, the report also fails to highlight some of the structural reasons why such fraud is hard to combat. Overall, I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

I am generally minded to support objections pursuant to Rule 106, which remove Commission delegated powers and minimise actions taken without democratic scrutiny.Absent any knowledge of reasons to do otherwise, I voted in favour of this objection.

2016/11/22

This is an own-initiative report on the work of the European Investment Bank in 2016. The EIB’s total financing was EUR 83.8 billion for 2016, mobilising EUR 280 billion of total investment for that year. Yet again, quite a large part of the report talks about the EIB needing better transparency, reporting and communication. Those parts are not inaccurate, but it fails to take into account structural issues with the EIB which cannot be solved solely through those measures.Given that it spectacularly misses the point and fails to find fault where fault is necessary, a vote against the final report was indicated.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The criticisms of democracy in Venezuela contained within Parliament’s resolution are sensible, measured and reasonable to highlight. Having spoken to people who have left Venezuela due to the anti—democratic nature of the situation there, and having seen the impact of the effective banning of certain opposition parties from taking part in the elections, I believed it was important for me to vote accordingly.Therefore I voted in favour, despite minor textual concerns.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Member States should be responsible for their own transport policy, and for dealing with bottlenecks in key network infrastructures. This matter does not require European Union involvement, so I voted against.

2016/11/22

The roll-call vote referred to a specific amendment (amendment 2 to paragraph 17) referring to ‘coercion’ and the taking of children’s biometric data by Member States. The word ‘coercion’ was not sufficiently explained or defined in this context, and I therefore abstained on it.

2016/11/22

I support a global ban on cosmetics. This resolution, however, is non-legislative.Furthermore, it praises the European Union’s ‘ground-breaking’ work on testing on cosmetics, failing to note that many Member States legislated a long time before the European Union.The self-congratulatory nature of this report, and the EU-centric insistence throughout, meant I felt unable to vote in favour of something which will have no actual practical effect with regard to animal testing.I therefore abstained on the report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I oppose the common agricultural policy. Believing that such matters should be determined by the Member States themselves, I voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I strongly support media freedom: the irony is that this report appears to wish to control such matters at European Union level and seeks to interfere with essential national sovereignty. I am far from convinced that I trust the European Union in this respect, and consequently I voted against.

2016/11/22

As I do not support tax harmonisation, and as this proposal is specifically described as ‘moving towards a definitive EU VAT system’, I voted against.

2016/11/22

Whilst the title is laudable, the nature of the legislation is to reduce national sovereignty on taxation. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This legislation involves the transfer of power from Member States. I believe that the British government has a responsibility to ensure that UK consumers are protected, but disagree with harmonisation at EU level.

2016/11/22

The report claims to simplify and rationalise EU intervention in organic farming but it also aims to enshrine it in perpetuity by proposing an EU Organic Agency. I do not believe the creation of an EU Organic agency is an appropriate use of taxpayers’ money, and therefore I voted against this resolution.

2016/11/22

The European Union should neither determine nor influence the UK’s employment policy, which should be sovereign.

2016/11/22

As the UK will still be in the EU at the start of 2019, I felt it was justifiable for me to vote on this report.This report contains the estimates of revenue and expenditure for the financial year of 2019. It states that there will be an increase of 3.9% from the 2018 budget (including EUR 37.3 million for the change of the parliament term and EUR 34.3 million for other extraordinary expenditure).I voted against the resolution because I cannot support an increased EU budget for 2019, especially considering that the British people have already voted to leave and expect to stop paying money to the EU altogether.

2016/11/22

Whilst this is described as a repeal of legal acts, it appears to me that the overall principle is one of consolidation and addition to existing legislation.

2016/11/22

I do not support harmonisation of this matter at European Union level.

2016/11/22

I am deeply concerned about these cases, and highly supportive of freedom of expression and freedom of speech.I am not convinced that this report proposes the correct remedial action, and therefore I abstained overall after supporting some amendments to the resolution.

2016/11/22

I oppose the use of taxpayers’ money for another propaganda scheme used to promote the EU.

2016/11/22

I note the intention of this resolution is a positive one, to deal with a miscarriage of justice. It does not contain politicised text, nor does it call for further European Union actions.I therefore abstained on amendments which - whilst I agreed with them - are likely to be unhelpful in that respect. I do not support Turkish accession to the European Union, but this is not the place to say so.I voted in favour of the final resolution.

2016/11/22

This will not come into force until after Brexit. It is therefore inappropriate for me to cast an affirmative vote, and I consequently abstained throughout.

2016/11/22

I opposed this report because it calls upon the Commission to take action on matters which should be within the remit of Member States; it seeks to extend the power of a protectionist European Parliament into competition law.

2016/11/22

I support medicine, education and vaccination. I agree that broadly speaking, the benefits of vaccination vastly outweigh the risks. There is some medical evidence that in a tiny minority of cases, vaccination can have negative side-effects, specifically as regards causing auto-immune diseases. For other illnesses there are dangers in believing every single scare story: the correlation-causation fallacy leads to all kinds of exaggerations and bogus claims made by those who would profit by undermining the principle of vaccination.But ultimately, there are some risks – and those risks do vary from child to child. It’s not for the State to force parents into making a particular decision, and neither is it for the European Union State to mandate what nation states must do.Education, yes. Counter misunderstandings, yes. But remove parental choice? No.

2016/11/22

This report encourages the Commission to launch infringement proceedings against Member States that breach the EPO directive and to spend money on promoting research into national and European protection orders. The report also includes a lot of statements that go beyond the scope of the EPO legislation. For example, there are calls in the report for mandatory education on gender equality in primary and secondary schools. Whist I fully support tackling the issues of gender discrimination and violence against women, I oppose the EU interfering with the policies of Member States and using taxpayer money to fund it.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This report calls for the Commission to strengthen its collaboration with the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) and to promote the EU’s own version of it, the ‘European Education Area’. I am against the EU’s interference in national education systems, particularly with regard to dictating the involvement of Member States in a voluntary, non-EU group.

2016/11/22

As the United Kingdom will no longer be a member of the European Union at the time of the next European elections, it is inappropriate for me to cast an affirmative vote on this matter. I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

As the UK will only be a member of the European Union for the first quarter of 2019, I would have abstained on this matter.

2016/11/22

As I oppose the development and promotion of EU foreign policy, it was consistent for me to vote against this.

2016/11/22

As I oppose the development and promotion of EU foreign policy, it was consistent for me to vote against this.

2016/11/22

I object to the harmonisation of criminal law amongst Member States of the European Union. By all means we should co-operate in the fight against terrorism, but this should not be used as an excuse to undermine essential national sovereignty.

2016/11/22

I object to the harmonisation of criminal law amongst Member States of the European Union. By all means we should co-operate in the fight against terrorism, but this should not be used as an excuse to undermine essential national sovereignty.

2016/11/22

The UK has voted to leave the European Union. Where new legislation being introduced at European Union level is likely to come into force before the UK leaves, or in any case prior to the end of the transitional period, I am generally minded to vote against it: such decisions could, in any case, be better taken by nation states under the principle of subsidiarity.

2016/11/22

The UK has voted to leave the European Union. Where new legislation being introduced at European Union level is likely to come into force before the UK leaves, or in any case prior to the end of the transitional period, I am generally minded to vote against it: such decisions could, in any case, be better taken by nation states under the principle of subsidiarity.

2016/11/22

The UK has voted to leave the European Union. Where new legislation being introduced at European Union level is likely to come into force before the UK leaves, or in any case, prior to the end of the transitional period, I am generally minded to vote against it: such decisions could, in any case, be better taken by nation states under the principle of subsidiarity.

2016/11/22

The UK has voted to leave the European Union. Where new legislation being introduced at European Union level is likely to come into force before the UK leaves, or in any case, prior to the end of the transitional period, I am generally minded to vote against it: such decisions could, in any case, be better taken by nation states under the principle of subsidiarity.

2016/11/22

The UK has voted to leave the European Union. Where new legislation being introduced at European Union level is likely to come into force before the UK leaves, or in any case prior to the end of the transitional period, I am generally minded to vote against it: such decisions could, in any case, be better taken by nation states under the principle of subsidiarity.

2016/11/22

This matter was not subject to a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy I believe that my constituents have a right to know how I voted, and therefore I confirm that I voted in favour of the motion.By contrast, I note that the appointment of the new Secretary-General of the Commission was not sufficiently transparent, and the timeline of events does not paint the Commission in a good light overall. Furthermore, there must be questions with regard to the speed of promotion and suitability for the role.The resolution is rightly critical of the manner by which Mr Selmayr was appointed, and generally for the right reasons.

2016/11/22

Essential national sovereignty requires that policies, in particular on regular migration, must be the preserve of national governments. Fundamentally, this should not be a matter for the European Union - and I therefore voted against this non-legislative resolution.

2016/11/22

Between 2014 and 2020 the EU has a dedicated budget of EUR 51.8 billion for external action covering several policy areas; foreign policy and defence, development and enlargement/pre-accession. With Britain, a net contributor to the EU budget, leaving the Union, the Commission should be concentrating on the funding black hole left by our exodus. Only one point in the review identifies the funding issue in the event of the UK’s exit from the EU, in which it states that the proportion of funding should be at least maintained.

2016/11/22

If the European Union truly respected the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, it would legislate on far fewer issues: there are only a small number of areas in which one-size-fits-all action, taking power further away from the citizen, could reasonably be said to be necessary.Indeed, if the European Union truly respected those principles, there would be a lot less euroscepticism: there would be less need for opposition to the structures and institutions of the European Union.That the European Union pays only lip-service to these words is evidenced both in this report, and in the current political situation across a growing number of EU countries.It is for this reason that many, especially in the United Kingdom, are pro-European and therefore anti-EU.I voted against.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the Commission and executive agencies discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the Court of Auditors’ special reports in the context of the 2016 Commission discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the EU general budget - 8th, 9th, 10th and 11th EDFs discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Parliament discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

Whilst legally speaking the Lisbon Treaty only gives the European Parliament the specific power to grant discharge to the Commission, it is a matter of transparency that the Parliament does so for EU institutions and agencies. Only the Council does not cooperate with the discharge procedure, and consequently the Parliament refuses to grant discharge to the Council. For reasons of transparency and democracy, I supported the proposal to postpone discharge to the Council.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the Court of Justice discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the Court of Auditors discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Economic and Social Committee discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the Committee of the Regions discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European External Action Service discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Ombudsman discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and cooperating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Data Protection Supervisor discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the Performance, financial management and control of EU agencies discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the Office of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union (CdT) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (Cedefop) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training (CEPOL) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Banking Authority (EBA) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Environment Agency (EEA) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Medicines Agency (EMA) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Union Agency for Network and Information Security (ENISA) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Union Agency for Railways (ERA) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Training Foundation (ETF) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice (eu-LISA) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (EU-OSHA) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the Euratom Supply Agency (ESA) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the EU Judicial Cooperation Unit (Eurojust) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Police Office (Europol) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the European GNSS Agency (GSA) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the Bio-based Industries Joint Undertaking (BBI) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the Clean Sky 2 Joint Undertaking discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the ECSEL Joint Undertaking discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen 2 Joint Undertaking (FCH2) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking (IMI) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy Joint Undertaking discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the SESAR Joint Undertaking discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

As I do not believe in the structures and institutions of the European Union as presently constituted, but rather in independent nations trading freely and co-operating where it makes sense to do so, I am substantially at odds with the mechanisms by which decisions were taken. Throughout the discharge votes, I attempted to take a consistent approach - supporting amendments which recognise genuine failings in the system, and which remove politicised language. I have generally supported evidence-based decisions to postpone discharge, and opposed decisions to grant it.Consequently, on the Shift2Rail Joint Undertaking (S2R) discharge vote, I felt it appropriate to vote against both the resolution and the proposal.

2016/11/22

I am concerned by the huge financial implications of this Agreement. Whilst I could be broadly supportive of scientific and technological cooperation, I cannot support the financing of it at European Union level, which will inevitably fall back upon taxpayers.

2016/11/22

I am concerned that this Agreement will lead to the usual problem: exploitation of the waters of a third country to the benefit, perhaps, of the European Union - but to the detriment of the natural resources of another country.It is, essentially, a cash-for-access deal. This protocol renews and fleshes out the agreement: the EU will pay EUR 2.3 million over four years to cover 85 fishing vessels supported by 20 supply vessels. Coming from the UK, whose waters have been plundered by the EU, I oppose this industrial scale despoliation of another country’s waters. Therefore I voted against.

2016/11/22

This report concerns the regular meetings between the EU and Norway to further liberalise trade between them in the fields of fisheries and agriculture. These are the two areas of trade not covered by the EEA agreement that governs most trade between the two parties. The report also favours free trade.

2016/11/22

Whilst I recognise the benefits of certain protein crops, I do not believe that this should be a matter for decision at European Union level.

2016/11/22

I remain concerned by the nature of the European Union’s policies in regards to greenhouse gas emissions. I still believe that they are not the right ones to achieve the stated aims, and therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I remain concerned by the nature of the European Union’s policies in regards to greenhouse gas emissions. I still believe that they are not the right ones to achieve the stated aims, and therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

There is much for me to be concerned about in this legislative report. It seems designed to reduce the variety of views expressed by pan-European political parties, whilst doing nothing to cut their funding.However, I note that this will effectively not come into force this year. Consequently, the impact upon the UK will be tangential at most due to the date of withdrawal from the EU.

2016/11/22

Energy performance of buildings should, in my view, be determined by Member States not the European Union. I voted accordingly.

2016/11/22

I remain concerned by the nature of the European Union’s policies in regards to the environment. I still believe that they are not the right ones to achieve the stated aims, and therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I voted against because I believe that domestic legislation should be a matter for individual sovereign nations, because I do not agree with quota systems and because I support equality of opportunity rather than equality of outcome.

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, therefore, I believe it is appropriate to confirm that I voted against. I did so because I believe that domestic legislation should be a matter for individual sovereign nations, because I do not agree with quota systems and because I support equality of opportunity rather than equality of outcome.

2016/11/22

The purpose of these instruments and programmes is to enhance and develop less developed nations in the world and reduce global poverty. So far, so good. But instead of assisting through free and fair trade, programmes tend to instead involve financial payments which lack basic accountability and transparency. I note, for example, that once money has found its way into the systems of a third country, it is no longer audited by the Court of Auditors.The report also continues to promote the EU’s ambitions in getting involved in foreign affairs (particularly concerning Africa) and calls for more staff posts to help with the day to day dealings with these instruments.I oppose the use of British taxpayers’ money to promote the EU´s development of foreign policy.It therefore seemed appropriate for me to vote against.

2016/11/22

This in a non-legislative report seeking to address the issue of debt in developing countries.For a large part of the report, the suggestions are incredibly reasonable and are more statements about the issues of debt in developing nations rather than the need to do something about it. However, the proposals within the second half of the report are more concerning and less well thought out and seeking action at EU level to deal with an issue which is, almost by definition, a matter for sovereign nation states.This being an own-initiative report, it does not have any legal force. I therefore felt that a vote against would signal that this is the wrong approach, without risking any negative impact upon countries struggling with a huge debt burden.

2016/11/22

This is a non-legislative, own initiative report primarily concerning the cohesion fund. As I do not share the rapporteur’s view that the fund should continue with an increased budget, carrying additional cost to the taxpayer, I voted against it.

2016/11/22

The Comoros is an archipelago of four main islands in the western Indian Ocean, at the northern end of both Madagascar and the Mozambique Channel. The fisheries agreement has effectively broken down as there is piracy and the licenses for 70 vessels remain unused. Voting for this denunciation would support the Commission and Council whilst opening the way to a new agreement. If I voted against, I am endorsing the current agreement. Consequently I abstained.

2016/11/22

The Comoros is an archipelago of four main islands in the western Indian Ocean, at the northern end of both Madagascar and the Mozambique Channel. The fisheries agreement has effectively broken down as there is piracy and the licenses for 70 vessels remain unused. Voting for this denunciation would support the Commission and Council whilst opening the way to a new agreement. If I voted against, I am endorsing the current agreement. Consequently I abstained.

2016/11/22

Mutual recognition of standards and qualifications should be a matter of bilateral agreement. The European Union should not interfere with the employment policies of Member States, I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

The EU want recognition of the European Union Youth Orchestra (EUYO), by making this official within the Creative Europe regulation. This is in order to secure funding for the orchestra who have applied for funding and have been unsuccessful in recent years.In order to gain funding every year the EUYO had to apply for funding via creative Europe as a ‘project’. The European Union Youth Orchestra state on their website ‘To produce enlightened Europeans equipped to play a part in the welfare and betterment of European and other communities as ambassadors for the EU, demonstrating cooperation, achievement and creativity, and embodying the highest ideals of the European Union’.I do not believe that the Creative Europe programme is an appropriate use of taxpayers’ money, and therefore I voted against this resolution. I oppose the use of taxpayers’ money for another propaganda scheme used to promote the EU, I naturally voted against.

2016/11/22

This is by definition a move that will happen after we leave the European Union. I therefore felt that it was only appropriate to abstain in the vote.

2016/11/22

This Consultation relates to the proposals for a Common Corporate Tax Base. Being harmonisation of taxes, I voted against this.

2016/11/22

This Consultation relates to the proposals for a Common Corporate Tax Base. Being harmonisation of taxes, I voted against this.

2016/11/22

This report calls for the extension of the EMSI and furthering the EU defence agenda. As UK will still be in the EU at the start of 2019, I therefore felt justified to vote against this report in the interests of UK taxpayers.

2016/11/22

I am hugely concerned by the situation in Syria. Overall, it felt appropriate for me to abstain on this resolution, despite my finding myself in agreement with much of the content, because I am not convinced that this matter should be considered at European Union level.

2016/11/22

It is noteworthy that the EU places higher tariffs on US agricultural goods coming into the EU. The report therefore seems a little disingenuous. The report also discusses that subsidies distort trade, a viewpoint which arguably should also apply to the common agricultural policy.

2016/11/22

I voted against this report, which would seek to interfere in the policies of Member States and whose language is far too vague in many areas to be useful.As ever, this report seeks to take power from nations and give it to the European Union.

2016/11/22

I believe that neither the proposed EU Withdrawal Agreement, nor this European Parliament resolution, approach Brexit negotiations in the appropriate manner. Negotiations should seek the closest possible trading relationship between the two parties, characterised by friendship and neighbourliness as set out in Article 8 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.These documents do not approach negotiations as equal parties, but rather with EU—centric arrogance demonstrated by a desire to create the maximum number of hurdles possible and to seek an agreement where one party’s courts police that agreement.The EU seeks to introduce additional stipulations upon access to plunder British waters, upon the UK’s environmental policy, and the UK’s taxation policy post—Brexit. Again this cannot be equitable: the UK does not seek to tell the EU what its internal policy must be post—Brexit.This resolution appears to be one designed to lead to a no-deal scenario, because it places impossible constraints upon the negotiators. As I would prefer there to be a deal between the UK and the EU, I voted against.

2016/11/22

This being a technical update, deleting an article without replacing, I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

Whilst the Report asks for the transposition an EU Directive, I note the importance of this issue as regards developments in research and in diagnostic procedures. I therefore abstained rather than voting against.

2016/11/22

I oppose the use of British taxpayers’ money being used to promote the EU´s development of foreign policy. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

As a matter of principle, my starting point is to support objections pursuant to Rule 105(3) because they generally prevent the Commission from introducing legislation under Delegated Acts or taking action without proper scrutiny.In this case, however, I am unconvinced by the reasoning and policy objectives behind the objection. Faced with the choice between two equally bad outcomes, I abstained.

2016/11/22

The principle of subsidiarity dictates that decisions should be taken at the closest possible level to the citizen – in this case, at regional or national level. Therefore, these projects should not be funded by the European Union.It is absurd that the arbiters of whether this funding should, or should not, be given are Members of the European Parliament with no detailed knowledge of the situation. This project may well be of benefit to the people of Germany, but I am not best placed to judge. The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund should be scrapped, which would give money back to the Member States to decide for themselves about the appropriateness of such funding. Consequently, I had no option but to vote against – even though this may be a worthwhile project.

2016/11/22

I was initially uncertain as to whether it would be reasonable for me to cast any vote on this issue; if the next MFF does not come into force until after Brexit, then there is a strong logical and moral case for an abstention. Eventually, I did vote on these issues because:1. There is no guarantee that the whole process of Brexit (including the end of the transitional period) will actually be complete by the end of 2020,2. The UK will be impacted by the decisions to be taken, and3. As part of the Withdrawal Agreement, the EU is seeking continued alignment from the UK post-Brexit.I opposed the resolution, which calls (inter alia) for ‘significant increase’ in the EU budget, new EU own resources, the abolition of national vetoes and a financial transaction tax.

2016/11/22

In conjunction with the future of the MFF report, this non-legislative report calls on the EU to create new funding streams for the budget. It calls for the Commission to push ahead with its proposal on a common consolidated corporate tax base, a financial transaction tax at EU level. Naturally I voted against the final report, which promotes and facilitates excessive EU spending.

2016/11/22

As usual, this non-legislative own initiative report identifies many of the problems but proposes the wrong solutions to them. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

The European Union should not interfere with the employment policies of Member States. I voted against.

2016/11/22

I opposed this measure, which will send further funding to the European Commission. Money which was unused or recovered since the expiry of the ECSC in 2002 should be returned to Member States, not to the EU budget.

2016/11/22

This matter being a technical update, I chose to abstain.

2016/11/22

Whilst I recognise the value of cross-border co-operation, I remain unconvinced that this report is the best way to achieve it: bureaucracy at EU level is expensive and unlikely to be the way forward. I note further that the UK has few borders with the EU27; consequently, any legislation based upon this report would likely place a larger burden upon the UK for less reward - particularly in the context of the UK’s vote to leave the European Union.

2016/11/22

I am unconvinced that this legislation will improve consumer delivery; rather, it will focus upon regulation and bureaucracy. Furthermore, the UK voted to leave the European Union in a referendum on 23 June 2016. It would be fundamentally against the spirit of that referendum for me, as a British MEP, to support further EU legislation in 2018 which will bind the UK. I therefore supported the rejection amendment and opposed the legislation.

2016/11/22

The UK voted to leave the European Union in a referendum on 23 June 2016. It would be fundamentally against the spirit of that referendum for me, as a British MEP, to support further EU legislation in 2018 which will bind the UK. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I do not support the establishment of a European Defence Industrial Development Programme. I believe this to be against the spirit of subsidiarity and to take EU integration too far: defence must always be sovereign. I further note that the mechanism for funding this will require the utilisation of the contingency margin. Furthermore, the UK voted to leave the European Union in a referendum on June 23, 2016. It would be fundamentally against the spirit of that referendum for me, as a British MEP, to support further EU legislation in 2018 which will bind the UK. Consequently I voted against.

2016/11/22

Irrespective of the areas in which I can find common ground with this report (and there are indeed many) I remain concerned by the fundamental principle of the EU’s politicisation of trade. This now being extended to so-called ‘gender mainstreaming’ indicates the European Parliament’s desire to interfere with third countries’ sovereign domestic policies through jeopardising trade. This seems to me to be hugely disrespectful to other nations. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

Whilst reducing unemployment and helping lagging regions is objectively desirable, this should be achieved at the closest possible level to the citizen – in this case, by national governments. This report calls for substantial Commission action, and I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I opposed this resolution for a number of reasons, but unusually one of them is that it seeks to interfere with US domestic politics. Whilst I hold some strong opinions on US politics (and not necessarily those which people expect me to hold, given my political background), I do not believe that this level of interference with another sovereign country is appropriate.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The proposed legislation claims that ‘in order to ensure legal certainty and avoid market disruption’ the Directive must come into force on 23rd February 2018 (i.e. retrospectively) so as to force Member States to transpose it into national law by 1st October 2018 at the latest. New EU legislation impacting upon the UK is against the spirit of the referendum of June 2016. Furthermore, I am against this use of retrospective legislation, and accordingly I voted against.

2016/11/22

Such matters should be for nation states, not the European Union, to determine. The EU should be prioritising a similar agreement with the UK before the USA, particularly given the global pre-eminence of the UK in insurance and re-insurance and the pressing timescale of Brexit. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I oppose this measure; it is a waste of taxpayers’ money. I suspect this also to be a precursor to an attempt to harmonise corporation tax, so naturally I voted against it.

2016/11/22

While I am in favour of products being clearly labelled and consumers having all the relevant information, I believe this is a decision that should be taken at Member State level. While I supported some technical amendments which would limit the scope of the legislation, I cannot agree with the Commission’s proposed electronic register or further EU control, so I voted against.

2016/11/22

The proposals undermine tax sovereignty, individual privacy and attorney-client privilege, by requiring and harmonizing rules that oblige taxpayers to disclose ‘aggressive’ tax planning (i.e. legal tax avoidance rather than evasion) and the sharing of this information between different tax authorities. Accordingly I voted against.

2016/11/22

Whilst I normally on principle would support objections pursuant to Rule 106, I am concerned in this case about the impact which that would have upon the UK, and am receiving mixed advice as to whether there exist reasonable concerns about the particular variant mentioned. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

Whilst I normally on principle would support objections pursuant to Rule 106, I am concerned in this case about the impact which that would have upon the UK, and am receiving mixed advice as to whether there exist reasonable concerns about the particular variant mentioned. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The principle of subsidiarity dictates that decisions should be taken at the closest possible level to the citizen – in this case at regional or national level. Therefore, these projects should not be funded by the European Union.It is absurd that the arbiters of whether this funding should, or should not, be given are Members of the European Parliament with no detailed knowledge of the situation. This project may well be of benefit to the people of Spain, but I am not best placed to judge.The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund should be scrapped, which would give money back to the Member States to decide for themselves about the appropriateness of such funding. Consequently, I had no option but to vote against – even though this may be a worthwhile project.

2016/11/22

The principle of subsidiarity dictates that decisions should be taken at the closest possible level to the citizen – in this case at regional or national level. Therefore, these projects should not be funded by the European Union.It is absurd that the arbiters of whether this funding should, or should not, be given are Members of the European Parliament with no detailed knowledge of the situation. This project may well be of benefit to the people of Sweden, but I am not best placed to judge.The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund should be scrapped, which would give money back to the Member States to decide for themselves about the appropriateness of such funding. Consequently, I had no option but to vote against – even though this may be a worthwhile project.

2016/11/22

Ignoring my personal views of the situation in Poland, this is a decision made by elected Polish officials. The EU is clearly infringing upon Poland’s sovereignty and for this reason I voted against the triggering of Article 7.

2016/11/22

Whilst I am a strong advocate for ensuring fundamental rights for all, I do not believe further EU interference on this issue is the best way forward. National governments within Europe will always be the best way to enhance and protect rights without additional EU bureaucracy and unnecessary legislation. I therefore voted against this report.

2016/11/22

There is certainly a strong need for protection of the welfare of bee populations. I am not completely convinced by the arguments so far raised on neonicotinoids, and believe that further research is urgently needed. My concern with the report as a whole is that it proposes a systematic programme of Commission action, which seems to me to go against the principle of subsidiarity.

2016/11/22

While this annual report on the Banking Union correctly identifies some of the problems (e.g. the inconsistency of stress tests, non-performing loans on bank balance sheets, zero-risk weighting of sovereign bonds, use of state aid), and I can support some of the EFDD amendments in this regard, it also calls on the Commission to introduce more harmonisation via regulations. Accordingly I voted against the report.

2016/11/22

This report deals with EU initiatives to limit and disrupt the financing of terrorist organisations. As such it takes, in some places, excessive interference in the internal affairs of Member States, an increased role in policy formulation for the EU institutions and a greater role for the EU institutions in action taken. I am wary of the UK’s participation in any centrally organised EU programmes or automatic exchanges of information, which is why I voted against the recommendations as a whole.

2016/11/22

I believe in equality of opportunity, I oppose any gender-based discrimination. The best candidate should be chosen at the same pay – irrespective of gender, religion, sexuality, ethnicity or pretty much anything else. In fact where the private sector is concerned, whenever they choose the wrong person for a job by discriminating, they effectively discriminate against themselves because it hits their own effectiveness, and consequently hits their profits.But where I diverge from this report is I do not consider equality of outcome to be an appropriate measure in and of itself of non-discrimination, because outcomes are based on a host of other factors. Not least that more men or more women might be more interested in a particular job or have different life and career goals, and in my view society should not measure that – it is none of the state’s business how we choose to approach work – but what we should do is stand against illegal and unfair discrimination.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This matter was approved without a vote, but had there been a vote my intention would have been to abstain on it for the same reasons which led to my abstention on the setting up of the committee.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I believe that these matters should be determined by the UK Government rather than by the European Union, and therefore I voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I believe that these matters should be determined by the UK Government rather than by the European Union, and therefore I voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The proposal forms part of the ‘External Investment Plan’, which aims to tackle the root causes of migration by helping to achieve development goals in third countries. The aim is to provide additional financing to the private sector in these third countries through loans and grants. The two main changes in this proposal to the Guarantee Fund are:1. Under the new private-sector lending mandate set up by separate legislation, the EU will be entitled to the risk premium revenues generated under EIB financing operations – this proposal will mean the amount of the Guarantee Fund in surplus exceeding 10% of the total outstanding of loans will be paid back to the EU budget.2. Management of the assets of the Guarantee Fund shall be transferred from the EIB to the Commission.I am opposed to both of these changes and therefore I voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I opposed this for the same reasons that I opposed the previous report. I note that the proposal provides for an increase of the ceiling under this EU guarantee of EUR 3 billion, and for adding a new private-sector lending mandate for projects addressing root causes of migration amounting to EUR 2.3 billion.

2016/11/22

. ‒ There were some positive aspects to this report, including calls for greater transparency and accountability. However, overall I voted against it due to the nature and direction of the European Investment Bank, and my concerns about an increasingly politicised approach to it.

2016/11/22

Whilst I do not agree with everything in this report, there are many favourable aspects to it.Specifically, I applaud the following words – and voted in favour of this text:‘including the increased discrimination against Christians and other religious minorities; condemns the confiscation of 50 Aramean churches, monasteries and cemeteries in Mardin; calls on the Commission to urgently address these issues with the Turkish authorities; urges the Turkish Government to release pastor Andrew Brunson and to allow him to return home’.I note the growing concerns over persecution of Christians in Turkey, and that Turkey is now ranked No 31 on Open Doors’ World Watch List in terms of persecution. Further to the specific cases described above, ‘Some believers from Muslim backgrounds keep their faith a secret and are too afraid to meet with other Christians because of pressure from their families and communities. Religion is recorded on ID cards, and can be difficult to change. If believers change their religion to ‘Christian’ on their ID cards, it is easy for employers to discriminate against them. However, if they don’t, their children will automatically be registered as Muslim and expected to attend Islamic classes.’

2016/11/22

I have serious concerns about the current political situation in Venezuela and recognise the impact which that situation is having upon the daily lives of its people. Consequently there is much which I agree with in that report, but I am unable to vote for it because the report contains further suggestions of action at EU level.

2016/11/22

I believe that in dealing with international organisations like the UN it should be nation states, not the European Union, which take the lead. However, there is much to commend in this report.

2016/11/22

I do not hold any strong opinions on changing the clocks in spring and autumn; however, it should not be for the European Union to interfere with national sovereignty and decisions. Indeed, the issues will differ depending upon how northerly a European country is; Greece is different from (say) the north of Sweden in this respect.

2016/11/22

This being a technical update, I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

Whilst in agreement with the protection of minorities and non-discrimination, this report rather missed the point in a number of places. Furthermore, its highly EU-centric approach seeks action often supplanting the sovereign role of Member States. Issues such as education must remain sovereign, for example.

2016/11/22

As a matter of principle, my starting point is to support objections pursuant to Rule 105(3) because they generally prevent the Commission from introducing legislation under Delegated Acts or taking action without proper scrutiny. I only do otherwise when there is a strong reason to do so.

2016/11/22

This gave me great cause for concern; there are two fundamentally competing principles at stake here. Firstly, I do not believe that politicians should be above the law. For that reason, in general I would tend to vote to waive immunity.However, where the issue at stake is freedom of speech and protection of an independent mandate, different considerations apply.In principle, unless there is an exceptionally strong reason to do otherwise, I vote against waiving immunity where accusations are made of libellous comments which could in any way be taken to relate to the performance of an MEP’s duties in the broader sense of representing constituents. I may fundamentally disagree with certain comments, but that does not mean they should be a matter for the courts.

2016/11/22

Though I believe in cooperation and exchange of information in the technology and energy sectors, I note the overall budgetary implications of Horizon 2020 as a whole. I consequently voted against.

2016/11/22

This resolution concerns procedures for authorisation of pesticides, of which glyphosate has been the most controversial. My previous votes on glyphosate have been based upon a principle that further scientific analysis is necessary concerning glyphosate. A negative vote would have implied that I am, in principle, happy for the Commission to re-authorise and re-approve such pesticides. I am not.A positive vote would imply that I believe the appropriate recourse is a Special Committee; I do not consider this to be the best way forward either. Furthermore, post-Brexit, I believe that the UK government should take this decision for UK crops.Overall I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

This report addresses geo-blocking based on nationality or place of residence. It tries to prohibit the blocking of websites and the re-routing of customers from one website to another. I agree with this premise, and I agree with increased consumer choice and consumer protection. However, the thrust of this report is further EU harmonisation and the advancement of the Single Market and the Digital Single Market. I therefore very reluctantly voted against.

2016/11/22

I believe in a free functioning, self-regulated market. A new emission trading system would try to reduce CO2 emissions at the expense of European jobs and industry. The sectors concerned, such as the steel industry, already face stiff competition from countries such as China. I oppose the strengthening of the Commission’s powers to the detriment of Member States and the report´s intention to include the maritime and aviation sector in the ETS mechanism. I felt that it was consistent with my principles, in particular the principle that such matters are matters for national sovereignty, to vote against this proposal.

2016/11/22

The European Central Bank has focused in recent years on propping up the euro, a currency entirely unsuited to the needs of a 21st-century economy and the diversity of economies from Germany to Greece. This report fails to comprehend the nature of the problem, and furthermore calls for more European Union action. There are various calls to deepen Economic and Monetary Union.Given that the UK has triggered Article 50, there was a case to be made for an abstention on the grounds that the ECB does not directly impact on the UK. However, this report linked ECB funds with the EU budget, and therefore I felt that casting a vote was indeed appropriate. I voted against but I did, however, support various amendments which sought to highlight the problems within the ECB.

2016/11/22

Decisions should always be based on technology, not targets. The European Union is all about its objectives, in particular its obsession with Carbon dioxide targets. The trouble with such targets is that they distort and lead you down blind alleys of policy making. None of this is really the point. The point is that we do not need an EU clean energy innovation strategy. I believe that such matters should be decided for the British people by the UK Parliament in Westminster.I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I support the aim of this treaty to facilitate access to published works for persons who are blind, visually impaired, or otherwise print disabled. The UK has already ratified and provides a number of exclusions to copyright intended to benefit the visually impaired. What I do not support is the EU overreaching its competences. The UK was one of eight EU countries to challenge the EU in ratifying this treaty as a block. For that reason, as a UKIP MEP, I abstained.

2016/11/22

This proposal seeks to strengthen already existing legislation for the protection of a child when a child has been abducted as part of a matrimonial rift. I would prefer measures like these were left to Sovereign States, but as this report is aiming to make an existing system more efficient I abstained.

2016/11/22

Once again this report calls for more EU action and greater coordination at EU level. In the light of the Brexit vote in the UK, I cannot go against the expressed wish of the British people in terms of harmonisation and therefore felt it important to vote against.

2016/11/22

The regulation of professions is something that should be left to Member States, I consequently voted against this report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This report refers to surveillance technology and other things which the EU feels could be bought supposedly for civilian/peaceful purposes, only to be used subsequently for nefarious purposes. The EU has therefore heavily politicised trade in this area. I do not support EU interference in trade so I voted against the proposals.

2016/11/22

Whilst of course I support the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources, as per the title of this legislative resolution, its contents are unlikely to assist with achieving its laudable goals and in fact could prove to be completely counterproductive. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

The European Commission continues imposing never-ending objectives for emissions reductions. EU policies are forcing the investment of vast amount of money for activity that will have little or no effect on climate. It calls for a new measures and asks Member States to increase the use of renewable energy in order to reduce CO2 emissions from electricity generation. I voted against this report because I object to any new EU legislation in this field.

2016/11/22

The European Commission continues imposing never-ending objectives for emissions reductions. EU policies are forcing the investment of vast amount of money for activity that will have little or no effect on climate. It calls for a new measures and asks Member States to increase the use of renewable energy in order to reduce CO2 emissions from electricity generation. I voted against this report because I object to any new EU legislation in this field.

2016/11/22

This report updates the EU arrangements in the South Pacific by transposing into EU law 15 recent local management measures. The EU should not be acting like a state and engaging in these neo-colonial arrangements on the other side of the world, however laudable some of the objectives may be.

2016/11/22

This is a non-legislative report on the implementation of EU macro-regional strategies. The document encourages improved coordination and better partnerships between different actors and policies at national and regional level. The document calls on the Commission to take action on matters which should be the responsibility of the Member States. With this in mind, I naturally voted against this own—initiative report.

2016/11/22

This is the long, detailed technical report which implements the CFP (Common Fisheries Policy) reform of the previous Parliament. UKIP tabled and championed amendments prohibiting the devastating use of electrical pulse fishing. I supported those amendments.I believe that the UK’s Exclusive Economic Zone should be a matter for United Kingdom policy, not European Union policy. The United Kingdom, post-Brexit, must regain exclusive competence over our own fishing grounds – which provide a significant national resource and are currently being mismanaged by the European Union. Consequently, I voted against this report as a matter of principle.

2016/11/22

Whilst I believe that seawater should be safeguarded and protected from pollution and environmental degradation, I consider this a matter for sovereign states and outside the EU’s competences. I therefore abstained in the final report.

2016/11/22

This report is calling for more EU action, additional funding and gender mainstreaming – all of which I oppose. Consequently, I voted against.

2016/11/22

This matter was not subject to a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy I believe that my constituents have a right to know how I voted, and therefore I confirm that I abstained. I have serious concerns about the current situation in Afghanistan and recognise the impact which that situation is having upon the daily lives of its people. I am unable to vote in favour of this report because it calls for action at EU level.

2016/11/22

This matter was not subject to a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy I believe that my constituents have a right to know how I voted, and therefore I confirm that I abstained. Whilst the report had much to commend it with regard to the situation in Burma, it also promoted EU foreign policy and I could not therefore vote in favour.

2016/11/22

This is a non-legislative report that provides Parliament’s views on the implementation of legislation that was designed to combat the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children. I welcomed the tougher language on prosecution mentioned in this report; however I disagree that this is something that could not be dealt with at Member State level. I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

The majority of the report is merely an overview of these activities and a justification for the continued role that the committee plays in European parliamentary and EU-wide work. The report mostly deals with the procedure petitioning EU institutions undertakes. I welcomed the report’s calls for greater transparency and full public access to EU documents; however, it also makes some suggestions regarding further Commission legislative initiatives, which is why I voted against.

2016/11/22

This non-legislative resolution endeavours to map out means to lower emissions from all transport sources. I welcome interoperability but believe it should not be driven by the Commission. I also disagreed with multiple calls on the Commission for further EU interference. Given my principles regarding the European Union, I felt that I should vote against.

2016/11/22

I believe that it is correct for negotiations between the United Kingdom and the European Union to move to talks on trade. I believe that the EFDD motion for a resolution provided the correct balance and a sensible, moderate approach to the continuation of negotiations. I therefore voted in favour of the EFDD resolution.I could not, however, do the same for the resolution from other political groups, which sought to place an impossible burden upon the United Kingdom and to dictate terms to the United Kingdom as to the UK’s domestic policies following Brexit. It is precisely such EU interference on matters which should be sovereign to nation states which was the biggest driver of Brexit in the first place. Any suggestion that the EU can interfere with British sovereignty post-Brexit must be resisted. For these reasons I voted against.

2016/11/22

This matter was the subject of an objection pursuant to Rule 106. I firstly note that in practical terms, an abstention and a vote against are materially identical. In order for such a motion to pass, it requires a majority of the constituent members of the Parliament to affirmatively vote in favour. Not voting, abstaining, and voting against all have the same impact in terms of frustrating that goal.To vote against would be to endorse the Commission’s position and to endorse the principle of such delegated legislation; this would fail to signal my disagreement with such a principle.To vote in favour would constitute support for the effective banning of kebabs; it appears that alternatives to the use of phosphates are insufficient for the industry. Furthermore, this would leave matters in the hands of the EU when I believe they should be determined by Member States.Consequently I abstained, which – due to the arcane voting system – has precisely the same impact as a vote against.

2016/11/22

The motion seeks extra-territorial control by the EU of financial matters, in particular the report is designed to negatively impact the UK as a third country post-Brexit, not least by calling for the Brexit deal to include provisions that prevent the UK tax and regulatory system from encouraging tax competition (between EU-27) or tax evasion (in British Overseas Territories). The report undermines the rule of law by calling for the burden of proof to be reversed on whether taxes have been paid, failing which monies are confiscated. The report undermines national tax sovereignty and calls for EU interference and harmonisation. Accordingly I voted against.

2016/11/22

The common security and defence policy focuses on military capabilities and the EU’s civilian and military overseas missions. It also deals with the research, development and procurement of military equipment. It carries the usual calls for increased use of PESCO, an EU military-civilian headquarters, greater overall coordination between Member States in all defence areas and the establishment of a Directorate-General for Defence within the Commission structure. The report calls on Member States to increase their future financial contributions to the EU budget in order to cover all additional costs incurred by the EU in connection with the European Defence Fund. As a UKIP MEP, I felt that it was consistent with my principles to vote against this report.

2016/11/22

The Common Foreign and Security Policy is EU—level coordination of the foreign policy of the EU and Member States. I do not believe that the European Union should be interfering in the affairs of sovereign nations, including in the area of foreign policy, which is why I voted against the report.

2016/11/22

This report is part of an annual review of the state of human rights and democracy globally. It discusses the effectiveness of current EU action, proposals for how this can be improved and justifications for further EU intervention globally. Consequently, I had no option but to vote against.

2016/11/22

This is an own-initiative report looking at the situation in Hong Kong 20 years after the handover of sovereignty from the United Kingdom to the People’s Republic of China. I disagree with the notion of the EU interfering with Hong Kong’s tax policy and subsequently voted against the report as a whole.

2016/11/22

This matter (excepting the amendment to Article 5(1)(d)) was subject to approval without a vote. I merely note that, whilst I support the principle of sustainable management, I feel unable to support the common fisheries policy which is structurally incapable of achieving that aim.

2016/11/22

These amendments fail to recognise the genuine problems within the system, and therefore will have little if any positive impact in resolving them.

2016/11/22

I do not support the principle of this legislative report. The European Union’s approach towards lowering emissions has proven to be counterproductive, and this is merely more of the same. The Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) pushes up energy prices, and therefore impacts upon industrial competitiveness. This leaves European businesses at a disadvantage, causing more polluting businesses outside the EU to capture more of the market.This outsources pollution and costs jobs.

2016/11/22

As I oppose the EFSI, I consequently supported the only available rejection amendment and opposed the provisional agreement.

2016/11/22

I note that this proposal will lead to inter-institutional negotiations and limit Parliamentary scrutiny. I further note that this legislation may come into force before the United Kingdom has fully left the European Union. I have concerns over the protection of national sovereignty, and over the EU’s approach to the exercise of copyrights. I therefore opposed this proposal to enter into negotiations pursuant to Rule 69c.

2016/11/22

I note that Eleonora Forenza was acting in her capacity as an MEP. Whether or not MEPs should in principle have immunity, the fact remains that she does enjoy it – and the rules must be applied equally to all MEPs across every political group. It was therefore consistent for me to vote in favour of this request for the defence of her immunity.

2016/11/22

I note that the actions complained of appear to fall substantially outside the remit of an MEP acting within the performance of their duties. I have some minor concerns about the text of the report, which should in my view refer to allegations rather than state them as facts (it being the nature of court proceedings, not the Legal Affairs Committee, to determine facts), but I cannot fault the logic behind the broad principle of the report.

2016/11/22

This change appears to have little substantive legal impact, but may potentially provide some simplification of the customs process, and therefore I abstained.

2016/11/22

Such matters should be for nation-states, not the European Union, to determine. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I voted against this Agreement for the same reasons that I opposed the Girling report in an earlier vote. I believe this scheme to be counterproductive and therefore oppose an Agreement to effectively extend it.

2016/11/22

I believe that it should be for Member States, not the European Union, to negotiate such agreements. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I believe that it should be for Member States, not the European Union, to negotiate such agreements. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

If the report genuinely were likely to strengthen citizens’ rights, I would have supported it. This does not appear to achieve such an aim, and it takes an incredibly EU-centric approach to a matter which should fundamentally be for nation states.

2016/11/22

This report seeks further European Union control and harmonisation; I therefore opposed it.

2016/11/22

This proposal for the mobilisation of the contingency margin seeks to amend the original payment plan. The original plan imposed ceilings in future budgets which would disappear under this new proposal. As a UKIP MEP I felt this was not in the interests of the British taxpayer and therefore I voted against it.

2016/11/22

While I of course oppose the non-legislative EU Parliament’s comments included in this report, I voted in favour as the legislative part of the proposal will mean the lowering of contributions from Member States to the EU.

2016/11/22

I previously opposed the principle of setting up the Solidarity Fund, and of including that Fund within the general budget of the European Union because I believe that such matters are better handled by national governments rather than administered remotely by the European Union.However, this fund already having been established, and the money already being available, I then abstained upon the application of that fund and changes proposed to speed up initial payments. I do not object to the specific cause to which this money is being put, merely to the principle of the creation of the fund and the mechanisms by which it is applied.

2016/11/22

Here the Flexibility Mechanism is being activated to provide EUR 837 million for migration and security. The Flexibility Instrument provides funding in a given financial year for clearly identified expenses which could not be covered by one or more budget headings without exceeding their expenditure ceilings. It is a way for the EU to spend more taxpayer money outside budget ceilings: here, especially on a failing policy area, I naturally voted against.

2016/11/22

The principle of subsidiarity dictates that decisions should be taken at the closest possible level to the citizen – in this case, at regional or national level. Therefore, these projects should not be funded by the European Union. It is absurd that the arbiters of whether this funding should, or should not, be given are Members of the European Parliament with no detailed knowledge of the situation. This project may well be of benefit to the people of Greece, but I am not best placed to judge.The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund should be scrapped, which would give money back to the Member States to decide for themselves about the appropriateness of such funding. Consequently, I had no option but to vote against, even though this may be a worthwhile project.

2016/11/22

The principle of subsidiarity dictates that decisions should be taken at the closest possible level to the citizen – in this case, at regional or national level. Therefore, these projects should not be funded by the European Union. It is absurd that the arbiters of whether this funding should, or should not, be given are Members of the European Parliament with no detailed knowledge of the situation. This project may well be of benefit to the people of Finland, but I am not best placed to judge.The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund should be scrapped, which would give money back to the Member States to decide for themselves about the appropriateness of such funding. Consequently, I had no option but to vote against, even though this may be a worthwhile project.

2016/11/22

Our Group previously submitted 65 cost-saving amendments to the 2018 EU budget. Most of our amendments, which would have saved in total over EUR 3 billion of taxpayers’ money, related to cutting of bureaucracy. These proposals were for ‘victimless cuts’ which impact only upon the inner workings of the European Union and luxuries for officials. All were ignored.I voted against the resolution because I cannot support an increased EU budget for 2018 set at EUR 160.1 billion, especially considering that the British people have already voted to leave and expect to stop paying money to the EU altogether.

2016/11/22

This matter was not subject to a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy I believe that my constituents have a right to know how I voted, and therefore I confirm that I voted in favour of the report concluding the immunity of Ana Gomes should not be waived.There are two fundamentally competing principles at stake here. Firstly, I do not believe that politicians should be above the law. For that reason, in general I would tend to vote against defending immunity. Nevertheless, the comments made were clearly in the exercise of her duties. I support freedom of speech; defamation in the UK is a civil rather than a criminal matter. I believe that this is the best way. Furthermore, I call upon Parliament at other times to adhere to its own Rules of Procedure. Under the Rules, immunity in this case should not be waived. I therefore voted to defend immunity because, in my opinion, to do otherwise would be to vote to break our own rules. I must remain consistent in my approach.

2016/11/22

The Commission wants to increase the amount of money spent on schemes such as the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI). In accordance with this they want an increase of EUR 1.2 billion for the YEI. In addition, there will be further funding allocated to the outermost regions and for the European territorial cooperation. In total the Commission wish to increase the resources for economic, social and territorial cohesion by EUR 4 billion. As a UKIP MEP, I felt this was not in the interests of the British taxpayer and therefore I voted against it.

2016/11/22

PRIMA is an EU project that wants to increase cooperation in research and innovation in the EU Mediterranean area, with particular focus on the agro-food and water managements sectors. This project will be funded with EUR 200 million under Horizon 2020. The report also states that with the implementation of PRIMA it will be possible to better address the causes of migration.As a UKIP MEP I strongly support the role of research in our society. However, I believe in the context of Brexit that the EU desperately needs budget cuts as a result of heavy deficiencies in several of its policy areas which is why I voted against the report.

2016/11/22

PRIMA is an EU project that wants to increase cooperation in research and innovation in the EU Mediterranean area, with particular focus on the agro-food and water managements sectors. This project will be funded with EUR 200 million under Horizon 2020. The report also states that with the implementation of PRIMA it will be possible to better address the causes of migration.As a UKIP MEP I strongly support the role of research in our society. However, I believe in the context of Brexit that the EU desperately needs budget cuts as a result of heavy deficiencies in several of its policy areas which is why I voted against the report.

2016/11/22

PRIMA is an EU project that wants to increase cooperation in research and innovation in the EU Mediterranean area, with particular focus on the agro-food and water managements sectors. This project will be funded with EUR 200 million under Horizon 2020. The report also states that with the implementation of PRIMA it will be possible to better address the causes of migration.As a UKIP MEP I strongly support the role of research in our society. However, I believe in the context of Brexit that the EU desperately needs budget cuts as a result of heavy deficiencies in several of its policy areas which is why I voted against the report.

2016/11/22

On this report I abstained, it is principally a matter for the third country concerned if they wish to adopt the Hague Convention, though it should not be up to the EU to authorise.

2016/11/22

On this report I abstained, it is principally a matter for the third country concerned if they wish to adopt the Hague Convention, though it should not be up to the EU to authorise.

2016/11/22

On this report I abstained, it is principally a matter for the third country concerned if they wish to adopt the Hague Convention, though it should not be up to the EU to authorise.

2016/11/22

On this report I abstained, it is principally a matter for the third country concerned if they wish to adopt the Hague Convention, though it should not be up to the EU to authorise.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This constitutes further EU interference in accounting and financial services regulation. As I advocate greater transparency, I could not agree to particular waivers called for in this report, and I therefore voted against it.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The Instrument Contributing to Peace and Stability is an EU fund used for development purposes in third countries. The Commission has proposed several changes to the functioning of the instrument. The most significant of these changes is an extension of the eligibility for funding to ‘military actors’ in third countries.Throughout the procedure concerns have been raised over the legality of these changes in relation to Article 41(2) TEU, which prohibits expenditure arising from operations having military or defence implications in the EU budget. There is also ambiguity in the term ‘military actor’, without any specific qualifications as to what military actors would be eligible. The fund will have a budget of EUR 100 000 000 for the period 2017-2020.I am uncomfortable with the suggested changes to the instrument and, in the interests of British taxpayers alone, I voted against this proposal.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This report calls for further harmonisation and Commission action in various fields relating to the financial sector. I therefore voted against it.

2016/11/22

This report calls for further interference in the taxation of goods and services within Member States, in particular an enhanced role for the Commission in co-ordinating VAT matters and tax harmonisation. I naturally voted against it.

2016/11/22

This report calls for further interference in the taxation of goods and services within Member States, in particular an enhanced role for the Commission in co-ordinating VAT matters and tax harmonisation. I naturally voted against it.

2016/11/22

I have serious concerns about the current political situation in Yemen and recognise the impact which that situation is having upon the daily lives of its people. Consequently there is much which I agree with in that report, but I am unable to vote for it because the report contains further suggestions of action at EU level, which is why I abstained.

2016/11/22

This report is supportive of extensive Commission involvement in and monitoring of Member State domestic policies. It also includes several calls for fresh legislative initiative. As a UKIP MEP, it was consistent for me to vote against this Agreement because I believe that such decisions should be taken for the UK by the UK Parliament in Westminster rather than by the European Parliament.

2016/11/22

The report is calling for the establishment of a common framework for the prevention and remedying of environmental damage, but also calls for further money for the European Union and further centralisation at EU level. As a UKIP MEP, I felt that it was consistent with my principles, that such matters are matters for national sovereignty, to vote against this resolution.

2016/11/22

This legislation seeks further harmonisation at European Union level; consequently, I voted against.

2016/11/22

This legislation seeks further harmonisation at European Union level; consequently, I voted against.

2016/11/22

Whilst I am completely supportive of the respect for private life and the protection of personal data, I am concerned that the content of this legislation centralises at European Union level matters which should be determined by the Member States, and therefore I voted against.

2016/11/22

I wanted to vote in favour of this resolution, because I believe that the report correctly identifies many of the problems which are currently faced, mainly by women, across Europe.I agree with many of the proposed solutions. However, the report itself is highly complimentary about the European Union and its fundamental principles. I cannot support this language, which pervades the text.I therefore reluctantly abstained.

2016/11/22

I supported the alternative motion for a resolution from the EFDD.Whist the main report is critical of the current economic policies of the Union, crucially it does not have any support for an exit mechanism to offer Member States the opportunity to leave the euro should they so desire.

2016/11/22

Under normal circumstances, I would abstain on this matter as it will not affect the United Kingdom: any future trade deal between the European Union and Australia is unlikely to come into effect until well after Brexit has taken place. On this occasion, following input from colleagues who fear that these negotiations might present a conflict of interest for the UK in pursuing our own trade policy (based upon the European Union's definition of sincere co-operation), I very reluctantly acceded to their request and voted against.

2016/11/22

Under normal circumstances, I would abstain on this matter as it will not affect the United Kingdom: any future trade deal between the European Union and New Zealand is unlikely to come into effect until well after Brexit has taken place. On this occasion, following input from colleagues who fear that these negotiations might present a conflict of interest for the UK in pursuing our own trade policy (based upon the European Union's definition of sincere co-operation), I very reluctantly acceded to their request and voted against.

2016/11/22

Whist this report in its amendments and some paragraphs is critical of the implementation of EU law, in the main it calls on the Commission to be more proactive in enforcement in respect of failures by Member States, in particular concerning the allocation of refugees. I do not believe that the European Union should be interfering in the affairs of sovereign nations, and I therefore voted against it.

2016/11/22

I voted against the final resolution because I cannot support an increase in the budget of the European Union, especially considering that the British people have already voted to leave and expect to stop paying money to the EU altogether.Our Group submitted 65 cost-saving amendments to the EU budget, and we voted in favour of these as well as in favour of cost-saving measures proposed by others. Most of our amendments, which would have saved in total over EUR 3 billion of taxpayers’ money, related to cutting of bureaucracy. These proposals were for ‘victimless cuts’ which impact only upon the inner workings of the European Union and luxuries for officials.We voted against any measures which would add to the European Union budget, because it would be completely contrary to the decision of the British people on Brexit. In some cases the additions would duplicate funding streams which already exist directly from the UK Government to the British people.

2016/11/22

I voted against this non-legislative and non-binding motion for a resolution. The resolution called for the cuts proposed by the Council to be reversed and more resources be given to the EU budget. Yet the Council was not proposing cuts, merely a below-inflation increase. I believe that the EU budget is already too high.We voted for amendments which called for cuts to the EU budget, opposed development of an EU military, and also of course voted in favour of our own amendment which said no EU funding should go to bullfighting.

2016/11/22

Whilst legally speaking the Lisbon Treaty only gives the European Parliament the specific power to grant discharge to the Commission, it is a matter of transparency that the Parliament does so for EU institutions and agencies. Only the Council does not cooperate with the discharge procedure, and consequently the Parliament refuses to grant discharge to the Council. For reasons of transparency and democracy, I supported the proposal to refuse discharge to the Council.

2016/11/22

According to the Commission, the aim of this directive is to further limit the legal levels of exposure to these materials in the workplace and update the legislation in accordance with the latest scientific expertise in the field. This proposal does not create new legislation but rather updates existing legislation. Ultimately, I abstained; I did so because, whilst recognising some merit in the report, there was too much call for European Union and Commission involvement.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This is a legislative first reading report that seeks to establish an EU Entry/Exit System for the Schengen Area. The EU is currently working on a proposal to establish a system, which will largely replicate the US ESTA programme, whereby visitors will need to register their details/apply for entry prior to arrival. This report seeks to establish one of the many mechanisms needed to create such a programme. The establishment of the EES is also expected to cost upwards of EUR 500 million. This is ultimately UK taxpayers’ money being used to fund a project for the benefit of the Schengen Area. Additionally, the UK after Brexit will be a ‘third country’, which will mean our citizens will have to provide this biometric data to EU databases. It is also highly likely that the applicant will eventually fund such an operation. For these reasons, I voted against the report.

2016/11/22

This is making a technical alteration necessary in the Schengen Border Code to facilitate the introduction of the Entry/exit System (EES). As I opposed the EES, I naturally voted against this as well.

2016/11/22

Whilst I am against any discrimination, the report makes a significant amount of suggestions or demands for Member States and the EU in all spheres of life (housing, employment, education, healthcare etc.). For this reason, I chose to abstain.

2016/11/22

This is a recommendation to guarantee the legal certainty of bilateral agreements and to develop a wider European Common Aviation Area. This agreement is the first to have been signed with a country outside the European continent. The agreement should be seen against the background of the European Neighbourhood Policy, through which the EU is working to strengthen relations with its neighbouring countries. Whilst supporting the principle of the agreement, I prefer such matters to be decided by sovereign nation states, not the European Union.

2016/11/22

This is a consultation procedure on authorising France to apply a reduced rate of certain indirect taxes on ‘traditional’ rum produced in Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Martinique and Réunion. The rum production in these areas exceeded the quota eligible for special tax treatment by one-fifth. Traditional rum from France’s outermost regions has been subject to special excise duty arrangements on the French mainland market since 1923. These special taxes pre-date the existence of the formation of the EU so France should not have to ask the Commission to increase the annual quota from 120 000 to 144 000 hap (hectolitres of pure alcohol). The EU should not have the right to be intervening in national state affairs. France should be able to regulate its own special tax arrangements with its outermost regions; therefore, I abstained in the final vote.

2016/11/22

I support exchange of information and cooperation among Member States in the field of research. However, I am against the financial implications of this EU project.

2016/11/22

This is a technically non-legislative vote to subject furanylfentanyl to control measures (i.e. criminalise it) at EU level. This designer drug is classed as a psychoactive substance. In the UK it is already criminalised under the Psychoactive Substances Act of 2016 and the UK is not bound by this decision. Whilst I may prefer this to be done on a bilateral basis, controlling the drug at an EU level will likely assist the UK Government in the fight against this drug at home. I therefore abstained on this report.

2016/11/22

Though I welcomed calls for transparency and better oversight of the money spent, ultimately the report calls for more EU interference in Member State employment polices and increased spending of taxpayers’ money on EU initiatives and information campaigns.

2016/11/22

This is a first reading, legislative report in which the Commission wishes to harmonise rules on organic or secondary raw fertilisers and label them as an ‘EC’ product. This will mean that they can be traded between EU countries and that less raw materials will have to be imported from outside the EU. However, the report could mean that production costs will rise for farmers, along with diminishing the quality of fertiliser products. A briefing on the report issued by the EPRS highlights that, for instance for SMEs producing compost, new compliance costs could amount to 10% of production costs, impacting SME competitiveness. Due to these considerations and because the report wishes to harmonise rules across the EU, I voted against the proposal.

2016/11/22

This is a legislative first reading report that seeks to strengthen the EU’s early warning system and risk assessment to establish a more effective and rapid response to new psychoactive substances. Interlinked with the other legislative report on drugs, this report primarily seeks to substantially reduce the deadlines that agencies must work towards to deem whether new psychoactive substances [are ‘drugs’]. It will cost approximately EUR 670 000 to develop this system with annual running costs of EUR 100 000. I recognise the positive intentions regarding an early warning system, but the report also seeks to increase the remit of Europol at the expense of British taxpayers.

2016/11/22

This report empowers the Commission to extend the policy of discards for up to three years whilst the landing obligation is rolled out through regional multiannual plans. I voted against the report as I oppose discards, the CFP and the pretensions of the EU to determine what happens in the North Sea.

2016/11/22

Whilst I normally on principle would support objections pursuant to Rule 106, I am concerned in this case about the impact which that would have upon the UK, and am receiving mixed advice as to whether there exist reasonable toxicity concerns. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

Whilst I normally on principle would support objections pursuant to Rule 106, I am concerned in this case about the impact which that would have upon the UK, and am receiving mixed advice as to whether there exist reasonable toxicity concerns. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

There are various conflicting positions here, irrespective of the specific question of genetically modified foods. I am inclined to support an objection to an implementing act on democratic grounds, but am concerned about the impact of such an objection upon free trade. Furthermore, the impact of this proposal is specific to one particular soybean 305423 x 40-3-2. I am concerned about the potential impact upon developing countries on the one hand, but respect the question of testing for potential health risks – though it appears to me that any such risk would be incredibly low. Consequently, I chose to abstain.

2016/11/22

Whilst I normally on principle would support objections pursuant to Rule 106, I am concerned in this case about the impact which that would have upon the UK, and am receiving mixed advice as to whether there exist reasonable concerns. I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

This Draft Amending Budget (DAB) increases the level of commitment appropriations by EUR 297.8 million. It contains two parts, the European Fund for Sustainable Development and the European Aid Reserve. The European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD) is a new financial instrument related to the EUs external actions. It comprises financial guarantees/grants/loans to foster private sector investment. Its aim is to tackle the root causes of migration in the European Neighbourhood and Africa and help achieve the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals. This DAB is going to allocate a budget to the EFSD of EUR 275 million from the Flexibility Instrument.The Emergency Aid Reserve (EAR) is a last resort financial instrument that lies beyond normal budgetary constraints. It is used for emergency situations in non-EU countries that require aid that was not foreseeable. A priority for the money is humanitarian operations, but it can be used for civil crisis management and protection. Recently a piece of legislation was passed, a proposal on the MFF midterm ‘revision’, which required the Commission to increase the EAR from EUR 280 million to EUR 300 million. This DAB will increase the budget of the EAR by EUR 22.8 million. Consequently I voted against it.

2016/11/22

Here the Flexibility Mechanism is being activated to provide EUR 275 million for the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD). The Flexibility Instrument ‘provides funding in a given financial year for clearly identified expenses which could not be covered by one or more budget headings without exceeding their expenditure ceilings’. It is a way for the EU to spend more money outside budget ceilings so naturally I voted against it.

2016/11/22

This resolution is a response to a Commission paper, which sets out different options about the future financing of the EU budget. The resolution calls for increases in the MFF, that the duration of the MFF should be in line with the political cycle of the Commission and the Parliament, and calls for a new system of own resources to take funding away from national contributions. The resolution says that four of the five options in the Commission paper (‘Carrying on’, ‘Doing less together’, ‘Some do more’ and ‘Radical redesign’) would be a decline in the EU’s ambition and goes on to fully support the 5th option (‘doing more together’). It calls for more information about a dedicated Euro area budget line and states that Brexit provides an opportunity to end all rebates. Overall, it is calling for a more ambitious and bigger EU budget, which is why I voted against it.

2016/11/22

This report calls on the Commission to present a legislative proposal effectively protecting whistle-blowers in the EU. In addition, this report calls on Member States to introduce an independent body responsible for collecting reports and verifying the credibility of the whistle-blowers. It goes on to call on the Commission to set up a similar body responsible for coordinating Member State activities. Though there were many amendments I supported, the report calls for ever increasing EU interference and legislation, therefore I voted against it.

2016/11/22

This report looks at the use of minimum income within the European Union and how effective it is at reducing poverty. I am against the general principles underpinning the report, such as calls for the redistribution of wealth. In addition, it calls for the introduction by the Member States of minimum income schemes by the European Union. This and other calls for EU level action are also fundamental positions to which I am opposed, therefore I voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I am against the development of EU foreign policy and the politicisation of trade, which is why I voted against this agreement.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I am not against the free exchange of data, but as this affects only the Schengen zone I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

I am not against the free exchange of data, but as it only affects the Czech Republic I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I am not against the free exchange of data, but as it only affects Portugal I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I am not against the free exchange of data, but as this affects only Greece I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

I agreed in principle with the suggested changes, but think such matters are matters for national sovereignty. I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

I agreed in principle with the suggested changes, but think that such matters are matters for national sovereignty. I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

This is a first reading, legislative report in which the Commission wishes to harmonise rules on organic or secondary raw fertilisers and label them as an ‘EC’ product. This will mean that they can be traded between EU countries and that less raw materials will have to be imported from outside the EU. However the report could mean that production costs will rise for farmers, along with diminishing the quality of fertiliser products. Due to these considerations and because the report wishes to harmonise rules across the EU, I chose to abstain

2016/11/22

There are various conflicting positions here, irrespective of the specific question of genetically-modified foods.I am inclined to support an objection to an implementing act on democratic grounds, but am concerned about the impact of such an objection upon free trade. Furthermore, the impact of this proposal is specific to one particular soybean, FG72 x A5547-127.I am concerned about the potential impact upon developing countries on the one hand, but respect the question of testing for potential health risks – though it appears to me that any such risk would be incredibly low.Consequently, I chose to abstain.

2016/11/22

I am inclined to support an objection to an implementing act on democratic grounds, but am concerned about the impact of such an objection upon free trade. Furthermore, the impact of this proposal is specific to one particular soybean, DAS-44406-6.I am concerned about the potential impact upon developing countries on the one hand, but respect the question of testing for potential health risks – though it appears to me that any such risk would be incredibly low.Consequently, I chose to abstain.

2016/11/22

I fully support the tackling of violence against women and deplore such an abominable crime as child marriage; the UK is committed to this cause, with forced marriage considered a criminal act under UK law. However, although I support the Istanbul convention, I do not feel it necessary for the EU to accede; this should be at the discretion of individual Nation States to sign, in their own right, I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

The European Union has completely the wrong approach, in my opinion, towards climate and energy policy. As a UKIP MEP, I felt that it was consistent with my principles to vote against this proposal.

2016/11/22

Whilst I believe it is necessary to increase legal certainty while protecting public health and the environment, I oppose new EU legislation in this area. Decisions related to restrictions on hazardous substances should be taken by national governments. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

Though I support the appropriate management of fish stocks, I voted against this report. ICCAT is an international agreement; the EU is neither a sovereign state nor a nation so cannot properly be party to the agreement.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I believe in economic equality of opportunity. I oppose any gender-based discrimination. The best candidate for the job should be chosen irrespective of gender, religion, sexuality, ethnicity or pretty much anything else.In fact, where the private sector is concerned, whenever they choose the wrong person for a job, by discriminating they effectively discriminate against themselves: it hits their effectiveness and consequently their profits.Where I diverge from this report is that I do not consider equality of outcome an appropriate measure of non-discrimination. Outcomes are based on a host of other factors, not least that more men or women might be interested in a particular job, or have different life and career goals. Society should not measure that: it is none of the state’s business how we choose to approach work.This report represents the EU seeking to interfere in how Member States conduct their annual-leave and employment policies, as well as intervening in the domestic life of families. I therefore voted against it.

2016/11/22

This is a non-legislative own initiative report on addressing shrinking civil society space in developing countries. The report wants to see the integration of all external policies, including trade and security policies, into one principle of policy coherence for development. This report as a whole would like to see further harmonisation of policies and the growth of the EU influence in developing countries, and due to this, as a UKIP MEP, I voted against this report.

2016/11/22

This is a non-legislative report addressing the issues surrounding cybercrime in the EU. Whilst many of the statements are generic, the report ultimately seeks to harmonise protocols in the EU. This includes calls to establish common legal definitions and various frameworks. I do not support harmonisation at European Union level, and therefore I voted against.

2016/11/22

Parliament has produced several reports analysing the current state of relations between the EU and several countries or regions. ASEAN is an international organisation supporting the economic and political partnership for the south-east of Asia. This report recognises that the UK has played an integral role in fostering EU-ASEAN relations and that Brexit is a challenge to the EU. It calls for the UK to continue to support EU-ASEAN relations after we leave. I am, however, against the development of an EU foreign policy and as such voted against this report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Whilst wanting to make products and services more accessible is certainly an admirable aim, this proposal seeks to harmonise the laws in question across the EU. I cannot support this because it calls for further harmonisation in an area in which Member States could act alone.

2016/11/22

This report concerns the aim of the EU to boost the trade in organic goods between Chile and the EU. The report contains a proviso whereby either side can cancel the deal if they feel the rules on equivalency are not being upheld by the other party.

2016/11/22

This report is a simple update to reflect the fact that various trade-based agreements signed between the EU and Chile need to take in to account the fact that Croatia joined the EU after these deals were done. As such, there is a need to update the agreements to include Croatia and Croatian entities in the agreements.

2016/11/22

This report contains the usual list of EU demands on its trade partners. The report is peppered with EU-speak about ‘sustainable development’ and ‘human rights’, I do not agree with the need to politicise trade deals in this way.

2016/11/22

According to the Commission’s summary explanation of the proposed extension ‘European statistics are... indispensable if ‘Europe’ is to be understood by the general public’. I oppose the use of taxpayers’ money for another propaganda scheme used to promote the EU so voted against.

2016/11/22

The Commission wishes to impose more harmonisation and to grant more authority to the regulator (ESMA) to issue Regulatory Technical Standards. Whilst the harmonisation might result in more liberal and open markets in these investment funds, it will also increase the power of EU regulators over national ones, accordingly I voted against.

2016/11/22

This sets out how the EU wants the Common Fisheries policy to operate in the North Sea and adds recreational fishing. Both are strongly against UK interests. The United Kingdom, post-Brexit, must regain exclusive competence over our own fishing grounds, which provide a significant national resource and are currently being mismanaged by the European Union. Consequently, I voted against this report as a matter of principle.

2016/11/22

This report is calling for more transparency in the institutions and the creation of a mandatory transparency register. It calls for a reduction in the accountability gaps within the EU institutions and a move towards more collaborative modes of scrutiny. This report is also calling for a review of the ‘revolving door’ issue, which can be detrimental. Additionally it looks to extend the ‘cooling off’ period to three years for former Commissioners.

2016/11/22

This is a non-binding resolution based on an oral question, regarding the prospect of the Erasmus+ Programme. The oral question briefly assesses areas of improvement to enable its continuation after the MFF period in view of the post 2020 MFF negotiations. This glorified exchange programme costs the taxpayer EUR 14.7 billion. Despite this huge budget allocation, and the claims of this programme’s success, the EU stated that only 5% of young people have benefitted from the programme. Furthermore, whilst the programme has benefitted from a 40% increase in funding since the last Erasmus programme period; the EU deems this insufficient, calling for further funding to help the programme expand. As a UKIP MEP, I felt this was not in the interests of the British taxpayer and therefore I voted against it.

2016/11/22

This is a non—legislative report based on a Commission communication with the same title published in June 2016. It offers criticisms and resolutions for various issues in the job market, such as skill shortages. It acknowledges that these areas remain competences of the Member States but it is various suggestions for member state action and legislation where the Commission is competent go too far and is ultimately why I voted against this report.

2016/11/22

This being a technical agreement to take into account the accession of Bulgaria, Croatia and Romania to the European Union, I abstained.

2016/11/22

I abstained on this technical resolution.

2016/11/22

I believe that the European Union’s foreign policy is in general misguided. Furthermore, in relation to the European Union’s relations with India, I am concerned over the politicisation of trade. I voted against this non-legislative report.

2016/11/22

I previously opposed the principle of setting up the Solidarity Fund, and of including that Fund within the general budget of the European Union because I believe that such matters are better handled by national governments rather than administered remotely by the European Union.However, this fund already having been established, and the money already being available, I then abstain upon the application of that fund. I do not object to the specific cause to which this money is being put, merely to the principle of the creation of the fund and the mechanisms by which it is applied.

2016/11/22

I previously opposed the principle of setting up the Solidarity Fund, and of including that Fund within the general budget of the European Union because I believe that such matters are better handled by national governments rather than administered remotely by the European Union.However, this fund already having been established, and the money already being available, I then abstain upon the application of that fund. I do not object to the specific cause to which this money is being put, merely to the principle of the creation of the fund and the mechanisms by which it is applied.In this instance, I do have some minor technical concerns over the transfer of ‘payments’ from other 2017 budget lines, but note that the more important ‘commitments’ line from 2018 will be the eventual budgeting. Overall, this being budget-neutral, I still abstained.

2016/11/22

The principle of subsidiarity dictates that decisions should be taken at the closest possible level to the citizen – in this case, at regional or national level. Therefore, these projects should not be funded by the European Union.It is absurd that the arbiters of whether this funding should, or should not, be given are Members of the European Parliament with no detailed knowledge of the situation. This project may well be of benefit to the people of Finland, but I am not best placed to judge.The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund should be scrapped, which would give money back to the Member States to decide for themselves about the appropriateness of such funding. Consequently, I had no option but to vote against – even though this may be a worthwhile project.

2016/11/22

Being concerned about the potential impact on non-EU countries, and the question of carbon leakage, I voted against. Furthermore, I note that stakeholders generally oppose this proposal to broaden the scope of the ETS beyond the EU. The EU’s energy policy has proven itself to be counter-productive.

2016/11/22

Forestry is not an EU competence; this legislative report appears to attempt to treat forestry as though it were an EU competence by the back door. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

The UK will not be bound by this legislation. I therefore abstained on democratic grounds: I do not believe that I should - as a British MEP - cast an affirmative vote on matters which do not impact on the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

I oppose the principle of delegated acts and am therefore naturally inclined to support any objections pursuant to Rule 105. In this case, I note that the Commission delegated regulation is flawed – and therefore I confidently voted in favour of the Objection.

2016/11/22

There are various conflicting positions here, irrespective of the specific question of genetically-modified foods.I am inclined to support an objection to an implementing act on democratic grounds, but am concerned about the impact of such an objection upon free trade. Furthermore, the impact of this proposal is specific to one particular soybean, DAS-68416-4.I am concerned about the potential impact upon developing countries on the one hand, but respect the question of testing for potential health risks – though it appears to me that any such risk would be incredibly low.Consequently, I chose to abstain.

2016/11/22

There are various conflicting positions here, irrespective of the specific question of genetically-modified foods.I am inclined to support an objection to an implementing act on democratic grounds, but am concerned about the impact of such an objection upon free trade. Furthermore, the impact of this proposal is specific to Japan.I am concerned about the potential impact upon Japan on the one hand, but respect the question of any potential health risks regarding the technical possibility of contamination following Fukushima- though it appears to me that any such risk would be incredibly low.Consequently, I chose to abstain.

2016/11/22

The Youth Employment Initiative may have a laudable goal, but the policy in and of itself has provided poor value for taxpayers’ money and has failed to tackle youth unemployment.I believe that in general the undistorted free market, not government interference, is the best way to promote growth in jobs. Government action should be taken by Member States, not by the European Union, and should focus on educational systems which ensure that young people have the necessary skills to obtain employment.There exists a specific issue within the UK due to the difficulty in obtaining entry-level positions due to a massive oversupply of unskilled and semi-skilled workers due to unlimited immigration from EU countries, but this problem is not addressed.Simply providing additional funding for the Youth Employment Initiative will not solve any of the problems, and I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I voted against, on the grounds that foreign, security and defence policy should be the sole responsibility of nation states and not of the European Union.

2016/11/22

I voted against this non-legislative report, on the grounds that foreign policy should be the sole responsibility of nation states and not of the European Union. I note further that there are attempts within the report for the European Union to interfere within the national domestic policies of countries within Latin America; this is inappropriate.

2016/11/22

I abstained on this report, because – although calling for the EU to involve itself with matters which the EU should not be involved with – it does correctly identify a number of issues of corruption and human rights across the globe.Given that the report is non-legislative and non-binding, I did not feel a vote against would be appropriate but could not support the calls for EU action.

2016/11/22

I do not support the principle that MEPs should enjoy immunity from prosecution. However, given that it exists, the rules for waiver must be applied fairly to all. If there exists a serious criminal case to answer, as opposed to anything politically-motivated, then immunity from prosecution should be waived. Immunity should apply only to actions related directly to the role of an MEP. In this case there is a tangential relevance, but the actions which she is accused of go far beyond the scope of the role of an elected official.

2016/11/22

This proposal was approved without a vote. I had no specific objection to the composition of the committee, but am concerned that the committee should not deal with any matters which could be dealt with by nation states themselves. Co-operation between nations is good; harmonisation erodes sovereignty.

2016/11/22

I believe that it should be the role of the UK as a nation state, not the European Union, to enter in to such agreements. However, I do not object to the specific content of this agreement and therefore I abstained, knowing that it would in any case pass by a huge margin.

2016/11/22

I believe that it should be the role of the UK as a nation state, not the European Union, to enter in to such agreements. However, I do not object to the specific content of this agreement and therefore I abstained, knowing that it would in any case pass by a huge margin.

2016/11/22

This own-initiative report identified the objective of the Mediation Directive to facilitate access to alternative dispute resolution. The report welcomes the Commission’s dedication to co-financing various projects concerning the promotion of mediation and training for judges and practitioners in the Member States.I cannot support any resolution which proposes further harmonisation, especially at a time when the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union and therefore I voted against.

2016/11/22

The report asserts that franchising is not as strong in EU as it is in the USA, and so calls on the Commission to introduce its own guidelines. I voted against as I do not support calls on the Commission to create guidelines/policy and believe that encouraging and supporting franchises should be the purview of national governments.

2016/11/22

This report welcomes the EU Commission’s communique ‘Space Strategy for Europe’. The report stresses that in order to meet current and future challenges the next EU budget should include a larger space budget. With Britain, a net contributor to the EU budget, leaving the Union, the Commission should be concentrating on the funding black hole left by our exodus rather than pursuing vanity projects.

2016/11/22

This report outlines EU interference in the education systems of Member States and dictates how they should spend their money. This not being something which needs to be done at EU level, I naturally voted against it.

2016/11/22

I voted in favour of the repeal of these obsolete regulations.

2016/11/22

I support the promotion of internet connectivity in local communities, but there is no convincing reason why this must be undertaken at EU level. National governments are perfectly capable of taking such strategic decisions for themselves. Indeed, it may well be that such decisions are even better taken at regional, county or even local council level.The top—down approach tends to be more expensive and bureaucratic than necessary, and I note that the EUR 120 million proposed for this project is likely to achieve only a small part of the stated aim.

2016/11/22

As a UKIP MEP, I felt that it was consistent with the principles on which I was elected to oppose enforced harmonisation.

2016/11/22

This matter was not subject to a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy I believe that my constituents have a right to know how I voted. Whilst there were some specific concerns about some text within the report, I felt that the principle was more important and consequently I voted in favour of encouraging Norway to halt whaling.

2016/11/22

This is a non-legislative report that seeks to approve the framework proposed for the EU to accede to the Istanbul Convention. The Convention puts in place a legal framework to combat violence against women. The UK has already signed this treaty and is currently in the process of full ratification. The UK government also opposes the EU acceding to this convention. There are also reasonable legal concerns regarding EU accession. Indeed, the United Kingdom already exceeds many of the requirements of the convention.Furthermore, this report contains various pieces of text which add a specific political dimension to the signing-up to an international convention. For example, the calls for the Commission to establish a 'European Monitoring Observatory' and calls for 'gender mainstreaming' and 'gender budgeting', which are often loosely defined.Therefore, whilst I support the Convention, I opposed this non-legislative report.

2016/11/22

I do not support the politicisation of trade, and therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I voted against this report. It is insufficiently strong in many areas, in particular in its discussion of a conditional suspension of the process of Turkey’s accession to the European Union. There has been ample evidence already to justify ending the process, rather than merely contemplating the possibility of a temporary suspension.There is no suggestion of stopping British taxpayers’ money going to support Turkey. The report also calls for visa liberalisation, foreign policy alignment and practical membership of the Customs Union.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I voted against this resolution as it calls for the setting up of yet another committee, more funding and more EU interference.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This legislative report advocates the establishment of a new fund, the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD) Guarantee, expected to have a total volume of up to EUR 1.5 billion and designed to leverage additional financing by allowing risk-sharing with private investors, international financial institutions and development banks. The fund would be managed by the Commission and implemented in partnership with financial institutions such as the European Investment Bank.The aim is to have the Commission enhance technical assistance in partner countries. This means that the EU wants to have the ability to influence the national countries’ agendas and policies. This is the EU asking for more money, more control, and less national sovereignty. Accordingly, as a UKIP MEP, I voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I am fully supportive of the Marrakesh Treaty. I note that the provisions of the treaty are in any case enshrined in British law. This is an unusual situation, therefore, in which I agree with the entire proposal.However, the question concerning competence and sovereignty is the critical one here. I opposed the principle of the European Union legislating on matters which should be for national governments, and the ruling of the Court of Justice granting the European Union sole competence over it.

2016/11/22

I am fully supportive of the Marrakesh Treaty. I note that the provisions of the Marrakesh Treaty are in any case enshrined in British law. This is an unusual situation, therefore, in which I agree with the entire proposal.However, the question concerning competence and sovereignty is the critical one here. I opposed the principle of the European Union legislating on matters which should be for national governments, and the ruling of the CJEU granting the European sole competence over it.

2016/11/22

Whilst arbitration is necessary in order to prevent the same income being taxed twice in different countries, the proposal is part of the Commission’s tax harmonisation agenda and undermines the tax sovereignty of Member States. Therefore I voted against the resolution.

2016/11/22

This report concerns EU sustainable development goals. Whilst I am in favour of a variety of measures to improve the environment, I note that this particular report seems:a) overly focused on the single measure of CO2 to the exclusion of other environmental issues;b) supportive of action taken by the Commission which should either be done within Member States or by international accord; andc) to be taking a short-term approach with regards to so-called green jobsI therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

I do not believe that the European Union should be dictating to the Member States how they should or should not be spending their own money. This is another example of proposed EU interference in matters which should not concern it, and I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This recommendation regards the Kigali Amendment and the use of hydrofluorocarbons. Whilst being in favour of the appropriate use of HFCs, I believe that such matters should be determined by national governments not the European Union. I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

This recommendation concerns the Gothenburg protocol and the protection of the human environment against air pollution. This protocol is already implemented in the EU through the national emission ceilings device so I abstained.

2016/11/22

I am against the development of an EU foreign policy and therefore I voted against this recommendation.

2016/11/22

I am against the development of an EU foreign policy and therefore I voted against this resolution.

2016/11/22

This is a technically non-legislative report that seeks the approval of parliament to establish a memorandum of understanding between Eurojust and eu-LISA. This memorandum of understanding establishes a cooperation framework based on areas of common interest such as the exchange of information, ICT related issues and strategic and administrative matters as well enhancing functionality in EU agencies. Given my principles regarding the European Union, I felt that I should vote against.

2016/11/22

This legislative report aims to help combat fraud in the EU that is against the EU’s financial interests. Currently criminal law in Member States is deemed too variable, particularly in cases of fraud where punishments vary significantly. The EU has concluded the best way to resolve this issue is to harmonise criminal law for crimes that are committed against the EU budget.This harmonisation proposal includes establishing definitions of legal terms and putting in place minimum prison sentences for these offences. It also paves the way for the European Public Prosecutor’s Office by giving them a mandate to investigate fraud amongst the Member States. This legislation is a clear and significant infringement on judicial sovereignty. This is not acceptable, so naturally I voted for the proposal to reject the Council position.

2016/11/22

This is a legislative first reading that seeks to establish an EU framework for an integrated approach for the enforcement of customs legislation. It calls for further harmonisation and legitimises the Union Customs Code, seeking to remove the power of Member States to govern its enforcement. There was not a roll-call vote but in the interests of transparency I would have voted against.

2016/11/22

I abstained on this resolution: whilst naturally I would vote against further EU legislation, and believing that sovereign nations are best placed to decide such matters for themselves, I recognise the positive intentions with regard tackling the rise of epidemics in Europe.

2016/11/22

It will surprise few that there is much I disagree with in the Commission Work Programme for 2018. British taxpayer money for projects broadly political in nature. There are projects that would be better achieved by Member States themselves cutting out the ‘middle man’ EU. I was glad to see the report does deplore the Commission’s decision to abolish the annual corruption report. Likewise I welcome the report’s condemnation of the militarisation of the EU, something Europhiles in the UK only a year ago were saying was an impossibility. As a UKIP MEP, I felt that it was consistent with my principles, in particular the principle that such matters are matters for national sovereignty, to vote against this resolution.

2016/11/22

It will surprise no one that I voted against the mandate for the trilogue on the 2018 Budget. It calls for the creation of support programmes for countries considering leaving the euro, potentially burdening British taxpayers for the failed euro experiment. It calls on the Commission to interfere with Member State finances and increases in the EUSF budget. The report demands the end of EU-NATO expansion, rejects the expansion policy of NATO and calls for the dissolution of foreign military bases in Europe. There is a real failure in the report to respect subsidiarity; things are done at an EU level where there is no actual need. This culminates in a budget that is perpetually too high leading to the EU scrambling around to increase funding. The EU should take note, budgetary caps are just that: caps, they are not targets.

2016/11/22

This is a non-legislative report looking at the EU’s current activates in culture with third party countries. It then suggests how these and other activities can be used to advance the EU’s foreign policy agenda. As I am against the development of EU foreign policy and the creation of additional EU schemes I voted against it.

2016/11/22

This resolution gives Parliament’s opinion on what the EU’s position and priorities should be at the UN General Assembly, covering topics such as Peace and Security, terrorism and migration. It calls for the UN Security Council to be ‘comprehensively reformed’. The unreformable EU has no place calling for change within the UN Security Council. Such decisions should be taken by Member States which is why I voted against the resolution.

2016/11/22

This matter was not subject to a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy I believe that my constituents have a right to know how I voted, and therefore I confirm that I voted against it. As a UKIP MEP, I felt that it was consistent with my principles, in particular the principle that such strategies should be for sovereign nations to decide.

2016/11/22

Parliament is being asked to give its consent to an agreement that sets out the principles under which Kosovo can gain access to EU programmes. I am against any form of EU expansionism so naturally voted against.

2016/11/22

This matter was not subject to a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy I believe that my constituents have a right to know how I voted, and therefore I confirm that I voted against it.The principle of subsidiarity dictates that decisions should be taken at the closest possible level to the citizen – in this case, at regional or national level. Therefore, these projects should not be funded by the European Union.It is absurd that the arbiters of whether this funding should, or should not, be given are Members of the European Parliament with no detailed knowledge of the situation. This project may well be of benefit to the people of Spain, but I am not best placed to judge.The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund should be scrapped, which would give money back to the Member States to decide for themselves about the appropriateness of such funding. Consequently, I had no option but to vote against – even though this may be a worthwhile project.

2016/11/22

This non-legislative own—initiative report calls for the adoption of European standards, especially in relation to the ICT sector. The report calls for the harmonisation of European standards as well as encouraging candidate countries to adopt the same standards. Additionally, it calls for the Commission and Member States to finance the infrastructure for such a system to function. This report calls for further harmonisation and additional funds. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This report calls for greater harmonisation and more EU legislation. I voted against it.

2016/11/22

Traditionally, angling and recreational fishing, whether ‘river or at sea’ has been excluded from the disastrous Common Fisheries Policy and thus escaped much of the touch of EU bureaucracy. This report seeks to change that by introducing an ‘ambitious policy framework’. Naturally, I voted against the report, which seeks to expand EU ‘competence’.

2016/11/22

This report calls for greater harmonisation and more EU legislation. I voted against it.

2016/11/22

The purpose of this recommendation is to harmonise minimum procedural standards at Union level. I believe such matters should be left to Member States and does not require EU intervention. The European Union should not interfere with the judicial policies of Member States, so I voted against.

2016/11/22

I see plenty of politics and expectations placed on Moldova in return for the cash, but let’s be honest here: Moldova ranks at a miserable 127th place in Transparency International’s measure of corruption. This makes it more corrupt than Pakistan, and Communist Cuba. The Free Trade Agreement (DCFTA) between the European Union and Moldova (part of the EU-Moldova Association Agreement) has contributed to the process of economic recovery. That is what free trade does, indeed if only the European Union focused on breaking down barriers to trade rather than creating them, perhaps it would be less of a negative force in the world.The Economic Freedom Index places Moldova as worse than countries like Rwanda and Swaziland when it comes to being attractive to trade and investment. The solution is not to give Moldova money, the solution is for Moldova to become more competitive. Is giving so much money to a country so notorious for official corruption and economic poor performance really a good use of taxpayers’ money? For all our fine words, this is in essence Foreign Aid being given by taxpayers. I felt this was not in the interests of the British taxpayer and therefore I voted against it.

2016/11/22

The proposal requires multi-national companies to supply the Commission with information on their EU and non-EU operations for publication on an EU register. This is part of a protectionist drive toward a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base. This report opens the door to new taxes based on wealth (rather than income), and also aims to harmonise Corporation taxes. As a UKIP MEP, I felt that it was consistent with my principles in particular the principle that such matters are matters for national sovereignty to vote against this framework agreement.

2016/11/22

This grants additional trade preferences to Ukraine. This is all part of drawing Ukraine deeper in to the EU’s sphere of influence and further inflaming the situation between Russia-Ukraine-EU. When Dutch voters rejected the EU-Ukraine Agreement, the EU and the Dutch Government ignored the result. I voted against this resolution, to send a strong message that the people should not be ignored.

2016/11/22

I support the aim to repatriate the money to Member States, but the report advocates the opposite. The resolution highlights the fall in the value of the pound, which they say is the main cause of shortfall of EU revenue. It insists this shortfall should be considered as part of the financial obligation negotiations of the UK as it leaves the EU. Ultimately I voted in favour of the Council position but against the resolution.

2016/11/22

This non-legislative, own initiative report concerns a longer lifetime for products in order to reduce waste and give consumers better value for money. While calling for an end to products that easily break is something that I could support, the report goes on to call on the Commission to implement measures. Ultimately I believe this legislating should be the remit of Member States, so I voted against.

2016/11/22

This is a non-legislative report looking at crimes against humanity, in particular cases of genocide and war crimes. It offers strong support for existing international institutions, such as the UN and International Criminal Court, but offers EU assistance and action to support them, which is why I abstained.

2016/11/22

Whilst being in favour of appropriate safeguards on security firms, I believe that such matters should be determined by national governments, not the European Union. I therefore I voted against.

2016/11/22

This non-legislative report looks at the working conditions of people on part-time, zero hour and flexible contracts. I do recognise that there are some people who need to be on zero-hours contracts. Supply teachers and university students, for example, sometimes value the flexibility. However, such contracts should be subject to appropriate checks and balances, not used as a means to exploit workers by the back door. I do not believe that the European Union should be interfering in the affairs of sovereign nations. It is my hope the British Government reviews current legislation in this area with larger businesses shouldering more responsibility. I therefore abstained on the final vote.

2016/11/22

This matter was not subject to a roll—call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy, I believe that my constituents have a right to know how I voted. I have supported the freedom of speech across all sides of the chamber, irrespective of criminal matters. As this case is a civil action, I confirm that I chose to abstain.

2016/11/22

I do not accept the principle of the European Fund for Strategic Investments. This report is broadly supportive of the principle, yet critical of its implementation. I supported calls for transparency and accountability in the amendments, and abstained on the overall final vote.

2016/11/22

This report calls for further EU harmonisation and for further legislation. I do not support harmonisation at European Union level, and therefore I voted against.

2016/11/22

I do not support calls for further harmonisation, nor for additional EU legislation, neither of which are compatible with the values and principles on which I was elected.

2016/11/22

The final resolution was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of democracy, transparency and accountability, I would like to confirm for the record that I abstained. Whilst agreeing with the general tone of a report recognising the huge suffering of people across Yemen, I have concerns that some of the political positions expressed are not entirely accurate.

2016/11/22

There were many amendments I voted in favour of, such as ending the use of taxpayers’ money to fund EU political parties. Ultimately, I voted against the final resolution as the report designates that support should only be given to activities in line with the principles of the Union.

2016/11/22

This Commission proposal covers all sectors currently outside of the EU emissions trading systems. The aim of the proposal is to deliver in the covered sectors 30% emission reductions by 2030 compared to 2005 levels. It entitles the Commission to authorise the expenditure of EUR 280 million devolved to the management of forest land in Member States. The European Union has completely the wrong approach, in my opinion, towards climate and energy policy. As a UKIP MEP, I felt that it was consistent with my principles to vote against this proposal.

2016/11/22

This matter was not subject to a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy I believe that my constituents have a right to know how I voted, and therefore I confirm that I voted against the waiver. I have been advised from those who had looked into this matter in greater detail and suggested to me that the waiver request is politically motivated. I acted on this advice and chose to vote against the waiver.

2016/11/22

This matter was not subject to a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy I believe that my constituents have a right to know how I voted, and therefore I confirm that I voted against the waiver. I am no supporter of Mylène Troszczynski or of her politics, which I consider to be toxic. That is not the issue at stake here, however. The issue is one of freedom of speech: should Parliamentary immunity be removed from someone solely on the basis of a Twitter post which was purely a factual post.Was the tweet distasteful? Yes, but it should not be criminal. Freedom, as George Orwell said in his book ‘1984’, is the freedom to say that 2+2=4. From that all else follows. He was correct; I could not in all conscience vote against freedom of speech. This vote is consistent with my previous votes across the political spectrum; I have supported the freedom of speech across all sides of the Chamber and I will not break that principle when it is Mylène Troszczynski being accused.

2016/11/22

This matter was not subject to a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy I believe that my constituents have a right to know how I voted, and therefore I confirm that I voted against the waiver.I am no supporter of Jean-Marie Le Pen or of his politics, which I consider to be toxic. That is not the issue at stake here, however. The issue is one of freedom of speech: should Parliamentary immunity be removed from someone solely for displaying a distasteful opinion. I could not in all conscience vote against freedom of speech. This vote is consistent with my previous votes across the political spectrum; I have supported the freedom of speech across all sides of the chamber and I will not break that principle when it is Jean-Marie Le Pen being accused.

2016/11/22

This matter was not subject to a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy I believe that my constituents have a right to know how I voted and therefore I confirm that I voted in favour of this objection.Significant quantities of leguminous crops are currently grown legitimately according to Ecological Focus Area (EFA) obligations. Grown well, they are of substantial agronomic and environmental benefit. The proposal to ban the use of plant protection products on EFAs demonises agrochemical suppliers and represents an unjustified restriction on rational farm business decision-making. This constitutes an unjustified use of the Commission’s powers under Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013.

2016/11/22

Whilst I support gender equality regarding the pension gap, the report calls for Commission intervention. It requires Member States to provide statistics and information on gender pay and pension gap, measures already in operation in the UK. The report also calls for penalties for Member States that do not comply with its rules. As a UKIP MEP, I felt that it was consistent with my principles, in particular the principle that such matters are matters for national sovereignty – to vote against this report.

2016/11/22

As a UKIP MEP, I felt that it was consistent with my principles. I felt it necessary to vote against this report. I do not believe in EU expansion.

2016/11/22

As a UKIP MEP, I felt that it was consistent with my principles. I felt it necessary to vote against this report. I do not believe in EU expansion.

2016/11/22

As a UKIP MEP, I felt that it was consistent with my principles. I felt it necessary to vote against this report. I do not believe in EU expansion.

2016/11/22

As hard as it is to see the situation unfolding in the Democratic Republic of Congo, I do not believe that the European Union should be interfering in the affairs of sovereign nations. I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

Whilst I support improving labour standards and encouraging responsible business conduct, I cannot support calls on the Commission to create binding legislation. I support the collaboration of the International Labour Organisation as they work with the Government of Bangladesh, but EU intervention is not acceptable to national sovereignty, so naturally I voted against.

2016/11/22

This non-legislative report looks at increased Euroscepticism and calls on the Commission and Council to analyse and address the causes. Given my principles regarding the European Union, I felt that I should vote against taxpayers’ money being used on communication projects, which are often little more than pro-EU propaganda.

2016/11/22

This was a non-binding report on the 7th Research programme (FP7) which ran from 2007-2013, with a budget of EUR 55 billion. The Court of Auditors found the supervisory control systems were only partially effective, and the error rate in research has always been higher than 5% in recent years. The report calls for more synergies between research and the EU structural funds and more information campaigns for the programmes. I therefore voted against the report.

2016/11/22

This report primarily highlights the situation of the Rohingya, a Muslim and stateless minority in Myanmar (Burma) that suffers state—led persecution. Whilst I am sympathetic and fully against religious persecution, the report also calls for extensive EU intervention, EU—led reviews and EU—led international level action. I therefore felt it appropriate overall to abstain.

2016/11/22

Whilst I welcome steps to combat tax fraud and bring greater transparency, this non-legislative report calls for a uniform legal framework on cross-border transfers. As a UKIP MEP, I felt that it was consistent with my principles – in particular the principle that such matters are matters for national sovereignty – to vote against this framework agreement.

2016/11/22

PRIMA is an EU project which aims to increase cooperation and innovation in the EU Mediterranean countries. This project will be funded using EUR 200 million under Horizon 2020. Though I support the role of research in society, the EU desperately needs budget cuts. I therefore felt that I had no option consistent with my principles but to vote against the report.

2016/11/22

This legislative proposal amends EU rules regarding relief and reconstruction funds for EU countries hit by natural disasters. As the report doesn’t call for additional taxpayer money and might mean quicker relief given to those hit by natural disasters I chose to abstain.

2016/11/22

Whilst I support energy efficiency labelling these new EU proposals may cause uncertainty and confusion for customers so I voted against the report.

2016/11/22

This proposes to extend participation to EFTA and EEA countries. It stipulates that all promotional material and marketing must show it is an EU scheme. Additionally the prize money is EUR 1.5 million, taken from the creative Europe programme. As a UKIP MEP I felt I could not support this propaganda scheme or the money which could be better spent.

2016/11/22

The rapporteur wants to avoid budget cuts and guarantee EUR 100 billion as a starting point. It calls on the Commission to separate defence research from civil research providing two different programmes and budgets. I strongly support the role of research in our society but the EU desperately needs budget cuts as a result of heavy deficiencies in several of its policy areas. Naturally I voted against the final report.

2016/11/22

The report underlines that the increased visibility of the cohesion policy is vital to combat Euroscepticism and can contribute to regaining citizens' trust. As a UKIP MEP, I felt that it was consistent with my principles in particular the principle that such matters are matters for national sovereignty, therefore I voted against the policy.

2016/11/22

The report calls for Commission action on the international stage through the fisheries council of the Mediterranean. It calls on the Commission to ‘assist’ non-EU countries on fishing. The EU’s Common Fisheries Policy has been terrible for UK and I cannot support EU intervention in areas that should be the responsibility of national sovereignty.

2016/11/22

The principle of subsidiarity dictates that decisions should be taken at the closest possible level to the citizen – in this case, at regional or national level. Therefore, these projects should not be funded by the European Union.It is absurd that the arbiters of whether this funding should, or should not, be given are Members of the European Parliament with no detailed knowledge of the situation. This project may well be of benefit to the people of Finland, but I am not best placed to judge.The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund should be scrapped, which would give money back to the Member States to decide for themselves about the appropriateness of such funding. Consequently, I had no option but to vote against – even though this may be a worthwhile project.

2016/11/22

The European Union rarely pays more than lip-service to the principle of subsidiarity. It seeks to centralise power at times when Member States are better placed to act.This report fundamentally misses the point that the European Union is failing to respect that principle and seeking to harmonise powers.It does, however, seek to make some very modest steps in the right direction for the future. I felt that I could not vote against for that reason, and therefore chose to abstain.

2016/11/22

This report calls for further harmonisation and Commission action in various fields relating to the financial sector. I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This being a technical update, I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

This is an objection to a Commission delegated regulation. I generally oppose such acts as they are by nature subject to insufficient democratic scrutiny, and am naturally inclined to support objections to them.In this case, I have concerns about the anti-Ethiopia stance of this delegated regulation.I therefore voted in favour of the objection.

2016/11/22

Whilst I normally on principle would support objections pursuant to Rule 106, I am concerned in this case about the impact which that would have upon the UK, and am advised that there are no reasonable toxicity concerns.I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

Whilst I normally on principle would support objections pursuant to Rule 106, I am concerned in this case about the impact which that would have upon the UK, and am receiving mixed advice as to whether there exist reasonable toxicity concerns.I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

This report contains far too much EU interference in the sovereign nation of Hungary. I may not agree with everything that the Hungarian Government does, but it is not for me as a British MEP to intervene in the affairs of a sovereign democratic nation. I therefore voted against the resolution.

2016/11/22

This matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote. In the interests of democracy and transparency I would like to confirm that I voted against the final resolution, on the grounds that it seeks to spend further taxpayers’ money and impinge upon matters which should rightly be determined by the Member States rather than the European Union as a whole.

2016/11/22

This protocol updates an agreement between the EU and Mongolia concerning the accession of Croatia to the Union. As a UKIP MEP, I felt that it was consistent with my principles – in particular the principle that such matters are matters for national sovereignty – to vote against this framework agreement.

2016/11/22

As a UKIP MEP, I felt that it was consistent with my principles. I felt it necessary to vote against this report. I do not believe in EU expansion.

2016/11/22

This legislative report puts in place the rules regarding how much Norway will contribute financially to the Internal Security Fund for the period 2014 - 2020. This amount works out at approximately 20 million EUR per year. This money primarily goes towards protecting the Schengen area and supporting the EU’s external border forces. I believe external borders should be the responsibility of nation states and cannot support any report which proposes spending taxpayer money maintaining the Schengen area.

2016/11/22

This report concerns the EU becoming part of the International Cotton Advisory Committee. This is just one example of how the EU can enter in to treaties and membership associations in its own name since the Lisbon Treaty of 2009 gave it its own legal personality. Cotton is a crop the EU shows a lot of interest in, especially in relation to countries it buys from, such as Uzbekistan. I do not agree with the EU behaving in this manner. Given my principles regarding the European Union, I felt that I should vote against.

2016/11/22

This non legislative report outlines digitalisation guidelines for members. Whilst a Member State may wish to pursue these policies it should not be for the EU to be pursuing this; particularly when national infrastructure across Member States varies greatly. This report calls for further funding from the EU and Member States to develop eGovernment and also for the EU to establish online ‘gateways’ as a model for Member States to implement. Whilst this maybe a laudable aim for national governments to pursue legislation is not required at an EU level.

2016/11/22

This is a non-legislative report assessing how the EU is combatting fraud in its own budget. The report notes with concern that the number of all fraudulent and non-fraudulent irregularities reported in 2015 increased by 36% but the sum of money involved dropped by 1% to EUR 3.21 billion. The report goes on to say that despite the positive drop of 11% in the number of irregularities reported as fraudulent, the sums involved increased by 18% to EUR 637.6 million in 2015. It calls for better protection of public money, better protections for whistle-blowers. The report however does call for Commission action and legislation in areas such as VAT, uniform reporting systems and that Member States should ratify existing EU directives and support for the European public prosecutor office. Given my principles regarding the European Union, I felt that I should vote against.

2016/11/22

Food waste is an important issue that needs to be addressed in Europe and the wider world. However, I believe this is the responsibility of national parliaments and does not warrant further EU legislation.

2016/11/22

On this report on the evaluation of external aspects of customs performance and management as a tool to facilitate trade and fight illicit trade I abstained. I did so because, whilst recognising much merit in some parts of the report, overall there was too much call for European Union and Commission involvement.

2016/11/22

This gave me great cause for concern; there are two fundamentally competing principles at stake here. Firstly, I do not believe that politicians should be above the law. For that reason, in general I would tend to vote against defending immunity.Nevertheless, the comments made were clearly in the exercise of his duties. I support freedom of speech; defamation in the UK is a civil rather than a criminal matter. I believe that this is the best way.Furthermore, I call upon Parliament at other times to adhere to its own Rules of Procedure. Under the Rules, immunity in this case should not be waived. I therefore voted to defend immunity because, in my opinion, to do otherwise would be to vote to break our own rules. I must remain consistent in my approach.

2016/11/22

I am not in favour of Community arrangements for trade marks to which uniform protection is given. I voted against it.

2016/11/22

This recommendation gives its consent to the conclusion of the Minamata convention on mercury. I do not believe that the European Union should be interfering in the affairs of sovereign nations, nevertheless mercury can bring several adverse effects to human and animal health so I opted to abstain.

2016/11/22

This non-legislative report supports the Commission to tackle hybrid mismatches. This is not acceptable to national sovereignty, so naturally I voted against.

2016/11/22

This agreement on operational cooperation between Europol and Denmark. It should be left to Denmark to decide therefore I abstained.

2016/11/22

This is an own-initiative report on the work of the European Investment Bank in 2015. It is clear that the European Investment Bank is politically motivated in various areas; for example, the British Broadcasting Corporation has received finance from the EIB in the past. The report fails to take the opportunity to note the expectation on EIB-funded projects to support the European Union, yet calls for an expansion of the same projects. Given that it spectacularly misses the point and fails to find fault where fault is necessary, a vote against the final report was indicated.

2016/11/22

The EU want to waste 142 million euro in current prices for this programme. I don’t think that represents good value for money for British taxpayers and runs until 2020 when we will have left.

2016/11/22

I oppose the use of taxpayers’ money for another propaganda scheme used to promote the EU.

2016/11/22

The regulation will increase the 2014-2020 budget for the European financial reporting advisory group to 57 million euros. Accordingly as an UKIP MEP I voted against.

2016/11/22

The regulation will increase funding by 6 million euros, naturally as an UKIP MEP I voted against it.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Although this report makes the sensible point that the outermost regions do not fit in the European common fisheries policy, it reintroduces subsidies at British taxpayers’ expense. I therefore voted against it.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I do not believe that the European Union should be interfering in the affairs of sovereign nations. However the report does talk about greater transparency and traceability of garments and seeks to make women and children’s rights the focus of the legislation. I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This proposal calls for more misguided EU intervention, all at the cost of the British taxpayer. I voted against it.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The report suggests that the European Investment Bank consider demanding more capital from shareholders (from taxpayers across the EU). It also calls for Member States to increase the budget for external lending. Naturally, as a UKIP MEP, I voted against it.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I would normally have voted against a report, which appears to seek further Commission action and interference in nation states. However, I note it refers to facilities whose improper management could cause ‘major accidents’ so, on reflection, I opted to abstain.

2016/11/22

I have serious concerns about the current political situation in Venezuela and recognise the impact which that situation is having upon the daily lives of its people. Consequently there is much which I agree with in that report, but I am unable to vote for it because the report contains further suggestions of action at EU level.

2016/11/22

This resolution’s purpose is amending Annex III to Regulation (EU) No 978/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences. Whilst I am opposed in principle to the use of delegated acts, I recognise that the alternative to this delegated act is likely to be a different delegated act and therefore I felt it necessary to abstain

2016/11/22

This report is the first step towards the adoption of the legislation proposed by the European Commission on roaming markets.I note the progress in this area which has been made by the free market, which better follows the needs of consumers than legislation does. Legislation to force lower prices in one area inevitably leads to higher prices in another and does not genuinely provide consumer benefit.Where supply is correctly linked to demand, we have seen prices fall and even in some cases free roaming outside the European Union. This has not caused increased prices to consumers elsewhere and is a far better model than legislation which will inevitably increase costs especially for lower-intensity users.I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

As a UKIP MEP, it is consistent with the principles upon which I was elected to vote against this legislation. Decisions related to visas should be taken by national governments.

2016/11/22

This scheme:a) is similar in nature to existing schemesb) will cost substantial amounts of taxpayers’ moneyc) is in essence further pro-EU propagandaThis matter was not subject to a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy I believe that my constituents have a right to know how I voted, and therefore I confirm that I voted against it.

2016/11/22

Whilst being in favour of appropriate data exchange where necessary for reasons of security, I believe that such matters should be determined by national governments not the European Union. I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

This was an amendment to an existing regulation which interferes with company law. I voted against because I believe that such matters are best left to the Member States.

2016/11/22

Ratification of conventions should be determined at a national level, I therefore voted against it.

2016/11/22

Ratification of conventions should be determined at a national level, I therefore voted against it.

2016/11/22

As a UKIP MEP, I felt that it was consistent with my principles – in particular the principle that external borders should always be matters for national sovereignty – to vote against this report. The European Union has completely the wrong approach in my opinion towards the Schengen Area, which provides for the free and unrestricted movement of criminals and contraband.

2016/11/22

This proposal on money market funds attacks freedom of contract. This is not a matter which should be determined at European Union level; I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This is not a matter which should be determined at European Union level; I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This proposal sought to increase the amount of money diverted to financial instruments that operate outside the EU budgetary ceilings. Naturally I voted against the final report, which permits excessive EU spending.

2016/11/22

This non-legislative report is on the MFF calls for more money to be spent and greater use of financial instruments outside normal budgetary constraints. Therefore I voted against the final resolution.

2016/11/22

This proposal for the mobilisation of the contingency margin seeks to amend the original payment plan for the years 2018-2020. The original plan imposed ceilings in future budgets which would disappear under this new proposal. As a UKIP MEP I felt this was not in the interests of the British taxpayer and therefore I voted against it.

2016/11/22

I supported many amendments to this report which sadly were opposed. Therefore in the final vote I opposed the resolution which fails to properly ensure value for taxpayer money.

2016/11/22

Britain is currently the second highest net contributor to the EU, I therefore felt it appropriate to support this proposal mobilising money from the solidarity fund for flood assistance for the UK. It is noteworthy that of the €60.3 million allocated to the UK we will only keep roughly a third of that once the rebate for the following financial year has been adjusted.

2016/11/22

This being a technical update, I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

This being a technical update, I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

This being a technical update, I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

This being a technical update, I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

This being a technical update, I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

This resolution calls on the EU Commission to withdraw its draft implementing decision. The decision authorises placing on the market products containing genetically modified maize. I voted for the resolution.

2016/11/22

Whilst I have every sympathy with refugees, external borders should always be matters for national sovereignty especially in light of the decision by the British public in last year´s referendum.

2016/11/22

I voted against this measure, which is legislative and seeks to extend the Common Fisheries Policy. I oppose the Common Fisheries Policy.

2016/11/22

This legislation involves the transfer of power from national governments to Member States. I believe that the British government has a responsibility to ensure that UK consumers are protected, but disagree with such action being taken at European Union level.

2016/11/22

This report concerns compulsory labelling to demonstrate sustainability of products containing palm oil which are sold in the European Union. It is an own-initiative report, and therefore non-legislative.I note the importance to countries such as Malaysia and Indonesia of palm oil exports, and further that the drive towards sustainability and biofuels has also fuelled demand for palm oil. Malaysia has done much good work towards ensuring sustainability.Any legislation produced following this own-initiative report would likely not take effect until after the United Kingdom has left the European Union. On balance, I chose to abstain on this report.

2016/11/22

I believe in gender equality, but I do not believe that this report is the right way to go about achieving it. For example, it seeks to introduce a gender element in programmes irrespective of whether or not there is a specific issue to be addressed.As this report is the wrong way to make progress in this area, I voted against it.

2016/11/22

This matter was not subject to a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy I believe that my constituents have a right to know how I voted, and therefore I confirm that I voted against it in the final vote: I believe that in dealing with the United Nations it should be nation states, not the European Union, which take the lead.

2016/11/22

I abstained on this resolution: whilst naturally I would vote against further EU legislation, and believing that sovereign nations are best placed to decide such matters for themselves, I recognise the positive intentions with regard, in particular, to preventing abuses against children in areas affected by conflict.

2016/11/22

I believe that the UK's Exclusive Economic Zone should be a matter for United Kingdom policy, not European Union policy. The United Kingdom, post-Brexit, must regain exclusive competence over our own fishing grounds – which provide a significant national resource and are currently being mismanaged by the European Union. Consequently I voted against this report as a matter of principle.

2016/11/22

It should be painstakingly obvious that only a true European federalist could vote in favour of anything where the ultimate aim is a common Security and Defence policy.Defence policy is by definition one of the fundamental factors of what it means to be a nation; if responsibility over this policy area were transferred from nation states to the European Union, we might well ask whether sovereign democratic nations had less status than even the individual states do within the United States of America.I am not a eurofederalist; I voted against.

2016/11/22

I voted against this own-initiative report, which would seek to interfere in the policies of Member States and whose language is far too vague in many areas to be useful.As ever, this report seeks to take power from nations and give it to the European Union.

2016/11/22

As I am opposed to Montenegro joining the European Union whilst the United Kingdom remains a member, it was logically consistent for me to vote against this report.

2016/11/22

If this report were actually going to bring more democracy into the European Union, then I might well have supported it. But the title of the report, as ever, bears little resemblance to its contents. The report in fact supports European Union interference in the policy of its Member States, and particularly with regard to electoral processes - something which the European Union has no mandate to be involved with.I recognise the potential of e-democracy, and if the right proposals were introduced in the right way in the United Kingdom, then I would be in favour. But I had to vote on the report actually in front of me, and therefore with regret I voted against.

2016/11/22

This being a technical update, I felt it appropriate to abstain on this resolution.

2016/11/22

This being a technical update, I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

This being a technical update, I felt it appropriate to abstain on a matter with only tangential impact upon the United Kingdom.

2016/11/22

This matter was approved without a vote; had there been a vote, I would have voted supported a rejection amendment.

2016/11/22

I do not support harmonisation at European Union level, and therefore I voted against.

2016/11/22

Aside from the glaring grammatical error in the title of this report, I voted against because I do not support the EU’s freedom of movement principle – which is in effect a euphemism for unlimited immigration.

2016/11/22

I do not believe that the Commission should intervene in the sovereign decisions of a Member State of the European Union, and therefore voted against the final resolution.

2016/11/22

In general I supported amendments which called for a reduction in the European Union budget, and opposed those amendments which called for an increase.Some of our amendments were aimed at clarifying and protecting the UK’s position – and in particular in respect of ensuring that the United Kingdom is not covered by the next MFF; of course, I supported those amendments which I had been involved in drafting.Naturally I voted against the final report, which fails to properly get to grips with excessive EU spending.

2016/11/22

Whilst of course believing in responsible ownership of animals (in this case horses), I likewise have concerns over potential action at EU level which could lead to a ‘lowest common denominator’ approach. Furthermore, there is a point of political principle: subsidiarity would imply that such matters should be determined by sovereign states. On balance, therefore, I abstained.

2016/11/22

I recognise the health risks with regard to mercury, including mercury amalgams being used in dental treatment – especially as regards pregnant women and children under the age of 15. Therefore I felt that I could support amendments which would protect public health – but abstained on the final vote where a point of political principle and national sovereignty was involved in terms of each nation’s right to deal with imports and exports for themselves.

2016/11/22

I do not believe that European Union law should take precedence over the laws of Member States. Whilst I am in favour of co-operation between governments, I cannot support this legislation as a matter of principle.

2016/11/22

These changes will put further restrictions on law abiding citizens in Europe who legally possess, or wish to acquire, firearms and ammunition. I note significant concerns over the potential impacts upon hobbyists, museums, gun clubs (the .22 could technically have fallen foul of this legislation) and re-enactment societies; the definition of ‘replica’ was too broad.I supported the appropriate amendments to safeguard the innocent; we should be targeting criminals, not law-abiding citizens. The UK already has some of the strictest firearms laws in the world.I believe that the directive is not proportionate to its intended objectives; whilst fully supportive of the necessary measures to combat terrorism, I feel that this is a mere smokescreen distracting from more serious changes which are needed.This legislation, therefore, acts only as a facade to combatting terrorism in order to distract from the real issue, the Schengen Area, which facilitates the free movement of terrorists and illegal firearms across Europe.

2016/11/22

This report called for a common methodology for collection, organisation and processing of data. It also was accompanied by legislative proposals. I felt that it was consistent with my principles – in particular the principle that such matters are matters for national governments to decide – so I voted against it.

2016/11/22

Whilst there were some amendments which I could support, from the point of view of ensuring that the intrusion upon the UK would be minimised, and recognising that there are genuine and reasonable environmental concerns, my vote on the report as a whole was the same as that on the previous vote – and for the same reasons.

2016/11/22

As with the previous two votes, I voted against because I believe that such matters are best left to the Member States – but I voted in accordance with the national interest on the various amendments.

2016/11/22

Whilst voting against the report as a whole, I note that there were various votes taken on specific targets relating to the position at the end of 2025 and 2030. On these (effectively, a decision about the appropriate percentages in various areas) I abstained: the United Kingdom will not be a member of the European Union at that time. The choice of targets is a matter for those Member States who will be bound by them. I do not believe that I should cast a positive vote either way upon matters which will not affect the United Kingdom; it is not for me to tell other countries what their own position on packaging waste should be.

2016/11/22

Whist I fully support tackling issues of gender discrimination, this should be done by national governments. I oppose the EU dictating quotas on boards, division of domestic responsibilities in private households and interfering with the policies of Member States.I opposed some amendments, notably one which called for equal ‘take-up’ of leave arrangements by men and women. Whilst supporting equality of opportunity, I cannot support equality of outcome: these are individual decisions, and it is not appropriate for the State – let alone the European Union – to tell women or men what they must do.

2016/11/22

Whist I fully support tackling issues of gender discrimination, I oppose the EU interfering with the policies of Member States. I therefore felt it necessary to abstain.

2016/11/22

Whist I fully support tackling issues of gender discrimination and violence against women, I oppose the EU interfering with the policies of Member States and using taxpayer money to fund it.

2016/11/22

This is not a matter which should be determined at European Union level; I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

As an own-initiative report, this vote will have zero actual impact on the welfare of rabbits.Rabbit is rarely farmed in the UK due to limited demand for human consumption; as of 2017 there are no ‘approved’ rabbit breeding farms or slaughter facilities for human consumption registered with the Food Standards Agency and only one approved facility for pet food use. It seems that in the UK rabbit farming is very much a ‘cottage industry’ in contrast to the intensive farming in many parts of mainland Europe, where demand for the meat remains high.I believe the UK Government should look at ways of ensuring that our supply chain is more ethically farmed; ‘naming and shaming’ of retailers who trade in meat produced under appalling conditions merits consideration. Changes in consumer demand can often be faster and more effective than legislation.Once the United Kingdom has left the European Union we will have the freedom and responsibility to introduce our own standards, which will not be set to an EU ‘lowest common denominator’. My hope is that the United Kingdom takes the lead with best practice, will then be emulated by other national governments.Consequently I abstained on the vote.

2016/11/22

This matter was not subject to a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy I believe that my constituents have a right to know how I voted, and therefore I confirm that I voted against.I am no supporter of Marine Le Pen or of her politics, which I consider to be toxic. That is not the issue at stake here, however. The issue is one of freedom of speech: should Parliamentary immunity be removed from someone solely on the basis of a Twitter post which was purely a factual post.She posted ‘this is Daesh’ [ISIS] together with a picture of hostages being executed. Is this distasteful? Yes. But it is not inaccurate, and nor should it be criminal in any democracy.Freedom, as George Orwell said in his book ‘1984’, is the freedom to say that 2+2=4. From that all else follows.He was correct; I could not in all conscience vote against freedom of speech. This vote is consistent with my previous votes across the political spectrum; I have supported the freedom of speech across all sides of the chamber and I will not break that principle when it is Marine Le Pen being accused.

2016/11/22

As a UKIP MEP, I felt that it was consistent with my principles – in particular the principle that such matters are matters for national sovereignty – to vote against this resolution.

2016/11/22

As a UKIP MEP, I felt that it was consistent with my principles – in particular the principle that external borders should always be matters for national sovereignty – to vote against this resolution. The European Union has completely the wrong approach, in my opinion, towards the Schengen Area, which provides for the free and unrestricted movement of criminals and contraband.

2016/11/22

Whilst of course I support the principle of secure, affordable and sustainable energy, as per the title of this legislative resolution, its contents are unlikely to assist with achieving those laudable goals and in fact could prove to be completely counterproductive.I further note that I believe in the sovereignty of the nation state, and the British people have chosen through a referendum to defend that principle. I believe that such matters should be decided for the British people by the UK Parliament in Westminster.I therefore voted against.

2016/11/22

This matter was not subject to a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy I believe that my constituents have a right to know how I voted, and therefore I confirm that I abstained. I did so because this issue does not affect the United Kingdom.Just as I believe that this European Parliament should not legislate on what should be United Kingdom sovereign matters, likewise I as a UK Member of the European Parliament should not influence votes which do not affect the United Kingdom and could not morally cast a vote in either direction.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This report was particularly difficult for me. I oppose the principle that such matters should be determined at EU level rather than by our sovereign Parliament in Westminster. At the same time, I share the concerns in the report regarding the high and often prohibitive cost of new medicines coming on to the market.However, the report is an own-initiative one and non-legislative. I recognise the issue that the pharmaceutical industry will have to conduct huge numbers of tests and trials before a new drug ever comes on to the market, and that such costs must be recouped: if they cannot be recouped through selling the drug, then it will impede future research and development.I therefore felt it appropriate to abstain overall on this report.

2016/11/22

I do not believe that the Creative Europe programme is an appropriate use of taxpayers' money, and therefore I voted against this resolution. I further note that this report calls for an increase in its budget, for non-EU countries to be involved, and for the creation of new European Union initiative.

2016/11/22

This report proposes a budget increase to EUR 500 million for the Europe for Citizens programme. The programme is often used to spread pro-EU propaganda, which is not an appropriate use of taxpayers' money. Consequently I had no option but to vote against the report.

2016/11/22

I note and accept that there are significant threats to endangered species across the globe, and furthermore that the report refers to the ‘existing domestic framework’.However, the report also calls for funding at European Union level - which is inconsistent with the democratically-expressed will of the British people. For that reason I was unable to vote in favour of it, and I felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

Whilst I recognise the value of a free trade deal between the UK and Canada, I have serious concerns about the nature of CETA. I am concerned about the potential impact upon the NHS, about the provisions of the mechanisms for dispute resolution, and whether the deal negotiated represents the interests of the UK rather than the EU’s interests as a whole.I would rather negotiate a good trade deal with Canada than continue along the lines of this poor deal.Whilst being a strong supporter of free trade, I felt for the above reasons that I had no choice but to vote against.

2016/11/22

Having voted against CETA in the previous vote, it seemed logically consistent to vote in favour of, or abstain on, the reports which were critical of CETA – and against a report which explained much of the reasoning behind this position.

2016/11/22

It was consistent with my principles as a UKIP MEP and with my previous vote on CETA for me to also vote against this Partnership Agreement.

2016/11/22

As a UKIP MEP, I felt that it was consistent with my principles – in particular the principle that such matters are matters for national sovereignty – to vote against this framework agreement.

2016/11/22

. ‒ As a UKIP MEP, I felt that it was consistent with my principles – in particular the principle that such matters are matters for national sovereignty – to vote against this resolution.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Whilst as a UKIP MEP I cannot vote in favour of anything being done at European Union level whilst the UK is engaged in the process of leaving the European Union, I recognise that this agreement will result in reduced tariffs on trade in aircraft parts. I believe that is a good thing, and therefore I abstained.

2016/11/22

I reject the EU Emissions Trading Scheme – the entire EU energy project has caused increased energy prices in Member States and effectively outsourced pollution to non-EU countries, as well as costing jobs in the UK. This report misses the point, and I therefore voted against it.

2016/11/22

I abstained on this objection. Whilst I object to the principle of delegated acts, the motions for a resolution all called for the Commission to propose a further delegated act. I could hardly vote in favour or against such motions.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I do not believe that the European Union should be interfering in the affairs of sovereign nations, and I note that this is a feature of the report – notably in paragraphs 31 and 32 and, in relation to foreign policy, paragraph 40. I therefore voted against it.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I felt it necessary to vote against this report. I do not believe in EU expansion.

2016/11/22

. ‒ I voted against this report for many reasons, including the calls on the Commission to accelerate the Capital Markets Union and extend the European Structural and Investment Funds.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The European Union should not interfere with the employment policies of Member States, so I voted against.

2016/11/22

This report suggests that the Commission should use infringement procedures more often against Member States who do not fully implement EU legislation. Given my principles regarding the European Union, I felt that I should vote against.

2016/11/22

This report calls upon the Commission to take various actions – including enhancing the ESRB regulatory function and completing the Banking Union. This is not acceptable to national sovereignty, so naturally I voted against.

2016/11/22

I voted against this report because of the calls for further EU regulation and for the European Union to organise a registration process for low-risk pesticides.

2016/11/22

The European Union should not seek to supplant national governments in terms of sport, let alone some of the more ludicrous suggestions in this report including the flying of the European Union flag at national sporting events.

2016/11/22

I would normally have voted against a report which appears to seek further Commission action and interference in nation states. I am not convinced either that the report proposes the right solutions to this particular issue.However, I recognise the importance of cross-border co-operation on this difficult issue; the principle of such co-operation is a sound one. I therefore abstained.

2016/11/22

This measure is essentially EU protectionism. Being a believer in tariff-free trade, I felt it important to vote against.

2016/11/22

I opposed these measures for the following reasons:1. For technical reasons I disagree with the way in which external fishing fleets are defined;2. The sustainable management issue in the United Kingdom relates to overfishing by EU-flagged vessels in UK waters;3. I am concerned as to the extent to which this will still apply to the UK post-Brexit, dependent upon the nature of UK legislation to repeal the 1972 European Communities Act.

2016/11/22

This matter was not subject to a roll-call vote. In the interests of transparency and democracy I believe that my constituents have a right to know how I voted, and therefore I confirm that I abstained. I did so because, whilst recognising much merit in the report, there was too much call for European Union and Commission involvement.

2016/11/22

I voted against this report. Whilst I believe that cross-border co-operation can be a good and innovative thing in education, I have specific concerns about the question of value for money and the way that the report praises the Commission’s actions.However, post—Brexit, the UK must co—operate with the European Union – and leading global centres of academic excellence – in the fields of education and research.

2016/11/22

As this was a vote on an agreement designed to lead to EU enlargement, I felt that I had no alternative but to vote against given my mandate as an MEP elected on a ticket of withdrawal from the European Union.

2016/11/22

This being a minor technical update on an existing set of rules, I felt it appropriate to abstain.

2016/11/22

As a UKIP MEP, it was consistent for me to vote against this Agreement because I believe that such decisions should be taken for the UK by the UK Parliament in Westminster rather than by the European Parliament.

2016/11/22

I have no specific objection to the appointments proposed, but equally I oppose the system in general.

2016/11/22

As a matter of principle, I would normally support objections pursuant to Rule 105(3) because they generally prevent the Commission from introducing legislation without proper scrutiny under Delegated Acts. However, in this instance the motion calls upon the Commission to propose a different Delegated Act – and therefore I felt it appropriate overall to abstain.

2016/11/22

I cannot support a report which calls for the Commission to take Member States to the European Court of Justice.

2016/11/22

Whilst generally supportive of ensuring workers’ rights in a modern 21st-century economy, I do not believe in the principle that such action should be taken at European Union level. There are huge differences between the economies of the member states of the European Union, so this is a classic example of where a one-size-fits-all approach will fail to work in the right way for all 28 Member States of the European Union.I further note that the report supports unlimited EU immigration into the UK and a proposed European Union social security card. I therefore felt that I had no option consistent with my principles but to vote against the report.

2016/11/22

I note that this matter was not the subject of a roll-call vote, and in the interests of transparency and democracy I would therefore like to confirm that I voted against. This measure effectively proposes tightening up the Customs Code to incorporate the Digital Single Market into future decisions, and crucially seeks further EU harmonisation. I cannot support any resolution which proposes further harmonisation at a time when the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union.

2016/11/22

1161 Written explanations of Jonathan ARNOTT

ParlTrack - 2011-2024