14 Amendments of Kostas CHRYSOGONOS related to 2015/2283(INI)
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomNotes the package of better regulation measures adopted on 19 May 2015; believes howeverby the Commission on 19 May 2015; reiterates the view it has repeatedly expressed that the material criteria necessary for a consistent preventive examination of the subsidiarity and proportionality of EU legislation do not currently exist and emphasises the need for these criteria, which are indispensable for establishing the existence of a violation of the subsidiarity and proportionality principles should be proposed, to be given specific form at EU level;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 a (new)
Citation 12 a (new)
– having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions "Better regulation for better results - An EU agenda COM(2015) 215, 19.5.2015,
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas subsidiarity and proportionality are key considerations in the context of retrospective evaluations, which assess whether EU actions are actually delivering the expected results in terms of efficiency, effectiveness, coherence, relevance and EU added value;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)
Recital F b (new)
Fb. whereas assessments of subsidiarity and proportionality are integral and permanent parts of the EU policy-making;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Regrets the decrease in the number of reasoned opinions received from national parliaments in 2014; takes note of the Commission’s view that, far from reflecting a decrease in interest on their part, this might be the result of the declining number of legislative proposals from the Commission; urges for the immediate initiation of a dialogue between national parliaments and the Commission, seeking to clarify the reasons for this decrease;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes the significant decrease of 76% in the number of reasoned opinions received from national parliaments in 2014 compared to the number of reasoned opinions received in the previous year (88 in 2013); points out, however, that such a decrease might be as a result of the declining number of legislative proposals by the Commission and not of a loss of interest on the part of national parliaments; draws attention to the fact that in 2014 no Commission proposal received a sufficient number of reasoned opinions to trigger the ‘yellow’ or ‘orange card procedures’ under Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is concerned by the fact that some national parliaments and more specifically the Austrian Bundesrat, the Czech Senát and the Croatian Hrvatski Sabor have highlighted that, in a number of the Commission’s legislative proposals, the justification of subsidiarity and proportionality is insufficient or non- existent in substance; stresses, in this connection, the need for the European institutions to make it possible for national parliaments to scrutinise legislative proposals by ensuring that the Commission provides detailed and comprehensive grounds for its legislative decisions on subsidiarity and proportionality, in accordance with Article 5 of Protocol No 2 to the TFEU;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that in Member States with a federal state structure, regional legislators have an important role to play in the preventive review of EU legislation, but their involvement through Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality has hitherto only been inadequately addressed; expresses its astonishment that the Commission clearly intends to abandon the forms of direct communication between the Commission and the regions with legislative powers that were established on the basis of the Commission communication 'A Citizen's Agenda: Delivering results for Europe' [COM/2006/0211] and to resort to a formalised procedure pursuant to Article 6 of Protocol No 2; calls on the Commission to maintain and develop regular and direct consultation with legislators at regional level in the framework of the 'political dialogue';
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Believes that the period of eight weeks given to national and regional parliaments to issue a reasoned opinion under Article 6 of the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality should be extended significantlyto at least 12 weeks;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the reports made by a number of national parliaments, especially the Danish Folketing, the Dutch Tweede Kamer and the UK House of Lords, as a valuable contribution to the debate on the role of national parliaments in the EU decision-making process and takes note of the proposals included therein; notes, in this connection, that these reports suggest that reasoned opinions should not only concern compliance with the principle of subsidiarity, but also compliance with the principle of proportionality and the legal basis for the proposal; believes that the practicability of these proposals depends on a revision or amendment of the Treaties and the Protocols thereto; encourages other national parliaments to share their views on the role that national parliaments should play in the EU decision-making process;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the reports made by a number of national parliaments as a valuable contribution to the debate on the role of national parliaments in the EU decision-making process and takes note of the proposals included therein; notes, in this connection, that these reports suggest that reasoned opinions should not only concern compliance with the principle of subsidiarity, but also compliance with the principle of proportionality and the legal basis for the proposal; believes that the practicability of these proposals depends on a revision or an amendment of the Treaties and the Protocols thereto; encourages other national parliaments to share their views on the role that national parliaments should play in the EU decision-making process;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that the Commission should provide an adequate response to the request by a number of national chambers for a stronger subsidiarity control procedure; supports the request made by some national chambers to play a more crucial role, by proposing that the Commission should be bound to withdraw or amend its proposal when a yellow card is triggered; believes, at the same time, that the idea of a ‘green card’ should be considered as one means of raising the participation and activity of national parliaments in the EU legislative process.
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission to systematically carry out enhanced proportionality assessments with detailed evaluations of the different legislative options at its disposal, explaining sufficient why each legislative initiative is needed, why it is the best tool for the EU to use, what stakeholders think and what the likely environmental, social and economic impacts are, particularly those on public interests, competitiveness and small and medium-sized enterprises, including a more thorough explanation of how the initiative meets the twin tests of subsidiarity (why the goal cannot be achieved by the Member States alone) and proportionality (why the measure proposed does not go further than what is needed to meet its goal), so as to discard alternatives with a disproportionate impact or which are unnecessarily burdensome on the individuals and undertakings concerned, in particular SMEs, and to provide a sufficiently detailed description of all the different alternatives that had been considered so as to allow better scrutiny of its proposals on proportionality grounds; considers that the enlargement of the scope of reasoned opinions so as to include respect of the principle of proportionality would be desirable;
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Highlights that legislation should be comprehensible and clear, allow parties to easily understand their rights and obligations, include appropriate reporting, monitoring and evaluation requirements, avoid disproportionate costs, and be practical to implement;