9 Amendments of Claude ROLIN related to 2016/2018(INI)
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. In keeping with the agreement, calls for Parliament and Council experts, to be given full access, on an equal footing, to meetings of Commission expert groups responsible for drafting delegated acts, and for the three institutions, working in close collaboration, to draw up a ‘joint functional register of delegated acts’ in order to ensure that the message of the co-legislators in a basic legislative act is not negated or distorted;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Points out that there is at present an information disparity between Parliament and the Council, since parliamentary committee meetings are held in public, whereas Council meetings are not; stresses the importance, therefore, of giving effect without delay to point 34 of the agreement, which stipulates that Parliament and the Council, in their capacity as co- legislators, have to maintain close contacts all through interinstitutional negotiations, one means to that end being to exchange views and information;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the establishment. on 14 November 2017, of the Commission Task Force on Subsidiarity, Proportionality and ‘Doing Less More Efficiently’, which mustshould work hand in hand with the IIA to help increase the trust of citizens, who consider the subsidiarity principle a key aspect of the democratic procesare looking to the EU to act where it has genuine added value and gets as close as possible to their daily lives, for instance by helping them to establish themselves in permanent employment and supporting them in their business ventures;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Points out that while impact assessments may help to improve the quality of EU legislation, the interinstitutional agreement of 13 April 2016 on better law-making nevertheless states that impact assessments are ‘not a substitute for political decisions within the democratic decision-making process’ and ‘must not be undue delays in the law- making process or prejudice the co- legislators’ capacity to propose amendments’;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Notes that, as specified in the interinstitutional agreement on better law- making, ‘Each of the three Institutions is responsible for determining how to organise its impact assessment work, including internal organisational resources and quality control’;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Maintains that it is essential that, to quote the agreement, ‘The Commission's initial impact assessment and any additional impact assessment work conducted during the legislative process by the Institutions’ should be made public by the end of the legislative process in order to ensure transparency in relation to citizens and stakeholders;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Believes that the RSB must show more ambition; calls for an evaluation and follow-up of the independence of the RSB in fulfilling its role of supervischecking, and providing objective advice on, the quality of impact assessments; considers it essential that RSB opinions should be published at the same time as the findings of impact assessments;