BETA

Activities of Javier COUSO PERMUY related to 2016/2238(INI)

Shadow reports (1)

REPORT on private security companies PDF (453 KB) DOC (66 KB)
2016/11/22
Committee: AFET
Dossiers: 2016/2238(INI)
Documents: PDF(453 KB) DOC(66 KB)

Amendments (13)

Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 19 a (new)
– having regard to the report 'Border Wars: The Arms Dealers Profiting from Europe's Refugee Tragedy' by the Transnational Institute, Centre Delàs d'Estudis per la Pau and Stop Wapenhandel,
2017/03/20
Committee: AFET
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Aa. Whereas the border security market is in rapid expansion, was estimated to be worth EUR 15 billion in 2015 and is predicted to increase in value to over EUR 29 billion per annum in 2022; whereas the European border security industry is dominated by big arms companies, which have expanded or developed their security divisions, and by a group of smaller hi-tech companies specialising in security; whereas the major players on the European border security scene also include arms companies such as Airbus, Finmeccanica, Thales and Safran, as well as the technology giant Indra; and whereas Finmeccanica and Airbus have been the main beneficiaries of European contracts aimed at reinforcing the borders; and whereas Airbus is, moreover, the main beneficiary of financing contracts for research in the field of security;
2017/03/20
Committee: AFET
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Ab. Whereas Finmeccanica, Thales and Airbus, which are prominent players in the security business in the EU, are also three of the four main arms traders in Europe, selling to countries in the Middle East and North Africa; their total revenue in 2015 stood at EUR 95 billion;
2017/03/20
Committee: AFET
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
G. whereas the outsourcing of military activities, formerly an integral part of the activities of armed forces, is taking place, among other things, to provide services in a more cost-efficient manner, but also to compensate for a shortfall in capabilities in shrinking armed forces in the context of an increasing number of multilateral missions abroad; whereas PSCs can also , provide capabilities that are entirely lacking in national armed forces, often at short notice; whereas PSCs could also be used for reasons of political convenience to avoid limitations on the use of troops;deleted
2017/03/20
Committee: AFET
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Q. whereas PSCs could play a more important role in the fight against piracy and in improving maritime security, in missions involving dogs, cyber defence, research and development of security tools, mixed surveillance missions and training in cooperation with public authorities;deleted
2017/03/20
Committee: AFET
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses the concern that private security companies play an important role in aiding the state’s military and civilian agencies by closing manpower and capability gaps created by budget cuts and increasing demand for the use of forces abroad; emphasises the availability of surge capacity at short notice as an additional benefit of the private provision of security services;
2017/03/20
Committee: AFET
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that, compared to national troops, private security companies, particularly those based in host countries, can provide considerable cost savings as well as valuable local knowledge;deleted
2017/03/20
Committee: AFET
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Points out that the use of private security companies must be strictly regulated and closely monitored, and staunchly opposes the use of private companies for military purposes in the sphere of security and defence;
2017/03/20
Committee: AFET
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Notes the concern that the EU makes use of Private Security Companies abroad to guard its delegations and staff and to support its civilian and military CSDP missions; stresses that their services fill capacity gaps that the EU would otherwise have difficulties in tackling; demands that the Commission and the Council produce an overview of where, when and for what reason Private Security Companies have been employed in support of EU missions;
2017/03/20
Committee: AFET
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Rather than contracting to private security services, the EU should have a public security corps answerable to the Member States that is responsible for ensuring the security of EU delegations and staff and providing support for CSDP missions; this corps could be constituted from the civil police forces of the Member States or take the form of a new ad-hoc civil corps;
2017/03/20
Committee: AFET
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Urges the Commission, the Council and the Member States to invest in research for more and better technologies such as facial recognition and crowd-control tools as part of automated controls at airports, metro stations and other places where crowds gather, together with private security companies;
2017/03/20
Committee: AFET
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Urges the Council and the Commission that a single European Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) solution should be used to support all Member States; this would deliver unprecedented security intelligence to help improve security responsiveness; recommends developing a commercial satellite imagery-based ISR solution for the European Union;
2017/03/20
Committee: AFET
Amendment 243 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)
20b. Points out that the arms and security industry has succeeded in securing EUR 316 million in funding for research on security topics, thereby setting the agenda for research, implementing it and then, on many occasions, being awarded the resulting contracts; since 2002, the EU has financed 56 projects in the field of border security and control;
2017/03/20
Committee: AFET