6 Amendments of James ELLES related to 2013/0255(APP)
Amendment 1 #
Recital B
B. whereas the Member States have the primary responsibility for implementing some 80 % of the Union budget, as well as for the collection of own resources, inter alia in the form of VAT and customs duties as established in Council Decision 2007/436 EC, Euratom, shortly to be replaced by a Council Decision on amended Commission proposal COM(2011) 739 final;
Amendment 2 #
Recital D (new)
D. whereas fourteen chambers of national Parliaments from eleven Member States have sent reasoned opinions concerning the compliance of the proposal with the principle of subsidiarity, as laid down in Article 5(3) TEU, to the Commission, triggering the subsidiarity mechanism as established in Article 7(2) of Protocol 2 TFEU;
Amendment 3 #
Recital E (new)
E. whereas following receipt of these reasoned opinions the Commission issued a review of its proposal which concluded that its proposal complied with Article 5(3) TEU and that a withdrawal or an amendment of the proposal was not required, deciding therefore to maintain its proposal as originally drafted;
Amendment 12 #
Paragraph 4b (new)
4 b. Notes with concern the proposed structure of the EPPO which may give rise to overlapping and competing structures, multiplication and diffusion of tasks as well as problems with specific accountability, which could possibly undermine its legal credibility;
Amendment 13 #
Paragraph 4c (new)
4 c. Requests therefore that the lead committee consider delaying its reading of the proposal until after the European elections with a view to ensuring that the proposal adequately reflects not only the principle of subsidiarity but also the legal suitability of the proposed legal framework;
Amendment 14 #
Paragraph 4d (new)
4 d. Considers that, in light of the number of national parliaments opposing this measure, the Commission should withdraw its proposal until the new European Parliament considers what action it might take on the EPPO;