Activities of David CORMAND related to 2019/2204(INI)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the implementation of Directive 2009/81/EC, concerning procurement in the fields of defence and security, and of Directive 2009/43/EC, concerning the transfer of defence-related products
Amendments (15)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital -A (new)
Recital -A (new)
-A. whereas well-functioning markets are created by rules and their strict implementation and assertive enforcement; whereas the same applies to the vision of a future European Defence Equipment Market (EDEM);
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas there is the need to develop a comprehensive and holistic concept for a European defence equipment market which formally connects all existing fragments such as the EDIDP, PADR, EDF, PESCO, Common Position on Arms Exports, the Dual-Use Regulation, the two directives of the 2009 Defence Package and future initiatives such as common rules on security of supply;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G b (new)
Recital G b (new)
Gb. whereas without inter-linkages between the different fragments and policy coherence there is the risk that the EU level adds to the existing market distortions and other highly inefficient processes and policies in the defence sector;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G c (new)
Recital G c (new)
Gc. whereas, after 11 years of implementation with very little impact, and in light of the creation of EU defence funds worth nearly EUR 10 billion for the next MFF which will introduce the EU as main actor in European military R&D, it is high time to revise both directives in order to ensure their meaningful contribution to the creation of an efficient and performant European Defence Equipment Market (EDEM);
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G d (new)
Recital G d (new)
Gd. whereas there is a massive lack of data as regards the use or non-use of both directives which makes it extremely difficult for lawmakers and stakeholders to assess the impact of the directives and possible weaknesses as well as strong points;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1
Subheading 1
Improving the functioning of the internal market for defence products through better implementation and enforcement ofthe adoption of a more assertive enforcement policy as regards the Defence Package
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Underlines that there is an urgent need to question the traditional interpretation of Article 346 TFEU in light of the fact that purely national defence products do not exist anymore due to multinational supply chains, multinational collaborative defence projects and a growing importance of the EU level in military R&D;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Reminds that abolishing the government-to-government sales exemption would not mean that European governments are not allowed to, for example, procure US weapon systems in particular under the form of US Foreign Military Sales (FMS) but that European companies would have a fairer chance to present alternative technology;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes, in this regard, that the Commission should take a more proactive role in monitoring the exclusions used by the Member States in their awarding of contracts outside the scope of the Defence Procurement Directive, and should not be mainly reliant on received complaints filed by the industry; urges therefore the Commission to adopt a more assertive enforcement policy;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Underlines that a more coherent interpretation and consistent implementation of the EU Common Position on Arms Exports is needed in order to limit fragmentation of the EU’s internal defence market and ensure the EU’s credibility as a global actor; calls for action to address any loopholes which may exist among and between the ICT directive, the Common Position and the Dual-Use Regulation; underlines the necessity for prior authorisation before re-exporting products and components, given the discrepancies in the implementation of the Common Position; behind this background, rejects the use of so called de-minimis rules for the transfer of components which exempt military technology from checks against the eight arms exports criteria up to a specifics threshold;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Calls for the revision of the ICT directive with the aim of integrating the eight EU criteria on arms exports which would make sure that intra-Community transfers do not undermine arms export policies towards third countries and that there is an increase in convergence between Member States;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Stresses that, in order to build a reliable and comprehensive European defence equipment market and an efficient defence sector, the Commission needs to present without further delay a comprehensive EU-wide Security of Supply regime which was asked for by the 19-20 December 2013 European Council and paragraph 21 of its conclusions but never presented by the Commission;
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on the Commission to be bold in enforcing the directives, including, where necessary, by making more use of infringement procedures;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Urges the Commission and the Member States to generate without delay high quality data on the implementation of both directives and to consider the creation of dedicated NACE or NC codes as their absence hinders any attempt at measuring how the structure of the European defence industry has evolved and to assess the true Europeanisation of defence value-chains;