BETA

745 Amendments of Rainer WIELAND

Amendment 6 #

2024/2006(REG)

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Members may not be elected as office- holders of Parliament or one of its bodies, be appointed as rapporteur or participate in an official delegation or interinstitutional negotiations,: (a) if they have not signed the declaration relating to that Codconfirming their commitment to complying with that Code, including the completion of the specialised training organised for them by the European Parliament on preventing conflict and harassment in the workplace and on good office management; or (b) if they have not completed the training referred to in point (a) within the first six months of their term of office save in duly substantiated exceptional cases, unless they have already completed it in a previous term of office.
2024/03/22
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 6 #

2024/2006(REG)

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Members may not be elected as office- holders of Parliament or one of its bodies, be appointed as rapporteur or participate in an official delegation or interinstitutional negotiations,: (a) if they have not signed the declaration relating to that Codconfirming their commitment to complying with that Code, including the completion of the specialised training organised for them by the European Parliament on preventing conflict and harassment in the workplace and on good office management; or (b) if they have not completed the training referred to in point (a) within the first six months of their term of office save in duly substantiated exceptional cases, unless they have already completed it in a previous term of office.
2024/03/22
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 7 #

2024/2006(REG)

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 21 – paragraph 1
The Conference of Presidents may, acting by a majority of three-fifths of the votes cast, representing at least three political groups, propose to Parliament that it bring to an end the term of office of the President, a Vice-President, a Quaestor, a Chair or Vice-Chair of a committee, a Chair or Vice-Chair of an interparliamentary delegation, or of any other office holder elected within the Parliament, where it considers that the Member in question has been guilty of serious misconduct, including when the President has submitted a proposal in line with Rule 176(7) following the establishment of the occurrence of a harassment in accordance with the applicable internal administrative procedure on harassment and its prevention. Parliament shall take a decision on that proposal by a majority of two-thirds of the votes cast, constituting a majority of its component Members.
2024/03/22
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 7 #

2024/2006(REG)

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 21 – paragraph 1
The Conference of Presidents may, acting by a majority of three-fifths of the votes cast, representing at least three political groups, propose to Parliament that it bring to an end the term of office of the President, a Vice-President, a Quaestor, a Chair or Vice-Chair of a committee, a Chair or Vice-Chair of an interparliamentary delegation, or of any other office holder elected within the Parliament, where it considers that the Member in question has been guilty of serious misconduct, including when the President has submitted a proposal in line with Rule 176(7) following the establishment of the occurrence of a harassment in accordance with the applicable internal administrative procedure on harassment and its prevention. Parliament shall take a decision on that proposal by a majority of two-thirds of the votes cast, constituting a majority of its component Members.
2024/03/22
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 8 #

2024/2006(REG)

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 21 – paragraph 2
Where a rapporteur breaches the provisions of the Code of Conduct for Members of the European Parliament regarding integrity and transparency13has been guilty of serious misconduct, the committee which appointed him or her may, at the initiative of the President and on a proposal by the Conference of Presidents, terminate the holding of that office. The majorities laid down in the first paragraph shall apply mutatis mutandis to each stage of this procedure. JustificationAlignment with the revised paragraph 1 of Rule 21 clarif misconduct’ includes cases when a Member has been found guilty of sexual o harassmentOr. en ying that ‘serious r psychological .
2024/03/22
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 8 #

2024/2006(REG)

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 21 – paragraph 2
Where a rapporteur breaches the provisions of the Code of Conduct for Members of the European Parliament regarding integrity and transparency13has been guilty of serious misconduct, the committee which appointed him or her may, at the initiative of the President and on a proposal by the Conference of Presidents, terminate the holding of that office. The majorities laid down in the first paragraph shall apply mutatis mutandis to each stage of this procedure. JustificationAlignment with the revised paragraph 1 of Rule 21 clarif misconduct’ includes cases when a Member has been found guilty of sexual o harassmentOr. en ying that ‘serious r psychological .
2024/03/22
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 9 #

2024/2006(REG)

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 176 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
In relation to Rule 10(6), as regards the prohibition of any type of psychological or sexual harassment laid down in the first subparagraph of that Rule, the President may only adopt a reasoned decision under this Rule following the establishment of the occurrence of a harassment in accordance with the applicable internal administrative procedure on harassment and its prevention.
2024/03/22
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 9 #

2024/2006(REG)

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 176 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
In relation to Rule 10(6), as regards the prohibition of any type of psychological or sexual harassment laid down in the first subparagraph of that Rule, the President may only adopt a reasoned decision under this Rule following the establishment of the occurrence of a harassment in accordance with the applicable internal administrative procedure on harassment and its prevention.
2024/03/22
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 11 #

2024/2006(REG)

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex II – point 5
5. Where necessary, Members will cooperate promptly and fullyfully, in accordance with the procedures in place forlaid down by the Bureau, with a view to managing situations of conflict or harassment (psychological or sexual), including by responding promptly to any allegations of harassment. Members swhould have not already done so shall take part in specialised training organised for them by the European Parliament on preventing conflict and harassment in the workplace and on good office management. This training shall be completed within the first six months of the Member’s term of office save in duly substantiated exceptional cases. The Members’ certificates of completion of this training will be published on Parliament’s website.
2024/03/22
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 11 #

2024/2006(REG)

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex II – point 5
5. Where necessary, Members will cooperate promptly and fullyfully, in accordance with the procedures in place forlaid down by the Bureau, with a view to managing situations of conflict or harassment (psychological or sexual), including by responding promptly to any allegations of harassment. Members swhould have not already done so shall take part in specialised training organised for them by the European Parliament on preventing conflict and harassment in the workplace and on good office management. This training shall be completed within the first six months of the Member’s term of office save in duly substantiated exceptional cases. The Members’ certificates of completion of this training will be published on Parliament’s website.
2024/03/22
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 40 #

2023/2104(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that Treaty requirements together with political realities have led to ad hoc negotiated agreements on the composition of the European Parliament every mandate; observes that the reason for the politicisation is the aim of every Member State to minimise seat losses and maximise seat gains in absolute or relative terms; deplores, in this context, antagonistic voting in plenary, which the countries concerned see as a loss of appreciation and which could be instrumentalised at domestic level for nationalist debates; emphasises that in the last two decisions concerning the allocation of seats, seats were allocated that became available after the United Kingdom left the EU; highlights that, in the long-term, this strategy is not sustainable, given the Treaty limitation of a maximum of 751 seats and the potentially distortive effects of a political solution, rendering an agreement on an equitable allocation in the future more difficult;
2024/02/21
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 40 #

2023/2104(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that Treaty requirements together with political realities have led to ad hoc negotiated agreements on the composition of the European Parliament every mandate; observes that the reason for the politicisation is the aim of every Member State to minimise seat losses and maximise seat gains in absolute or relative terms; deplores, in this context, antagonistic voting in plenary, which the countries concerned see as a loss of appreciation and which could be instrumentalised at domestic level for nationalist debates; emphasises that in the last two decisions concerning the allocation of seats, seats were allocated that became available after the United Kingdom left the EU; highlights that, in the long-term, this strategy is not sustainable, given the Treaty limitation of a maximum of 751 seats and the potentially distortive effects of a political solution, rendering an agreement on an equitable allocation in the future more difficult;
2024/02/21
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 51 #

2023/2104(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that in choosing the most suitable formula, priority needs to be given to objective and evidence-based criteria and remains convinced that the calculation method and its underlying principles should be as simple as possible and easy for citizens to understand; further believes that changes to the relevant Treaty provisions can be considered;
2024/02/21
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 51 #

2023/2104(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that in choosing the most suitable formula, priority needs to be given to objective and evidence-based criteria and remains convinced that the calculation method and its underlying principles should be as simple as possible and easy for citizens to understand; further believes that changes to the relevant Treaty provisions can be considered;
2024/02/21
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 69 #

2023/2104(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Points out that the method chosen should be understandable, avoiding a level of complexity that citizens cannot understand, or else a new kind of ‘democratic deficit’ could arise;
2024/02/21
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 69 #

2023/2104(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Points out that the method chosen should be understandable, avoiding a level of complexity that citizens cannot understand, or else a new kind of ‘democratic deficit’ could arise;
2024/02/21
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 75 #

2023/2104(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that degressive proportionality is assessed on the basis of the representation ratio of the citizens of a given Member State, meaning the ratio of the population of a Member State relative to its number of seats before rounding; observes that degressive proportionality entails that the ratio varies for the various Member States; further notes that the larger the population, the higher the entitlement to a number of seats for a specific Member State, while the ratio population to MEP also increases; notes and accepts that degressive proportionality entails an underrepresentation of citizens from Member States with a larger population and an overrepresentation of citizens of Member States with a smaller population; recognises, however, that through rounding and with the distribution of the last seats in the system, smaller fractions can occur owing to the laws of mathematics; believes that this principle is justified given the current EU institutional framework;
2024/02/21
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 75 #

2023/2104(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that degressive proportionality is assessed on the basis of the representation ratio of the citizens of a given Member State, meaning the ratio of the population of a Member State relative to its number of seats before rounding; observes that degressive proportionality entails that the ratio varies for the various Member States; further notes that the larger the population, the higher the entitlement to a number of seats for a specific Member State, while the ratio population to MEP also increases; notes and accepts that degressive proportionality entails an underrepresentation of citizens from Member States with a larger population and an overrepresentation of citizens of Member States with a smaller population; recognises, however, that through rounding and with the distribution of the last seats in the system, smaller fractions can occur owing to the laws of mathematics; believes that this principle is justified given the current EU institutional framework;
2024/02/21
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 77 #

2023/2104(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that degressive proportionality is assessed on the basis of the representation ratio of the citizens of a given Member State, meaning the ratio of the population of a Member State relative to its number of seats before rounding; observes that degressive proportionality entails that the ratio varies for the various Member States; further notes that the larger the population, the higher the entitlement to a number of seats for a specific Member State, while the ratio population to MEP also increases; notes and accepts that degressive proportionality entails an underrepresentation of citizens from Member States with a larger population and an overrepresentation of citizens of Member States with a smaller population; believes that this principle is justified given the current EU institutional framework;
2024/02/21
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 77 #

2023/2104(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that degressive proportionality is assessed on the basis of the representation ratio of the citizens of a given Member State, meaning the ratio of the population of a Member State relative to its number of seats before rounding; observes that degressive proportionality entails that the ratio varies for the various Member States; further notes that the larger the population, the higher the entitlement to a number of seats for a specific Member State, while the ratio population to MEP also increases; notes and accepts that degressive proportionality entails an underrepresentation of citizens from Member States with a larger population and an overrepresentation of citizens of Member States with a smaller population; believes that this principle is justified given the current EU institutional framework;
2024/02/21
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 80 #

2023/2104(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Is of the opinion that a permanent system based on a formula needs to be durable and therefore flexible enough to account for changes in population figures, for future enlargements and for possible changes of applicable legislative provisions, such as the electoral law or treaty changes; points out that when new countries have joined the EU in the past, the current upper limit of 751 members has been exceeded for a limited period of time;
2024/02/21
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 80 #

2023/2104(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Is of the opinion that a permanent system based on a formula needs to be durable and therefore flexible enough to account for changes in population figures, for future enlargements and for possible changes of applicable legislative provisions, such as the electoral law or treaty changes; points out that when new countries have joined the EU in the past, the current upper limit of 751 members has been exceeded for a limited period of time;
2024/02/21
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 92 #

2023/2104(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Observes that previous recommendations for seat allocation comprised several elements; notes that these included a fixed base number of seats for all Member States and an allocation of remaining seats in proportion to respective population figures with a cap of 96 seats; stresses that these recommendations, such as the so-called ‘Cambridge Compromise’, have been criticised for not respecting Treaty criteria, such as degressive proportionality, in certain circumstances, and can only be understood by a minority of citizens;
2024/02/21
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 92 #

2023/2104(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Observes that previous recommendations for seat allocation comprised several elements; notes that these included a fixed base number of seats for all Member States and an allocation of remaining seats in proportion to respective population figures with a cap of 96 seats; stresses that these recommendations, such as the so-called ‘Cambridge Compromise’, have been criticised for not respecting Treaty criteria, such as degressive proportionality, in certain circumstances, and can only be understood by a minority of citizens;
2024/02/21
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 94 #

2023/2104(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Further notes that the ‘Cambridge Compromise’ has been criticised for neglecting the interests of citizens of medium-sized Member States, entailing seat losses for these countries; recalls that in order to counterbalance this tendency of the ‘Cambridge Compromise”, an extensive reform of the qualified voting mechanism currently in force in the Council; regretfully acknowledges that, , due to high political hurdles, such as Treaty change, these reforms were never pursued;deleted
2024/02/21
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 94 #

2023/2104(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Further notes that the ‘Cambridge Compromise’ has been criticised for neglecting the interests of citizens of medium-sized Member States, entailing seat losses for these countries; recalls that in order to counterbalance this tendency of the ‘Cambridge Compromise”, an extensive reform of the qualified voting mechanism currently in force in the Council; regretfully acknowledges that, , due to high political hurdles, such as Treaty change, these reforms were never pursued;deleted
2024/02/21
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 101 #

2023/2104(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Stresses the need for any method chosen to maintain the advantages of the known formulas, while minimising their disadvantages; points out that ‘base seat’ elements of the seat allocation system can be used to ensure the democratic representation of citizens from smaller Member States, while the proportional elements ensure that the larger a Member State’s population , the greater the number of seats allocated to it; highlights that seats allocated in proportion to the square root of the population of Member States contribute to ensuring that degressive proportionality is achieved and the citizens of small and medium-sized Member States are democratically represented; believes that the combination of these elements can be converted into a mathematical formula and used as the basis of the most suitable allocation system; believes that such allocation system should be proposed and adopted in the form of a political decisionpoints out that a fair method could also be to use the Council’s ‘double majority’ principle as a key element for a formula for Parliament;
2024/02/21
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 101 #

2023/2104(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Stresses the need for any method chosen to maintain the advantages of the known formulas, while minimising their disadvantages; points out that ‘base seat’ elements of the seat allocation system can be used to ensure the democratic representation of citizens from smaller Member States, while the proportional elements ensure that the larger a Member State’s population , the greater the number of seats allocated to it; highlights that seats allocated in proportion to the square root of the population of Member States contribute to ensuring that degressive proportionality is achieved and the citizens of small and medium-sized Member States are democratically represented; believes that the combination of these elements can be converted into a mathematical formula and used as the basis of the most suitable allocation system; believes that such allocation system should be proposed and adopted in the form of a political decisionpoints out that a fair method could also be to use the Council’s ‘double majority’ principle as a key element for a formula for Parliament;
2024/02/21
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 9 #

2023/2083(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas special legislative procedures are procedures that either reduce or weaken the role of the European Parliament as colegislator on an equal footing with the Council, and whereas the institutions must therefore restore a balance in that regard;
2023/09/26
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 10 #

2023/2083(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas the different areas in which the special legislative procedure applies must be carefully examined, as must the different roles of the European Parliament, where consent is required or where it is merely consulted or where it acts instead as initiator of legislation (Statute for Members of the European Parliament, European electoral law, right of inquiry, Statute of the Ombudsman, etc.), bearing in mind that the special legislative procedure in the Treaties is used in certain more sensitive policy areas (such as the budget, international agreements, etc.);
2023/09/26
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 20 #

2023/2083(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls for the role of the European Parliament in these special legislative procedures to be strengthened accordingly in order to enable it to conduct serious negotiations with the Council;
2023/09/26
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 25 #

2023/2083(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Acknowledges that the rights of the institutions under the different procedures and the specific features of those procedures also afford each institution latitude - exercising latitude being part of the interinstitutional competitive process - and that that latitude may also be exercised to secure acceptance for political positions; stresses, however, that such latitude must also be seen to be exercised at all times as a measure of good faith to actually carry out the colegislation functions that have been conferred, that the dividing line between latitude and obstruction must not be crossed, and that, in cases of doubt, formal termination of a procedure is preferable to permanent non-acceptance;
2023/09/26
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 46 #

2023/2083(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Recommends that, in accordance with the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making (IIA), the legislative procedure resulting from the right of legislative initiative conferred on Parliament by the Treaties should include a request to establish a legislative timetable for the initiatives concerned along the lines of that for the ordinary legislative procedure; stresses further that such a special legislative procedure must comply with the IIA provisions on the institutional obligation on all three institutions to negotiate;
2023/09/26
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 47 #

2023/2083(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Stresses that, as currently worded, the third paragraph of Article 226 TFEU, which stipulates a ‘special legislative procedure’ and requires Council and Commission consent for adoption of a regulation on Parliament’s right of inquiry, does not oblige the Council and the Commission to negotiate, since they are obliged only to give or withhold their consent to Parliament’s proposal, and not to negotiate with a view to reaching a common accord;
2023/09/26
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 75 #

2023/2083(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Reiterates its call on the Council to adopt a positive decision on Romania and Bulgaria’s accession to the Schengen free movement area by the end of 2023;deleted
2023/09/26
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 81 #

2023/2083(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Reiterates that, should use be made of a special legislative procedure and should no agreement be reached within a reasonable period, the Commission would have to withdraw the legislative proposal concerned;
2023/09/26
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 96 #

2023/2083(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Stresses that the time limits available to each institution for the different procedures - in primary law or through IIA arrangements - must also reflect the principle that the institutions are of equal standing;
2023/09/26
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 103 #

2023/2083(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28a. Considers it necessary for all institutions to step up efforts to publish, as the product of the lawmaking process, texts whose content is consistent across all official languages and, in the interests of uniform application of the law throughout the Union, robustly interpretable and applicable for all responsible actors involved in implementing legislation, within the judiciary and within the executive at all levels;
2023/09/26
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 109 #

2023/2083(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29a. Considers that the discontinuity principle within the legislative procedure fundamentally strengthens the Union’s colegislating institutions and significantly complements the institutions’ better- lawmaking efforts;
2023/09/26
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 114 #

2023/2083(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
31a. Calls on the political parties to ensure that their election programmes express their commitment to the proposal by Parliament for a new and updated regulation on its right of inquiry, and invites the various lead candidates to offer their public and political support on this matter;
2023/09/26
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 41 #

2023/0033(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
(3) New and revised limit values should be set out in light of available information, including up-to-date scientific evidence and technical data, based on a thorough assessment of the socioeconomic and cultural impact and availability of exposure measurement protocols and techniques at the place of work.
2023/06/08
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 94 #

2023/0033(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15 a (new)
(15a) The central aim of this legislation is to ensure a comprehensive level of protection for workers and also to protect the cultural heritage of the European Union. Therefore, a sectoral exemption for the occupational substance lead should be introduced for activities, which are essential for cultural activities in Europe. It should be regularly reviewed whether these regulations are still necessary for the preservation of Europe's cultural heritage.
2023/06/08
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 138 #

2023/0033(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph -1 – point 4 (new)
Directive 2004/37/EC
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
(4) in Article 5, the following paragraph 4a is inserted: "4a. The limit values set out in Annex III for the occupational substance "inorganic lead and its compounds" and Annex IIIa for the occupational substance "lead and its ionic compounds" shall not apply to activities which, in accordance to Annex IIIb, are of substantial importance for the preservation of the cultural heritage and cultural diversity of the European Union."
2023/06/08
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 194 #

2023/0033(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex II – paragraph 1 a (new)
Directive 2004/37/EG
Annex III
Annex IIIb (new) Exemptions for activities of substantial importance for the preservation of the cultural heritage and cultural diversity of the European Union A. The following activities are covered by the exemption under Article 5 (4a): 1. List of activities of essential significance for the preservation of cultural heritage and cultural diversity of the European Union I. Manufacture, restoration and repair of musical instruments II. Preservation of cultural assets in museums and cultural institutions III. Preservation of historical monuments IV. Construction of new pipe organs (Annex III is amended by adding an Annex IIIb)
2023/06/08
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 30 #

2022/2143(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas, as a legal community, the EU is dependent on the effective and uniform application of its law by the Member States’ and the Union’s courts; whereas such effectiveness and uniformity can only be ensured if EU law takes precedence over national law; whereas the principle of primacy therefore constitutes a cornerstone of the EU’s legal order, which is essential for the EU’s functioning;
2023/09/06
Committee: JURIAFCO
Amendment 33 #

2022/2143(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the primacy of EU law is intrinsically linked to the principle of equality before the law, as it guarantees equal protection of the rights conferred by EU law to all EU citizens;
2023/09/06
Committee: JURIAFCO
Amendment 44 #

2022/2143(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas, according to Article 4(3) subparagraph 2 TEU, Member States must take any appropriate measure, general or particular, to ensure fulfilment of the obligations arising out of the Treaties or resulting from the acts of the institutions of the Union;
2023/09/06
Committee: JURIAFCO
Amendment 50 #

2022/2143(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the continuous dialogue between the Court of Justice of the European Union and national supreme and constitutional courts regarding the interpretation of this principle results from tensions between the EU and national legal orders, namely regarding the division of competences between the two constitutional spheres and who has the ultimate authority to define whether something falls under the scope of powers conferred by the Member States to the EU;
2023/09/06
Committee: JURIAFCO
Amendment 71 #

2022/2143(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F
F. whereas several national constitutional courts have nevertheless defended the existence of certain limits to the principle of primacy related to Articles 4(2) and 5 TEU; whereas these reservations mostly concern respect for EU competences and the national constitutional identity;
2023/09/06
Committee: JURIAFCO
Amendment 79 #

2022/2143(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G
G. whereas the principle of primacy does not imply a hierarchy between the legal orders of the EU and the Member States, but rather requires that, in the event of conflicting provisions of EU and national law, national courts must disapply those national provisions, EU law prevails and that national courts must interpret their national law in conformity with EU law; whereas a conflict between domestic law and EU legislation can finally be solved either by amending the domestic law or the respective EU law;
2023/09/06
Committee: JURIAFCO
Amendment 142 #

2022/2143(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that it is up to the CJEU, given its exclusive competence to provide the definitive interpretation of EU law, to define the scope of the principle of primacy; notes that such a definition cannot, therefore, be left tounderlines that the application of Articles 4(2) and 5 TEU requires an active dialogue between the national courts onand the basis of their interpretation of EU lawCJEU; notes that the definition of the principle orf provisions of national lawimacy cannot, therefore, be left to the CJEU or national courts alone;
2023/09/06
Committee: JURIAFCO
Amendment 157 #

2022/2143(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Underlines that a constructive dialogue between national constitutional courts and the CJEU is beneficial to the development of EU law as it can serve as a way of solving tensions between the European and national legal orders regarding the division of competences; stresses that such dialogue should be constructive and does not legitimise any disrespect for the decisions of the CJEU;
2023/09/06
Committee: JURIAFCO
Amendment 181 #

2022/2143(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Is of the opinion that the preliminary reference procedure constitutes a way to engage in a constructive judicial dialogue; emphasises that, since it ensures the uniform interpretation of EU law, it is a prerequisite for the consistency and autonomy of the EU’s legal order; recalls that, in certain cases, the CJEU has shown a willingness to change its reasoning in a second preliminary ruling requested by the same national constitutional court that had initiated the first preliminary reference, which demonstrates that this procedure provides for an effective dialogue between courts; considers that the escalation of conflicts by national constitutional or supreme courts might testify to a lack of investment in dialogue with the CJEU in the course of the proceedings;
2023/09/06
Committee: JURIAFCO
Amendment 217 #

2022/2143(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Encourages the Commission to initiate infringement procedures under Article 258 TFEU where appropriate, in response to judgments of national constitutional courts that challenge the principle of primacy; underlines that such procedures provide the opportunity for supreme courts to engage in a judicial dialogue; stresses also the need to make clear to other national constitutional courts that there are consequences for failing to respect the principle of primacy;
2023/09/06
Committee: JURIAFCO
Amendment 221 #

2022/2143(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Acknowledges that infringement procedures against judicial decisions are often criticised for potentially jeopardising the independence of the judiciary; points out, however, that judicial independence is aimed at shielding courts from exposure to political pressure, but not from accountability for not complying with the applicable law;deleted
2023/09/06
Committee: JURIAFCO
Amendment 251 #

2022/2143(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Recommends nevertheless that, in the event of a revision of the Treaties, the principle of primacy be codified; recalls that the precedence of EU law was explicitly laid down in the Constitutional Treaty; regrets the fact that this primacy clause was not included in the Treaty of Lisbon; underlines the legal effect of Declaration No 17 annexed to the Treaty of Lisbon, concerning primacy and its interpretation by the signatory states;
2023/09/06
Committee: JURIAFCO
Amendment 344 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
(9) In the final report of the Conference on the Future of Europe, published on 9 May 2022, when it comes to the proposals on agriculture, food production, biodiversity and ecosystems, pollution, citizens ask the Union in particular to significantly reduce the use of chemical pesticides and fertilizers, in line with the existing targets, while still ensuring food security, and support for research to develop more sustainable and natural-based alternatives. Citizens ask for more research and innovations, including in technological solutions for sustainable production, plant resistance, and precision farming, and more communication, advisory systems, and training for and from farmers as well as asking the Union to protect insects, in particular indigenous and pollinating insects.55 __________________ 55 Conference on the Future of Europe – Report on the Final Outcome, May 2022, Proposals 1 and 2, pp. 43-44.deleted
2023/04/04
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 624 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
(43) In order to enforce the obligations set out in this Regulation, Member States should lay down rules on penalties applicable to infringements of this Regulation and ensure that those rules are enforced. The penalties should be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. It is also important to provide for Member States to recover costs related to carrying out obligations under this Regulation by means of fees or charges in order to ensure that adequate financial resources are available to competent authorities.deleted
2023/04/04
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 637 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
(45) Activities performed by the competent authorities, or by other bodies or natural persons to which official control tasks have been delegated, in order to verify compliance by operators with this Regulation, are, with the exception of control tasks related to equipment used to apply plant protection products, regulated by Regulation (EU) 2017/625 of the European Parliament and of the Council.75 Therefore, this Regulation only needs to provide for controls and audits in respect of inspection of application equipment in professional use. __________________ 75 Regulation (EU) 2017/625 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 on official controls and other official activities performed to ensure the application of food and feed law, rules on animal health and welfare, plant health and plant protection products, amending Regulations (EC) No 999/2001, (EC) No 396/2005, (EC) No 1069/2009, (EC) No 1107/2009, (EU) No 1151/2012, (EU) No 652/2014, (EU) 2016/429 and (EU) 2016/2031 of the European Parliament and of the Council, Council Regulations (EC) No 1/2005 and (EC) No 1099/2009 and Council Directives 98/58/EC, 1999/74/EC, 2007/43/EC, 2008/119/EC and 2008/120/EC, and repealing Regulations (EC) No 854/2004 and (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council, Council Directives 89/608/EEC, 89/662/EEC, 90/425/EEC, 91/496/EEC, 96/23/EC, 96/93/EC and 97/78/EC and Council Decision 92/438/EEC (Official Controls Regulation) (OJ L 95, 7.4.2017, p. 1).deleted
2023/04/04
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2158 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 4
4. An application by a professional user for a permit for the use of a plant protection product in a sensitive area shall include the information necessary to demonstrate that the conditions set out in paragraph 3 are met.deleted
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2167 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 5
5. The competent authority referred to in paragraph 3 shall decide on the application for a permit for the use of a plant protection product within 2 weeks of its submission.deleted
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2172 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 6
6. The permit to use a plant protection product in a sensitive area shall indicate all of the following: (a) the conditions for limited and controlled use by the applicant; (b) the obligation to display notices regarding use of plant protection products on the perimeter of the area to be treated, and any specific form such display is to take; (c) (d) permit.deleted risk mitigation measures; the duration of validity of the
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2180 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 7
7. A professional user that has been granted a permit to use a plant protection product in a sensitive area shall display notices to that regard on the perimeter of the area to be treated in the form indicated in the permit.deleted
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2186 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 8
8. Where a permit for use of a plant protection product in a sensitive area is granted, bedeleted the location of the use; the evidence fore the first day of its validity, the competent authority referred to in paragraph 3 shall make publicly available the following information: (a) (b) circumstances justifying the applicationexceptional the start and end date of the the relevant weather conditions the name of athe plant protection product; (c) approval period of the permit, which shall not exceed 60 consecutive days; (d) allowing a safe application; (e) product or products; (f) used and the risk mitigation measures to be taken.the application equipment to be
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2202 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19
Measures to protect the aquatic environment and drinking water 1. The use of all plant protection products is prohibited on all surface waters and within 3 metres of such waters. This 3 metre buffer zone shall not be reduced by using alternative risk- mitigation techniques. 2. Member States may establish larger mandatory buffer zones adjacent to surface waters. 3. of application of this Regulation], Member States shall have in place appropriate measures to avoid deterioration of surface and groundwater status as well as coastal and marine waters and allow achievement of good surface and groundwater status, to protect the aquatic environment and drinking water supplies from the impact of plant protection products to achieve, at least, the objectives set out in Directives 2000/60/EC, 2006/118/EC, 2008/105/EC, 2008/56/EC and (EU) 2020/2184.Article 19 deleted By … [OP: please insert the date
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2203 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. The use of all plant protection products is prohibited on all surface waters and within 3 metres of such waters. This 3 metre buffer zone shall not be reduced by using alternative risk- mitigation techniques.deleted
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2214 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Plant protection products may not be applied to bodies of water, with the exception of small bodies of water of minor importance for water management purposes, within 10 metres of the water body concerned, measured from the upper edge of the bank or, if there is no upper edge, from the mean water level line. By way of derogation from the first sentence, the minimum distance to be maintained shall be five metres if there is closed year- round vegetation cover. Tillage for vegetation renewal may be carried out once within five-year periods. The first five-year period shall start at XXX (to be inserted). If, when a given plant protection product is authorised, application-related provisions are laid down as regards greater distances or the plant protection equipment to be used, this shall be without prejudice to the obligation to comply with these provisions. The first to the fourth sentences shall not apply where a Member State has adopted or adopts provisions laying down different distances from bodies of water.
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2216 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. The competent authority may authorise derogations from the first and second sentences of paragraph 1 in order to prevent significant agricultural, forestry-related or other economic harm or to protect native fauna and flora, in particular against invasive species.
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2266 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. Where certain categories of unmanned aircraft fulfil the criteria set out in paragraph 2, a Member State may exempt aAerial application by such unmanned aircraft from the prohibition laid down in Article 20(1) prior to any aerialwill not be prohibited for targeted application of plant protection products.
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2270 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2
2. An aerial application by an unmanned aircraft may be exempdeleted by the Member State from the prohibition laid down in Article 20(1) where factors related to the use of the unmanned aircraft demonstrate that the risks from its use are lower than the risks arising from other aerial equipment and land-based application equipment. These factors shall include criteria relating to: (a) unmanned aircraft, including in relation to spray drift, number and size of rotors, payload, boom width and overall weight, operating height and speed; (b) wind speed; (c) its topography; (d) products authorized for use as ultra-low volume formulations intechnical specifications of the the weather conditions, including the area to be sprayed, including the availability of plant protection potential use of unmanned aircraft the relevant Member State; (e) in conjunction with real time kinematic precision farming in certain cases; (f) pilots operating an unmanned aircraft; (g) multiple unmanned aircraft in the same area.el of training required for potential concurrent use of
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2291 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 40 supplementing this Regulation to specify precise criteria in relation to the factors set out in paragraph 2 once technical progress and scientific developments allow for the development of such precise criteriatechnical qualifications, use or training.
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2330 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2
2. Where a purchaser is a legal person, a distributor may sell a plant protection product authorised for professional use to a representative of the purchaser of the plant protection product when that distributor has checked, at the time of purchase, that the representative is the holder of a training certificate for following courses for professional users issued in accordance with Article 25 or has a proof of entry in a central electronic register for following such courses in accordance with Article 25(5).
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2335 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3
3. A distributor shall direct a purchaser of a plant protection product to read its label prior to use and to use the product in accordance with the instructions on the label and shall inform the purchaser of the website referred to in Article 27.deleted
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2344 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 5
5. Each distributor shall ensure that it has sufficient staff that hold a training certificate for following courses for distributors issued in accordance with Article 25 orand has a proof of entry in a central electronic register for following such courses in accordance with Article 25(5) available at the time of sale to provide adequate responses to purchasers of plant protection products at the moment of sale on their use, related health and environmental risksthe necessary knowledge of the health and environmental risks relating to storage and handling and of the appropriate safety instructions to manage those risks.
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2348 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 6
6. The distributor referred to in paragraph 5 shall inform the purchaser of a plant protection product about less hazardous control techniques before the purchaser buys a plant protection product with a higher risk for human health and the environment.deleted
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2375 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2
2. Each Member State shall designate a competent authority or authorities responsible for the implementation of the system for the training and certification of all training referred to in paragraph 1 and, for issuing and renewing training certificates, updating the central electronic register, providing proof of entry in the central electronic register andand for overseeing that the tasks referred to in paragraph 1 are carried out by the body that provided the training.
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2384 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) the employer of the professional user, distributor or advisor to whom the training was provided, where that employer is a legal person or a natural person in its professional capacity;deleted
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2423 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall designate a competent authority to establish, oversee and monitor the operation of a system of independenexpert advisors for professional users. That system may make use of the impartial farm advisors referred to in Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 2021/2115, who must be regularly trained and can be funded under Article 78 of the same regulationshall comprise advisors trained in accordance with Article 25.
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2426 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2
2. The competent authority referred to in paragraph 1 shall ensure that any advisor registered in the system referred to in that paragraph (‘independent advisor’) is free from any conflict of interest and, in particular, is not in a situation which, directly or indirectly, could affect their ability to carry out their professional duties in an impartial manner.deleted
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2433 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 3
3. Each professional user shall consult an independent advisor at least once a year for the purposes of receiving the strategic advice referred to in paragraph 4.deleted
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2440 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. An advisor referred to in paragraph 3(4) An expert advisor shall provide strategic advice on the following subjects:
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2523 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29
Electronic register of application equipment in professional use 1. first day of the month following 9 months after the date of entry into force of this Regulation], an owner of application equipment in professional use shall enter the fact that he or she is the owner of the application equipment in the electronic register of application equipment in professional use referred to in Article 33, using the form set out in Annex V, unless the Member State in which the owner uses the equipment has exempted that equipment from inspection in accordance with Article 32(3). 2. professional use is sold, the seller and the buyer shall enter the fact of the sale, within 30 days after the sale, in the electronic register of application equipment in professional use referred to in Article 33, using the form set out in Annex V, unless the application equipment in professional use has been exempted from inspection in the relevant Member State(s) in accordance with Article 32(3). A similar obligation to enter a transfer of ownership in the electronic register applies in the case of any other changes of ownership of application equipment in professional use that has not been exempted from inspection in the relevant Member State(s) in accordance with Article 32(3). 3. If application equipment in professional use is withdrawn from use and is not intended to be used again, its owner shall, within 30 days after the withdrawal from use, enter the fact that the equipment has been withdrawn from use in the electronic register of application equipment in professional use referred to in Article 33, using the form set out in Annex V. 4. professional use is returned to use, its owner shall, within 30 days after the return to use, enter that fact in the electronic register of application equipment in professional use referred to in Article 33 using the form set out in Annex V. 5. adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 40 amending Annex V in order to take into account technical progress and scientific developments.Article 29 deleted By … [OP please insert the date = If application equipment in If application equipment in The Commission is empowered to
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2613 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33
1. designated by a Member State pursuant to Article 30 shall establish and maintain a central electronic register to record: (a) parties pursuant to Article 20(2), point (b)(i), and Article 29; (b) certificates as set out in Article 31(6) and (7)(b); (c) paragraph 2 on application equipment in professional use in its Member State that has not been exempted from inspection under Article 32(3). 2. to in Article 30 shall, at the time of inspection, record the following information: (a) the name of the body carrying out the inspections; (b) the unique ID of the application equipment, if available; (c) the date of manufacture, if available; (d) the name and address of the current owner; (e) where there has been a transfer of ownership, the date of each transfer and the name and address of previous owners within the last five years; (f) the tank size; (g) the width of the horizontal spray boom, if applicable; (h) the nozzle type(s) present on the application equipment at the time of inspection; (i) in the case of boom sprayers, whether section and/or nozzle control through geospatial localisation technology is present or absent on the application equipment; (j) years, the date of each inspection carried out in accordance with Article 31; (k) whether the application equipment passed or failed each inspection caArticle 33 deleted Electronic register of application equipment in professional use Each competent authority information entered by third records of inspections and other information as set out in The competent authorities referried out under Article 31; (l) the reasons for any failed inspection. 3. Where application equipment does not bear a unique ID as referred to in paragraph 2, point (b), the competent authorities referred to in Article 30 shall supply a unique ID.for equipment older than three
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2614 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33
1. designated by a Member State pursuant to Article 30 shall establish and maintain a central electronic register to record: (a) parties pursuant to Article 20(2), point (b)(i), and Article 29; (b) certificates as set out in Article 31(6) and (7)(b); (c) paragraph 2 on application equipment in professional use in its Member State that has not been exempted from inspection under Article 32(3). 2. to in Article 30 shall, at the timeArticle 33 deleted Electronic register of application equipment in professional use Each competent authority information entered by third records of inspection, recors and othe followingr information: (a) the inspections; (b) equipment, if available; (c) available; (d) current owner; (e) ownership, the date of each transfer and the name and address of previous owners within the last five years; (f) (g) the width of the horizontal spray boom, if applicable; (h) the nozzle type(s) present on the application equipment at the time of inspection; (i) in the case of boom sprayers, whether section and/or nozzle control through geospatial localisation technology is present or absent as set out in The competent authorities referred the name of the body carrying out the unique ID onf the application equipment; (j) years, the date of each inspection carried out in accordance with Article 31; (k) whether the application equipment passed or failed each inspection carried out under Article 31; (l) the reasons for any failed inspection. 3. Where application equipment does not bear a unique ID as referred to in paragraph 2, point (b), the competent authorities referred to in Article 30 shall supply a unique ID.the date of manufacture, if the name and address of the where there has been a transfer of the tank size; for equipment older than three
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2648 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2
2. Using the methodology set out in Annex I, the Commission shall calculate the results of progress towards achieving the two... Union reduction and two national 2030 reduction targets annually until and including 2030... [OP: please insert the dates – 10 years after the date of application of this Regulation] corridor targets annually until and including ... [OP: please insert the date – 10 years after the date of application of this Regulation] and publish those results on the website referred to in Article 7.
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2662 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 40 amending this Article and Annex VI in order to take into account technical progress, including progress in the availability of statistical data, and scientific and agronomic developments. Such delegated acts may modify the existing harmonised risk indicators or provide for new harmonised risk indicators, which may take into account Member States’ progress towards achieving the target of having 25% of their utilised agricultural area devoted to organic farming by 2030 as referred to in Article 8(1), point (d).
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 2676 #

2022/0196(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall evaluate the results of each calculation of (a) progress towards achieving each of the two national 2030 reduction... [OP: please insert the date – 10 years after the date of application of this Regulation] corridor targets as referred to in Article 34 and (b) harmonised risk indicators at Member State level, as referred to in Article 35, each time the calculations are performed.
2023/04/05
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 138 #

2022/0104(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
(2) The European Green Deal announced a revision of Union measures to address pollution from large industrial installations, including reviewing the sectoral scope of the legislation and how to make it fully consistent with climate, energy and circular economy policies. In addition, the Zero Pollution Action Plan, the Circular Economy Action Plan and the Farm to Fork Strategy also call for reducing pollutant emissions at source, including sources not currently within the scope of Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council69 . Addressing pollution from certain agro- industrial activities thus requires their inclusion within the scope of that Directive. __________________ 69 Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 on industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control); OJ L 334, 17.12.2010, p. 17-119.
2022/12/14
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 160 #

2022/0104(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
(4) Rearing of pigs, poultry and cattle cause significant, while contributing to food security, cause pollutant emissions into the air and water. In order to reduce such pollutant emissions, including ammonia, methane, nitrates and greenhouse gas emissions and thereby improve air, water and soil quality, it is necessary to lower the threshold above which pigs and poultry installations are included within the scope of Directive 2010/75/EU and to include also cattle farming within that scope. Relevant BAT requirements take into consideration the nature, size, density, design like free- ventilated stables, trade-offs with animal welfare and complexity of these installations, including the specificities of pasture based cattle rearing systems, where animals are only seasonally reared in indoor installations, and the range of environmental impacts they may have. The proportionality requirements in BATs aim to incentivise farmers to implement the necessary transition towards increasingly environmentally friendly agricultural practices.
2022/12/14
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 279 #

2022/0104(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3
(3) ‘installation’ means a stationary technical unit within which one or more activities listed in Annex I, in Annex Ia or in Part 1 of Annex VII are carried out, and any other directly associated activities on the same site which have a technical connection with the activities listed in those Annexes and which could have an effect on emissions and pollution;;
2022/12/14
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 602 #

2022/0104(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point b
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Without prejudice to Union competition law, information considered as confidential business information or commercially sensitive information shall only be shared with the Commission and with the following individuals having signed a confidentiality and non-disclosure agreement: civil servants and other public employees representing Member States or Union agencies, and representatives of non-governmental organisations promoting the protection of human health or the environment. The exchange of information considered as confidential business information or sensitive commercial information shall remain limited to what is required to draw up, review and, where necessary, update BAT reference documents, and such confidential business information or sensitive commercial information shall not be used for other purposes..
2022/12/20
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 1288 #
2022/12/20
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 1322 #

2022/0104(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 70d – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall ensure that the operator carries out monitoring of emissions and of associated environmental performance levels in accordance with the operating rules referred to in Article 70i.deleted
2022/12/20
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 1323 #

2022/0104(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 70d – paragraph 1– subparagraph 2
The operator shall keep a record of, and process, all monitoring results, for a period of at least 6 years, in such a way as to enable the verification of compliance with the emission limit values and environmental performance limit values set out in operating rules referred to in Article 70i.deleted
2022/12/20
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 1392 #

2022/0104(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 70i – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The Commission shall establish operating rules containing requirements consistent with the use of best available techniques for the activities listed in Annex Ireferred to in Article 70a, which shall include the following:
2022/12/20
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 1678 #

2022/0104(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex II
Directive 2010/75/EU
Annex Ia – paragraph 2
2. Rearing of any mix of the following animals: cattle, pigs, poultry, in installations of 150 LSU or more. The approximate equivalent in LSU is based on the conversion rates established in Annex II to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 808/2014*. __________ * Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 808/2014 of 17 July 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (OJ L 227, 31.07.2014, p.18).deleted
2022/12/21
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 21 #

2021/2229(INL)


Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the current allocation of seats in the European Parliament as established in European Council Decision 2018/937/EU only applies to the 2019- 2024 parliamentary term; stresses, therefore, that a new decision on the composition of the European Parliament for the 2024-2029 parliamentary term is required without delay;
2023/03/24
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 36 #

2021/2229(INL)


Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Underlines that Parliament, in previous resolutions, and the European Council, in its Decision 2013/312/EU establishing the composition of the European Parliament, undertook to establish a system which in the future will make it possible, before each fresh election to the European Parliament, to allocate seats between Member States in an objective, fair, durable and transparent way, based on the principle of degressive proportionality as laid down in Article 1 of that Decision, taking account of any change in their number and demographic trends in their population; stresses that Parliament, in previous resolutions, also considered the possibility of introducing transnational lists; stresses that Parliament’s initiative to establish such a system should be submitted before the end of the current parliamentary term in order for the system to be applied first in 2029;
2023/03/24
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 41 #

2021/2229(INL)


Paragraph 6
6. Adopts and submits to the European Council the annexed proposal for a decision of the European Council establishing the composition of the European Parliament, on the basis of its right of initiative laid down in Article 14(2) TEU; reminds that the Parliament will need to give its consent to the decision, therefore requests to be immediately informed if and how the European Council intends to deviate from the submitted proposal; underlines the urgent need to adopt the decision so that the Member States can enact, in good time, the necessary domestic provisions to enable them to organise the elections to the European Parliament for the 2024-2029 parliamentary term; commits therefore in the spirit of mutual sincere cooperation, to proceed swiftly with the consent procedure;
2023/03/24
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 45 #

2021/2229(INL)


Annex to the motion for a legislative resolution

Recital 4
(4) The adoption ofresolution (4) Once the legal basis for a Union- wide constituency should be complemented by laying downis adopted, a reserve of an appropriate number of representatives in the European Parliament to be elected in that constituency comprising the entire territory of the Unionshould be established,
2023/03/24
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 54 #

2021/2229(INL)


Annex to the motion for a legislative resolution

Article 3 – paragraph 1
resolution 1. The number of representatives in the European Parliament elected in each Member State for the 2024-2029 parliamentary term is set as follows: Belgium 21 Bulgaria 176 Czech Republic 21 Denmark 154 Germany 96 Estonia 7 Ireland 14 Greece 21 Spain 61 France 79 Croatia 12 Italy 76 Cyprus 6 Latvia 98 Lithuania 110 Luxembourg 6 Hungary 210 Malta 6 Netherlands 310 Austria 2019 Poland 52 Portugal 21 Romania 332 Slovenia 98 Slovakia 154 Finland 154 Sweden 21
2023/03/24
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 60 #

2021/2229(INL)


Annex to the motion for a legislative resolution

Article 3 – paragraph 2
resolution 2. In addition, to the number of Members of the European Parliament elected in each Member State, set in Article 3(1), and subject to the entry into force of Council Regulation (xx/yy) on the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage, repealing Council Decision (76/787/ECSC, EEC, Euratom) and the Act concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage annexed to that Decision, in the first elections following that event providing for a Union-wide constituency, 28 representatives in the European Parliament are elected in a Union-wide constituency in the first elections following that event, as provided for in that Regulation.
2023/03/24
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 75 #

2021/2166(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11b (new)
11b (new) Classifies uniform linguistic versions in the official EU languages as a crucial prerequisite for the submission of a reliable interpretation of existing regulations by courts and authorities and thus as one of the most important contributions to the unitary exertion of European Union Law; calls on the institutions to substantially meet these requirements in the course of future law-making.
2022/02/17
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 22 #

2021/2048(REG)

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 213 – paragraph 1
1. At the first committee meeting after the appointment of committee members pursuant to Rule 209, and again two and a half years thereafter, the committee shall elect a bureau consisting of a Chair and of Vice-Chairs from among its full members in separate ballots. The number of Vice- Chairs to be elected shall be determined by Parliament upon a proposal by the Conference of Presidents. The diversity of Parliament must be reflected in the composition of the bureau of each committee; it shall not be permissible to have an all male or all female bureau or for all of the Vice-Chaibureau members to come from the same Member State.
2021/06/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 7 #

2021/2025(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission’s first ever Rule of Law Report as a positive addition to the EU’s toolbox to prevent and address rule of law issues in Member States, while considering that further improvements are needed;
2021/04/22
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 12 #

2021/2025(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that the Commission’s report iwas a response to the Council’s failure to trigger the procedure under Article 7(1) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), as requested by the Commission in 2017 and Parliament in 2018; regrets that the Council has failed to resume hearings under Article 7 of the TEU since December 2019; notes that the failure to apply Article 7 of the TEU, also due to the requirement of unanimity for the sanctions mechanism, enables continued divergence from the values enshrined in Article 2 of the TEUcommitment made by President Von Der Leyen in her political guidelines for the 2019-2024 Commission, ahead of her election;
2021/04/22
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 18 #

2021/2025(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Regrets the Council’s failure to move further the procedure under Article 7(1) TEU, as requested by the Commission in 2017 and the Parliament in 2018; underlines, in the strongest terms, that only qualified majority is required to determine that there is a clear risk of a serious breach by a Member State of the values referred to in Article 2; regrets that the Council has failed to resume hearings under Article 7 TEU since December 2019; notes with concern that the failure to progress in Article 7 TEU procedure enables continued divergence from the values enshrined in Article 2TEU; urges the Portuguese presidency of the Council to take the appropriate steps in order to move further the procedure under Article7(1) TEU;
2021/04/22
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 22 #

2021/2025(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Regrets that the report fails to fully address all Union values set out in Article 2 of the TEU, such as democracy and fundamental rightsConsiders the scope of the report can be broadened and fine-tuned as requested by the EP; reiterates the need to have a single monitoring system for democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights, as proposed by Parliament1 ; calls again on the Council and the Commission to engage in discussions to set up such a mechanism via an interinstitutional agreement; _________________ 1European Parliament resolution of 7 October 2020 on the establishment of an EU Mechanism on Democracy, the Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights (texts adopted, P9_TA(2020)0251).
2021/04/22
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 29 #

2021/2025(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the methodology of the report, which focuses on four pillars: independence of the judiciary, the anti- corruption framework, media pluralism, and checks and balances; invites the Commission to in the next editions broaden the scope of the report, or at least of its first pillar and to include in the next editions an assessment of how the right to a fair trial is guaranteed in Member States, with particular attention paid to the right of defence, andthe equality between prosecution and defence parties and the length of trials; believes that the report should go beyond monitoring and include preventive and corrective elements with a clear outline of enforcement measures;
2021/04/22
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 44 #

2021/2025(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to use all tools at its disposal to counter violations of EU values, such as infringement procedures, including expedited procedures, actions to ensure compliance with the judgments of the Court of Justice and applications for interim measures before the Court; welcomes the new rule of law conditionality mechanism and asks that it be fully enforced with regard to all EU funds, including Next Generation EU; reiterates it has entered into force and is binding in its entirety for all commitment appropriations and payment appropriations in all Member States and for the EU institutions; underlines the importance of the direct applicability of the Regulation since 1 January 2021, particularly in the context of the disbursement of the Next Generation EU funds which will occur early in the budget cycle;
2021/04/22
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 56 #

2021/2025(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Highlights that the COVID-19 pandemic has had a deleterious impact on fundamental rights as well as on constitutional checks and balances; insists that any measures restricting the rights and freedoms of EU citizens should be transparent, proportional and temporary; calls on the Commission to furthercontinue analyseing measures taken in response to the COVID- 19 pandemic in its 2021 report.
2021/04/22
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 4 #

2021/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas European political parties help to raise European political awareness and express the will of Union citizens; whereas strong political parties and foundations at European level are essential for the development of a truly European political sphere;deleted
2021/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 8 #

2021/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas strong political parties and foundations at European level are essential for the development of a truly European public sphere;
2021/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 9 #

2021/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
A b. whereas European political parties contribute to forming European political awareness and to expressing the will of citizens of the Union;
2021/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 10 #

2021/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A c (new)
A c. whereas alternative political positions of the parties are essential for the public discourse and for citizen´s choice;
2021/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 11 #

2021/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A d (new)
A d. whereas parties cannot be considered as non-partisan entities in the course of political competition and their financing cannot be reduced on apolitical expenses;
2021/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 12 #

2021/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A e (new)
A e. whereas European political foundations have a mandate which encompasses raising political awareness for and contributing to the debate on European policy issues and on the process of European integration, and within this framework they develop also offerings that are not exclusively directed at the members or voters of a particular party, but are open to everyone on the same terms;
2021/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 14 #

2021/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas European political parties and foundations should cooperate with their national member parties and partners, in order to support them in bringing the Union and its policies closer to the citizens;
2021/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 16 #

2021/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas European political parties should cooperate with their corresponding national counterpart in order to facilitate interactive participation on European issues;
2021/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 18 #

2021/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas in order to continue to be aware of, and to give expression to and where appropriate to mould the will of Union citizens, it is essential that the role and functioning of European political parties and foundations are not limited concerning issues of exclusively European relevance at Union level; whereas those European political parties and foundations should be allowed to use their funds accordingly;
2021/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 53 #

2021/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Underlines the need to make the definition of indirect funding from European political parties and foundations to national counterparts and members more precise in order to avoid hampering their required cooperation in promoting and explaining European policies, as well as their engagement with European´s citizens;
2021/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 58 #

2021/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Regrets that the narrow interpretation of the definition of members of a European political party established by case law does not sufficiently recognise the need for flexibility in the internal organisation of European political parties, especially as regards associate members, including those from third countries; is concerned that this narrow interpretation has the effect of preventing, for no good reason, European political parties from receiving financial contributions from such members;deleted
2021/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 63 #

2021/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Regrets the narrow interpretation, established by the case-law, of the definition of members of a European political party or foundation and insists on allowing the affiliation of members from candidate countries for accession to the Union, from the European Economic Area and the European Free Trade Association, from EU neighbourhood countries, and from former Member States, from which membership fees and contributions from members of the European political foundations might be legally collected;
2021/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 74 #

2021/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Considers that a clear set of rules and conditions should be established for the joint organisation and co-financing of activities concerning European issues by European political parties and foundations and national member parties, as well as underlining the ability of European political foundations to invite politically active representatives and staffers of political parties to their events;
2021/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 90 #

2021/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Insists that different categories of party membership be recognised, that the affiliation of members from candidate countries for accession to the Union, from the European Free Trade Association, from EU neighbourhood countries and from former Member States be allowed, and that European political parties and foundations be allowed to legally collect membership fees from them;deleted
2021/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 99 #

2021/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Supports the creation of further categories of revenue, in order to cover all sources of income of political parties and political foundations rather than just contributions and donations, for example "other own ressources" which includes contributions from joint activities, conference fees, sales of publications, participation fees or similar circumstances and other activities;
2021/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 114 #

2021/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
25. Is of the opinion that the introduction of a general obligation to report publicly on any donation received regardless of its value would make any external influences on European political parties more transparentstrengthened scrutiny by the Authority of reported aggregate donations over 3000 € would make substantial / significant external influences on European political parties more transparent; the Authority should focus such scrutiny to cases where it observes significant and sudden increases in the aggregate number of small donations;
2021/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 122 #

2021/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
26. Is, moreover, of the opinion that in order to strengthen the transparency of funding, donations by the same donor to a European political party, its national member parties and their regional substructures should be considered to be a single donation and subject to publication by the European political party; the reporting threshold a single donation could be set at 10 000 €;
2021/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 123 #

2021/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26 a. Is furthermore of the opinion that suitable instruments must be in place by the financial year 2027 at the latest to ensure that donations are not made to legally independent entities which are part of the same European political party in order to circumvent transparency rules, which in their entirety would otherwise exceed the transparency limits;
2021/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 124 #

2021/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)
26 b. Advocates to ensure that, by the calendar year 2027, any donation made by a donor to a European political party is equal under tax law as donations made to national political parties at the donor´s respective place of residence;
2021/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 133 #

2021/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
30. Is of the opinion that the rules on eligibility of expenditure are too narrow and that European political parties and foundations should be allowed to finance any activity which contributes to increasing European political awareness and giving expression to the will of Union citizens;
2021/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 152 #

2021/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
33. Is of the opinion that the hybrid status of the Authority should be clarified and a possibility to appeal the Authority´s decisions should be provided: given that under the current regulation, the only way of appealing is before the Court of Justice of the European Union;
2021/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 1642 #

2021/0420(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex 1 – part 9/23
Add the following to the comprehensive network: - Colmar - Freiburg rail passengers line
2023/01/25
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 1643 #

2021/0420(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex 1 – part 9/23
Add the following to the comprehensive network: - Haguenau - Roeschwoog - Rastatt rail passengers line
2023/01/25
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 1649 #

2021/0420(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex 1 – part 12/23
Add the following to the comprehensive network: - Colmar-Freiburg rail passenger line (conventional/new construction)
2023/01/25
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 1650 #

2021/0420(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex 1 – part 12/23
Add the following to the comprehensive network: - Rastatt-Hagenau rail passenger line (conventional/new construction)
2023/01/25
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 1674 #

2021/0420(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex 1 – part 13/23
Add the following to the comprehensive network: - Colmar-Freiburg rail passenger line (conventional/new construction)
2023/01/25
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 1676 #

2021/0420(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex 1 – part 13/23
Add the following to the comprehensive network: - Rastatt-Hagenau rail passenger line (conventional/new construction)
2023/01/25
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 111 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
(37) In order to enhance cooperation with long-standing members sharing EU values, contributions from member parties or organisations having their seat in a country outside the Union but in the Council of Europe or a candidate country, should be allowed. However, such contributions should be subject to a cap in relation to total contribution, to limit the risk of foreign interference.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 114 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
(38) Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014 acknowledges only two categories of revenues for European political parties and foundations apart from contributions from the budget of the European Union, namely contributions from members and donations. A number of revenue sources generated from own economic activities (such as sales of publications or conference fees) fall outside the scope of these two categories, creating accounting and transparency problems. A third category of revenues (‘ancillary own resources’) should therefore be created. The proportion of own resources in the total budget of a European political party or foundations should be capped at 510% to avoid that it becomes overdimensioned in relation to the overall budget of these entities.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 120 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
(41) European political parties should not fund, directly or indirectly, other political parties and, in particular, national partiesand foundations should not use the funding received from the general budget of the European Union for the direct or caindidates. European political foundations should not fund, directly or indirectly, European or national politicalrect funding of other political parties and, in particular, national, parties or candidates. The prohibition of indirect funding should however not prevent European political parties or political foundations from publicly supporting and engaging with their member parties or member organisations in the Union on issues of relevance for the Union, or tofrom supporting political activities in the common interest, or from engaging in educational activities, in order to be able to fulfil their mission under Article 10(4) TEU and act to reinforce the existence of the European demos. The prohibition of indirect funding should not prevent the participation of either representatives and staffers of political parties, nor of potentially politically active persons in events of European political foundations. However, European political foundations may not engage in training of political candidates in the 6 months before national or European elections. Moreover, European political parties and their affiliated European political foundations should only finance activities in the context of national referendum campaigns when they concern the implementation of the TEU and the TFEU issues directly related to the European Union. These principles reflect Declaration No 11 on Article 191 of the Treaty establishing the European Community annexed to the Final Act of the Treaty of Nice.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 126 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
(45) It is necessary to provide for a clear, dissuasive and proportionate system of sanctions in order to ensure effective, proportionate and uniform compliance with the obligations regarding the activities of European political parties and European political foundations. Such a system should also respect the ne bis in idem principle whereby sanctions cannot be imposed twice for the same offence. It is also necessary to define the respective roles of the Authority and of the Authorising Officer of the European Parliament in controlling and verifying compliance with this Regulation as well as the mechanisms for cooperation between them and the Member States' authorities. It is also necessary to define a structured appeal process that enables European political parties and political foundations to appeal any sanctions or decisions taken by the Authority that they may feel is unjust.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 142 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
(7) 'donation' means any cash offering or by bank transfer, any offering in kind, the provision below market value of any goods, services (including loans) or works, and any other transaction which constitutes an economic advantage for the European political party or the European political foundation concerned, with the exception of contributions from members, association fees, ancillary own resources and usual political activities carried out on a voluntary basis by individuals;
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 143 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point i (new)
i) "association fees" means payments by bank transfer, when provided to the European political party or to the European political foundation by a party or organisation associated to it and having its seat outside the EU but within the limits set out in this regulation
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 144 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9
(9) ‘ancillary own resources’ means income generated by own economic activities, such as conference fees and sales of publicatributions from joint activities, sales of publications, participation fees for conferences or workshops or other activities directly linked to political actions;
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 147 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
(10) ‘indirect funding’ means funding from which the member party derives a financial advantage, even where no funds are directly transferred; this should include cases which allow the member party to avoid expenditure which it would otherwise have had to incur for activities, other than political activities injoint events co-financed to the extent they common interestncern issues of relevance for the Union´s fields of activities, organised for its own and sole benefit;
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 152 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) its member parties are not members of another European political party;, and their political programme and activities are consistent with the provisions of the political alliance’s political programme as included in its statutes in accordance with Article 4 (1) (c)
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 157 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) it also ensures that its member parties having their seat in the Union observe the values expressed in Article 2 TEU and that its members well as that parties having their seat outside the Union and that pay association fees observe equivalent values. It provides a written declaration using the template in Annex I;
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 161 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) it also ensures that its member organisations having their seat in the Union observe the values expressed in Article 2 TEU and that its members well as that organisations having their seat outside the Union and that pay association fees observe equivalent values. It provides a written declaration using the template in Annex I;
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 164 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) a requirement that member parties display the European political party’s logo in a clearly visible and user-friendly manner, specifying that it is to be located in the top section of the front page of the member party’s website and in an equally visible manner as the member party’s own logo;
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 171 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Each European political party shall transmit within five working days of the first dissemination to the Authority information concerning each political advertisement that it sponsors or publishes directly to enable the wider context of the political advertisement and its aims to be understood by citizens. That information shall include at least the information listed in point 1 of Annex II. The information shall be provided to the Authority in a form which is easily accessible and using plain language.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 173 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. The Authority shall immediately publish the information referred to in paragraph 2 in the repository provided for in Article 8. The information shall be presented in a form which is easily accessible, clearly visible and user friendly, and using plain language without undue delay.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 185 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. 1 The European Parliament, acting on its own initiative or following a reasoned request from a group of citizens, submitted in accordance with the relevant provisions of its Rules of Procedure, or the Council or the Commission may lodge with the Authority a request for verification of compliance by a specific European political party or European political foundation with the conditions laid down in Article 3(1), point (d), and Article 3(2), point (c) . In such cases, and in the casIn case of non-compliance with Article 3(1), points (a) to (g), Article 3(2), points (a), (b) to (g) or the governance provisions mentioned in paragraph 1, the Authority shall give the European political party or European political foundation concerned the opportunity to introduce the measures referquired to in Article 19(3), point (a), the Authority shall ask the committee of independent eminent persons referred to in Article 14 for an opinion on the subject. The committee shall give its opinion within two monthsremedy the situation within the time limit provided for by paragraph 2.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 194 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. If tThe Authority ishall be informed of any decision of a national supervisory authority within the meaning of Article 4, point (21), of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 finding that a natural or legal person has infringed applicable rules on the protection of personal data, and i. If it follows from that decision, or if there are otherwise reasonable grounds to believe, that the infringement is linked to political activities by a European political party or a European political foundation in the context of elections to the European Parliament, the Authority shall refer this matter to the committee of independent eminent persons referred to in Article 14 of this Regulation. The Authority may, if necessary, liaise with the national supervisory authority concerned.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 196 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
The Authority shall annually prepare and publish a report on the political advertising activity of European political parties. This report shall include a factual summary of the reports for the relevant reporting year published by European political parties according to Article 5(4), as well as any decisions of the national regulatory authorities designated under Article 5(6) or of the supervisory authorities referred to in Article 5(7) finding that a European political party has violated Article 5 of this Regulation.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 208 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 4
4. The Authority shall fix the date of the publication refdecision on the removal shall be addressed and notified to the European political party or European political foundation concerrned to in paragraph 1 after consultation with the Member State in which the European polit. The decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union. It shall take effect upon notification and in any event at the latest by the time of its publication in the Official party or European political foundation has its seatJournal of the European Union.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 225 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 3
3. Donations received by European political parties and European political foundations and expenditure funded from those donations within six months prior to elections to the European Parliament shall be reported on a weekly basis to the Authority in writing and in accordance with paragraph 2.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 231 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 6 – point c
(c) donations from any public authority from a Member State or a third countryfrom outside the Union, or from any undertaking over which such a public authority may exercise, directly or indirectly, a dominant influence by virtue of its ownership of it, its financial participation therein, or the rules which govern it; or
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 233 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 6 – point d
(d) donations from any private entities based in a third countryoutside the Union or from individuals from a third countryoutside the Union who are not entitled to vote in elections to the European Parliament.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 234 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 8
8. The Authority shall carry out verificationcontrols where it has grounds to believe that any donation has been granted in breach of this Regulation. It may for that purpose request additional information from the European political party or European political foundation and its donors.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 236 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 9
9. Contributions from members of a European political party that have their seat in, or are citizens of, a Member State or from member parties that have their seat in a country belonging to the Council of Europe shall be permitted. The total value of contributions from members shall not exceed 40 % of the annual budget of a European political party. The value of contributions from member parties that have their seat in a country outside the Union shall not exceed 10% of the total contributions from membersshall be permitted. The total value of contributions from members shall not exceed 40 % of the annual budget of a European political party.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 242 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Association fees from political parties that have their seat outside the Union but in a country belonging to the Council of Europe shall be permitted, under condition that the respective country has full voting rights in the Council of Europe. The value of association fees from such parties that have their seat in a country outside the Union shall not exceed 20% of the total contributions from members.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 248 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 13
13. The value of ancillary own resources of a European political party or of a European political foundation generated from own economic activities shall not exceed 510% of the annual budget of that European political party or European political foundation.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 259 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2
2. The funding of European political foundations from the general budget of the European Union or from any other source shall not be used for any other purpose than for financing their tasks as listed in Article 2, point (4), and to meet expenditure directly linked to the objectives set out in their statutes in accordance with Article 6. It shall in particular not be used for the direct or indirect funding of elections, political parties, or candidates in the six months before national or European elections or other foundations.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 262 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. At the latest within six months following the end of the financial year, European political parties and European political foundations shall submit to the Authority, with a copy to the Authorising Officer of the European Parliament with a copy to the Authority and to the competent National Contact Point of the Member State of their seat in an open, machine readable format:
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 264 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The Authorising Officer of the European Parliament shall control compliance by European political parties and European political foundations with the obligations relating to Union funding under this Regulation in accordance withand under Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 . In carrying out such controls, the European Parliament shall take the necessary measures in the fields of the prevention of and the fight against fraud affecting the financial interests of the Union.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 270 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 4
4. The Authorising Officer of the European Parliament shall inform the Authority of any findings which might give rise to the imposition of sanctions under Article 30(2) to (4), with a view to allowing the Authority to take appropriate measures. The Authority shall make a decision on the imposition of sanctions within [6 months].
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 271 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. With a view to fully comply with the obligations referred to in Article 38, bBefore the Authority’s final decision relating to any of the sanctions referred to in Article 30, the Authority or the Authorising Officer of the European Parliament shall give the European political party or the European political foundation concerned an opportunity to introduce the measures required to remedy the situation within a reasonable period of time, which shall not normally exceed one month. In particular, the Authority or the Authorising Officer of the European Parliament shall allow the possibility of correcting clerical and arithmetical errors, providing additional documents or information where necessary or correcting minor mistakes.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 273 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2
2. Where a European political party or a European political foundation has failed to take sufficient corrective measures within the period of time referred to in paragraph 1, the appropriate sanctions referred to in Article 30 shall be decided.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 274 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2
2. Where a European political party or a European political foundation has failed to take sufficient corrective measures within the period of time referred to in paragraph 1, the appropriate sanctions referred to in Article 30 shall be decided.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 279 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – point g – point i (new)
i) the ancillary own resources referred to in Article 23(13) and reported by European political parties and European political foundations in accordance with Article 23(2), including the identity of the person or entity which made those payments
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 280 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – point g – point ii (new)
ii) the association fees referred to in Article 23(9a) and (10a) and reported by European political parties and European political foundations in accordance with Article 23 (2), including the identity of the parties or organisations which made those payments;
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 281 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 3
3. The Authority, the European Parliament and the committee of independent eminent persons referred to in Article 14 shall ensure that personal data collected by them pursuant to this Regulation are not used for any purpose other than to ensure the legality, regularity and transparency of the funding of European political parties and European political foundations and the membership of European political parties. They shall erase all personal data collected for that purpose at the latest 24 months after the publication of the relevant parts in accordance with Article 36 has ceased.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 288 #

2021/0375(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014 is repealed. Any procedural steps and decisions previously taken by an Institution, the Authorising Officer of the European Parliament or the Authority in accordance with, or on the basis of, Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014 shall remain applicable and be construed in light of this Regulation.
2022/04/19
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 11 #

2020/2272(ACI)

Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 2
2. Insists that, in line with the political statement, the institutions commit to a coordinated approach on reinforcing the common transparency culture with the view to improving and further strengthening ethical interest representation; highlights their obligation under the Agreement, and in accordance with Article 13(2) TEU, to practise mutual sincere cooperation when developing the scheme and that the institutions should therefore aim for the highest level of commitment; insistreminds that the measures referred to in the Aagreement represent athe minimum for which should be expanded further; there is political support given the existing constitutional and legal limitations;
2021/02/25
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 19 #

2020/2272(ACI)

Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the commitments made by Parliament in the negotiation process on conditionality and complementary transparency measures; considers that the modification of Rules 11 and 35 of its Rules of Procedure have provided a strong impetuscommitment in that regard; welcomes the fact that the Agreement preserves the constitutional right of the Members to exercise their mandate freely;
2021/02/25
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 22 #

2020/2272(ACI)

Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 9
9. Is of the opinion that the implementation of the conditionality measures and other complementary transparency measures through individual decisions is not only a way to respect the respective internal organisational powers of the three signatory institutions but that it offers also an opportunity to increase the level of commitment of the respective institutions with regard to the scheme throughout the implementation period; welcomes in that regard the fact that the annual report has been expanded to cover the implementation of such measures adopted by the signatory institutions;
2021/02/25
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 30 #

2020/2272(ACI)

Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 13
13. Insists on the need to ensure that, within Parliament, there is a high degree of political ownership of the implementation and review process; proposes therefore that a monitoring group is established within the Committee on Constitutional Affairs; suggests that the review process provided for in Article 14 of the Agreement should be informed and shaped in close cooperation with EP Vice- President responsible for Transparency;
2021/02/25
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 48 #

2020/2272(ACI)

Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on the Committee on Constitutional Affairs to consider, Underlines the importance of political ownership guaranteeing the pbrocess of revision of the EP Rules of Procedure, further transparency measures which should be introduced in order to enhance Parliaad consensus necessary to go beyond the current proposals, especially in view of the formal requirements commitment to the joint schemthat apply to any revision of the Rules of Procedure;
2021/02/25
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 76 #

2020/2220(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Recital S a (new)
Sa. whereas in certain Member States the ballot papers containing the list of candidates for the elections to the European Parliament may be misleading, since political parties or coalitions are allowed in certain territories within a single national constituency to indicate on the ballot paper only the names of certain candidates and alternates and to indicate a name, acronym or symbol other than that of the political party or coalition; whereas this situation is contrary to the most elementary requirements of transparency and democracy in elections;
2021/11/11
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 230 #

2020/2220(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Stresses that ballot papers containing the list of candidates for the elections to the European Parliament must not under any circumstances be misleading or deceptive as to the candidate actually voted for; rejects allowing political parties or coalitions in certain areas within a single national constituency to indicate on the ballot paper only the names of certain candidates and substitutes, or to indicate a name, acronym or symbol other than that of the political party or coalition; proposes that the ballot paper for each candidate may not be different within the same national constituency;
2021/11/11
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 527 #

2020/2220(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 19
19. Campaigning for the Union-wide constituency shall start eight weeks before Election day. No electoral campaigning shall be allowed on Election day.
2021/11/11
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 530 #

2020/2220(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 15 – paragraph 21
21. Member States shall forward the electoral results obtained by each list of candidates to the European Electoral Authority. The European Electoral Authority shall aggregate the national results and proclaim the candidates elected as members of the European Parliament after apportionings well as the sleats in accordance to the D´Hondt method, as stated in paragraph 22d candidate whose list has received the most votes.
2021/11/11
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 594 #

2020/2220(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
The ballot papers for each candidacy may not be different within the same national constituency.
2021/11/11
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 595 #

2020/2220(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex to the motion for a resolution – Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 b (new)
The ballot papers of electoral coalitions shall contain the following information: the name, acronym and symbol of the coalition presenting the candidacy and the complete list of the names of the candidates and alternates, in the order in which they are to be placed.
2021/11/11
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 1 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 5
— having regard to the Treaty on European Union (TEU), in particular Articles 9 and 10, 15(3)3, 14, 15,16 and 17(3) thereof,
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 2 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
- having regard to the special report 13/2019 of the European Court of Auditors on the ethical frameworks of the audited EU institutions
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 5 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 13
— having regard to the recommendations of Transparency Intthe Organisation for Economic Co-Opernational and Development (OECD), the Council of Europe´s Group of States against Corruption (GRECO), and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)various NGO´s,
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 7 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas the TEU stipulates that ‘the Union shall observe the principle of the equality of its citizens, who shall receive equal attention from its institutions, bodies and agencies’; whereas this implies that public decisions are taken in the interest of the common good and notthat conflicts of interests - which occur, according to the definancial power of individual actors; ition of the OECD "when an individual or a corporation (either private or governmental) is in a position to exploit his or their own profession or official capacity in some way for personal or corporate benefit" - should be avoided in the legislative process and whereas any definition of conflict of interest has a contextual and evolving nature and full transparency does not necessarily guarantee the absence of any conflict of interest, nor does it guarantee that public trust will be won or decreased;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 10 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas the Treaties have established a system of division of powers between the institutions of the Union that assigns to each institution its own role within the institutional structure of the Union and in the performance of the tasks entrusted to it;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 15 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas the European Court of Auditors has stated in its special report 13/2019 1a on the ethical framework of the EU that Parliament, Council and Commission "have to a large extent adequate ethical frameworks in place for both staff and Members". _________________ 1a https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADoc uments/SR19_13/SR_ethical_frameworks _EN.pdf
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 18 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
B b. whereas nevertheless the enforcement of the ethical framework could be improved;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 22 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas the shortcomings of the current EU ethics framework derive largely from the fact that it relies on a self-regulatory approach and lacks adequate human and financial resources and competences to verify informany further evolution of the EU ethics framework must have a clear legal basis while respecting the separation of powers as laid down in the Treationes;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 24 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas, as a consequence, multiple cases of unethical conduct and their inadequate handling by the EU institutions have harmed the trust which European citizens place in the EU institutions;deleted
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 27 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas, as a consequence, multiple cases of unethical conduct and their inadequate handling by the EU institutions have harmed every incidence of unethical behaviour can endanger the trust which European citizens place in the EU institutions;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 32 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E
E. whereas the current ethics standards frameworks appearse to be highly fragmented, with different rules in different institutions, creating a complex system which is difficult for both EU citizens and for those who have to respect the rules to understandailored according to the specificities of each European institutions;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 35 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
E a. whereas the balance of powers assigned to the institutions is a fundamental guarantee afforded by the Treaty to European citizens;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 36 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F
F. whereas the Meroni doctrine developed by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) allows for the delegation of EU institutions’ competences to external bodies; under strict conditions; whereas according to the court any delegation of competences must be limited and can only relate to clearly defined executive powers, the use of which must be entirely subject to the supervision of the high authority and cannot concern discretionary powers involving any political judgement in order not to jeopardise the balance of powers between the institutions;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 39 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
F a. whereas, following the preceding considerations, the legal margin for overarching rules applied to individual institutions with a common application is very narrow;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 40 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G
G. whereas all lead candidates in the 2019 European elections committed to the creation of an independent ethics body common to all EU institutions; whereas the President of the Commission committed to it in her political guidelines and whereas Parliament has already supported this view;deleted
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 43 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
G a. Underlines that all EU institutions have to meet the highest standards of independence and impartiality while stressing each institution´s right of organisational sovereignty;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 44 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G b (new)
G b. Recalls that Members of Parliament´s freedom of the mandate is in the interest of the citizens they represent;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 45 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G c (new)
G c. Further highlights that the existing strict ethics framework for commissioners needs to be further developed in order to fill in existing legislative gaps such as the non-existence of a commissioner´s statue, underlines that this process is closely linked with parliamentary scrutiny and oversight and is of the opinion that a commissioner's statute needs to be elaborated in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 46 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G d (new)
G d. Points out that all staff in the institutions is covered by the EU staff regulations of officials of the European Union (EUSR) and conditions of employment of other servants of the European Union (CEOS);
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 47 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G e (new)
G e. Recalls that the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union set out a European governance framework based on the separation of powers, laying down distinct rights and obligations for each institution;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 48 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G f (new)
G f. Points out that based on the principle of conferral, institutions cannot delegate by means of an interinstitutional agreement, powers which they themselves do not have, for instance where such powers are conferred by the Treaties on the Court of Auditors or have remained with the Member States;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 49 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G g (new)
G g. Recalls furthermore that one of Parliament´s primary functions as laid down in the Treaty on European Union is to exercise political control;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 50 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that a single independent EU ethics body is necessary to ensure the consistent and full implementation of ethics standards across the EU institutions; proposes the conclusion of an interinstitutional agreement (IIA) to set up an EU Ethics Body for Parliament and the Commission open to the participation of all EU institutions, agencies and bodies; recommends that the IIA contain the following provisions:deleted
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 57 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Principles Considers that any option under discussion for improving transparency and integrity in the EU institutions must be respectful of the following principles: - the principle of sound financial management, ensuring the efficient and effective management of Union ressources - the principles of conferral and separation of powers - the freedom to choose an occupation and the right to engage in work as stipulated by article 15 of the Charter of Fundamental rights of the European Union - rule of law and fundamental European principles such as the presumption of innocence, the right to be heard, the principles of legality and proportionality - Freedom of the mandate of Members of European Parliament
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 58 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Further stresses that any option under discussion requires a solid legal base for the constitution and for any competences to be assigned;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 59 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1 c. Insists that any option under discussion requires a clear definition of the mandate, composition and competences none of which must duplicate or interfere with the work of OLAF, the European Ombudsman, the European Court of Auditors or the European Court of Justice;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 60 #
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 61 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1 a (new)
Underlines that the principle of separation of powers is the foundation pillar of modern democracy; considers it imperative for the legislative to control the executive, as any reversal of the roles and powers of the legislative and executive would otherwise endanger the independence of the free mandate of elected Members of Parliament;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 62 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1 b (new)
Stresses that any option under discussion for improving transparency and integrity in the EU institutions can neither, based on primary law, issue any decision on whether a criminal offense has been committed, nor impose any sanctions, nor impose any administrative measures intended to avoid or clean up accidental or negligent non-compliance with the rules;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 63 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1 c (new)
Highlights that any option under discussion for improving transparency and integrity in the EU institutions which is to regulate the grey area in between can only have an advisory function for the institutions concerned;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 64 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1 d (new)
Insists that any decisions on measures to be taken or sanctions to be imposed can only be taken by the competent bodies of the institutions themselves;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 65 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1 e (new)
Recalls that distinction must be made between a conflict of interest arising during or after the exercise of a function and the importance to distinguish between the two and recalls furthermore to distinguish between acts that authorised if declared and acts that are not authorised at all.
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 66 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1 f (new)
Suggests that each institution concludes agreements on exchange of information with the Member States respecting the framework of the separation of powers;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 70 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Considers that the new EU Ethics Body should be delegated a list of competences to implement ethics rules for Members and staff; takes the view that this list should include by way of a minimum the competences provided for in:any options under discussion for improving transparency and integrity in the EU institutions should only have advisory competences for the members of the institutions;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 72 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – indent 1
- the Statute for Members of the European Parliament: Articles 2 and 3,deleted
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 73 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – indent 2
- Parliament’s Rules of Procedure: Rules 2, 10 and 11, 176(1), Annex I, Articles 1 to 3, 4(6), 5 and 6 and Annex II,deleted
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 76 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – indent 3
- the Commission’s Rules of Procedure: Article 9, its Code of Conduct, Article 2 and Articles 5-11, and Annex II, and its Decision of 25 November 2014 on the publication of information on meetings held between Members of the Commission and organisations or self- employed individuals, and the same decision for Directors-General,deleted
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 79 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – indent 4
- the Staff Regulation’s Articles 11, 11(a), 12, 12(a), 12(b), 13, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21(a), 22(a), 22(c), 24, 27 and 40,deleted
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 82 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – indent 5
- The IIA on a mandatory Transparency Register;deleted
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 87 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that the Members and staff of the participating institutions should be covered by the agreement before, during and after the term of office or service in line with the applicable rules; considers that this should apply to Members of Parliament, Commissioners and all EU staff falling under the scope of the Staff Regulation;deleted
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 94 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Insists that the IIAany cooperation agreement between the institutions should be open to the participation of allother EU institutions and bodies; believes that the IIA should allow the Ethics Body to conclude agreements with national authorities with a view to ensuring the exchange of information necessary for the performance of its task in order to agree on common measures which can be implemented in respect of the division of powers;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 100 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that the participating institutions should entrust the EU Ethics Body with monitoring powers over ethics standards, as well as advisory, investigative and enforcement powers;deleted
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 101 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that the participating institutions should entrust the EU Ethics Body with monitoring powers over ethics standards, as well as advisory, investigative and enforcement powersany options under discussion for improving transparency and integrity in the EU institutions has to be respectful of the balance between the institutions as established by the treaties, underlines that it must not replace, substitute or interfere with the responsibilities and prerogatives of each institution and points out that given these considerations, the decision-making powers must remain within the respective institutions, hence only a body with advisory function able to issue non- binding recommendations is conceivable;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 109 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that this monitoring capacity should include the verification of the veracity of the declaration of financial interests, the handling of conflicts of interest, checks on transparency obligations and the verification of compliance with revolving doors rules;deleted
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 120 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Takes the view that the EU Ethics Body could also be given authority over the obligations imposed by the Transparency Register;deleted
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 126 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Considers that the EU Ethics Body should have the power to initiate procedures and to conduct investigations based on the information it has collected or that it has received from third parties;deleted
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 130 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Stresses that requesting tax documents and bank records are interventions in private law, for which there must be serious allegations that enter in competence of OLAF;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 134 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Believes that in relation to its enforcement powers, the body could take over from the Appointing Authority in dealing with staff ethics obligations, and that in relation to Members of Parliament or Commissioners, the body couldannot be granted enforcement powers within the limits of the provisionssince this transferral of powers would countained in the Treaties, and without prejudice to any additional mechanisms provided for in Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, in particular concerner the separation of powers laid down ing termination of officehe Treaties;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 142 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Considers that thesuch an EU Ethics Body should be entrusted with advisory tasks in order to provideto improve the enforcement of existing provisions in the EU institutions in order to provide reliable and trustworthy advice to any individual possibly covered by its scope who wishes to request interpretation of an ethical standard in relation to appropriate conduct in a specific case;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 150 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. BelievUnderlines that the decision on the absence of conflicts of interest of designated Commissioners-designate should remain a competence of Parliament’s Committee on Legal Affair remains a political and institutional competence of the European Parliament and its bodies, while thesuch an EU Ethics Body shcould support the process with the publication of itsits non-binding analysis of each individual case and make its investigative capacities available;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 153 #
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 154 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3 a (new)
Recalls that the competent bodies in the institutions are regulated by law and that the composition of the competent body in the European Parliament could be made up of MEPs and former MEPs, such an EU Ethics Body may be composed of Members or former Members of the institutions;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 155 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3 b (new)
Underlines that with the creation of a new advisory ethics body duplication of work and overlapping competences must be avoided, its decisions should take the form of non-binding recommendations to the President, who must remain in charge of the final decision-making power; calls for clear provisions giving the person concerned a right of appeal against any such decision taken by the President in full respect of the basic principles of rule of law;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 159 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Believes that the Ethics Body should be composed of nine Members, three selected by the Commission, three elecappointed by Parliament, and three asdesignated de jure from among the former Presidents of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), the Court of Auditors and former EU Ombudsmen;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 164 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Considers that its members must be independent, chosen on the basis of their competence, experience and professional qualities, as well as their personal integrity, have an impeccable record of ethical behaviour and provide a declaration of the absence of conflicts of interest; is of the opinion that the composition of the body should be gender-balanced; underlines that all member shall be independent in the performance of their duties;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 176 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. InsistsRecommend that the college be supported by a secretariat with the human, material and financial resources commensurate with its mandate and tasks in accordance with the principles of sound financial budget management;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 181 #
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 182 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Proposes a two-stepn approach whereby, in the event that thesuch an EU Ethics Body becomes aware of a breachdeals with a breach of conduct or possible breach of ethics rules, it first recommends actions to put an end to the breach; considers that ithis first preventive step should ensure confidentiality and the right of the person to be heard; suggests that in the event that the individual concerned refuses to take the appropriate actions, the EU Ethics Body should make relevant information about the case publicly available and decide, if appropriate, on sanctions; considers that this two-step approach should apply provided that there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the individual acted in bad faith and recommends that intentional breach, gross negligence, the concealment of evidence and non- compliance with the obligation to cooperate should be, as such, subject to sanctions, even when the breach itself has ceaseto be heard;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 192 #
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 193 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 5 a (new)
Underlines that any interinstitutional body should have an advisory function only in ethical matters and that in cases of corruption, OLAF is the competent authority;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 194 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 5 b (new)
Insists that the procedures laid down in the Treaties must be applied, such as the transfer of investigations by the European Court of Auditors to OLAF and to the European Court of Justice;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 197 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Is of the opinion that the EU Ethics Body should publish an annual report containing both information about the fulfilment of its tasks and, where appropriate, recommendations for improving ethics standardsto be presented to the European Parliament;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 204 #

2020/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Insists that the decisions of thean EU Ethics Body should bcannot issue legally binding, reviewable before the CJEU and subject to possible complaints to the EU Ombudsma decisions, since no institution can delegate decision- making authority to another institution;
2021/02/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 10 #

2020/2098(REG)

Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that the sanitary crisis caused by the Covid-19 pandemic has revealed that its Rules of Procedure did not providrequire fmor all appropriate measures in order to facilitate thee developed procedures in order to ensure the unlimited functioning of Parliament in different types of extraordinary circumstances;
2020/09/24
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 11 #

2020/2098(REG)

Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 3
3. Takes notUnderlines the importance of the temporary measures adopted, in compliance with the rule of law, by its President and its governing bodies in the current sanitary crisis, in order to cope with such extraordinary circumstances; underlinstresses that there were no alternatives to those measures were neein ordedr to guarantee the continuity of Parliament’s business, as required by the Treaties, and that they allowinged Parliament to carry out its legislative, budgetary and political control functions during the crisis in accordance with the procedures provided for by the Treaties;
2020/09/24
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 13 #

2020/2098(REG)

Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 4
4. RecogniStresses that those temporary measures were fully justified and that they ensured the validity of all votes taken during their period of application;
2020/09/24
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 21 #

2020/2098(REG)


Title XIII a (new) – rule 237 a (new)
Rule 237a Extraordinary measures 1. This Rule applies to situations in which the European Parliament, due to exceptional and unforeseeable circumstances beyond its control, is hindered from carrying out its duties and exercising its prerogatives under the Treaties and a temporary derogation from Parliament’s usual procedures set out elsewhere in these Rules is necessary in order to adopt extraordinary measures to enable it to continue to carry out those duties and to exercise those prerogatives. Such extraordinary circumstances shall be considered to exist where the President comes to the conclusion, on the basis of reliable evidence confirmed, where appropriate, by Parliament’s services, that for reasons of security or safety or as a result of the non-availability of technical means it is or will be impossible or dangerous for Parliament to convene in accordance with its usual procedures as set out elsewhere in these Rules and its adopted calendar. 2. Where the conditions set out in paragraph 1 are fulfilled, the President may decide, with the agreement of the Conference of Presidents, to apply one or more of the measures referred to in paragraph 3. If it is impossible, due to reasons of imperative urgency, for the Conference of Presidents to convene, the President may decide to apply one or more of the measures set out in paragraph 3, points (a), (b) and (c). Such a decision shall lapse five days after its adoption unless approved by the Conference of Presidents within that deadline. Following a decision by the President, approved by the Conference of Presidents, a political group or Members reaching at least the low threshold may, at any time, request that some or all of the measures addressed by that decision be submitted individually to Parliament for approval without debate. The vote in plenary shall be placed on the agenda of the first sitting following the day on which the request was tabled. No amendments may be tabled. If a measure fails to obtain a majority of the votes cast, it shall lapse after the announcement of the result of the vote. A measure approved by the plenary may not be the subject of a further vote during the same part-session. 3. The decision referred to in paragraph 2 may provide for all appropriate measures addressing the extraordinary circumstances referred to under paragraph 1, and in particular for the following measures: (a) postponement of a scheduled part- session, sitting or meeting of a committee to a later date and/or cancellation or limitation of meetings of inter- parliamentary delegations and other bodies; (b) displacement of the part-session, sitting or meeting of a committee from Parliament’s seat to one of its working places or to an external place or from one of its working places to Parliament’s seat, to one of Parliament’s other working places or to an external place; (c) holding of the part-session or the sitting on the premises of Parliament but fully or partially in separate meeting rooms allowing for appropriate physical distancing; (d) holding of the part-session, sitting or meeting of bodies of Parliament under the remote participation regime laid down in Rule 237c; (e) in the event that the ad hoc replacement mechanism laid down in Rule 209(7) fails to provide sufficient remedies to the extraordinary circumstances under consideration, temporary replacement specified by the political groups of Members in a committee unless the Member concerned opposes; (f) in the event that the remote participation regime laid down in Rule 237c cannot be applied, lowering of the quorum laid down in Rules 178 and 218 to a minimum of one quarter of Parliament’s component Members instead of one third as regards the necessary presence in the Chamber and/or to a minimum of one fifth of the members of a committee instead of one quarter as regards the necessary presence in a committee. 4. A decision referred to in paragraph 2 shall be limited in time and shall state the reasons on which it is based. It shall enter into force upon its publication on Parliament’s website or, if circumstances prevent such publication, by the best available means. All Members shall also be informed individually of the decision without delay. The decision may be renewed by the President in accordance with the procedure under paragraph 2 once or more for a limited time. A decision to renew shall state the reasons on which it is based. The President shall revoke a decision adopted under this Rule as soon as the extraordinary circumstances referred to in paragraph 1 that gave rise to its adoption have disappeared. 5. This Rule shall be applied only as a last resort, and only measures that are strictly necessary to address the extraordinary circumstances under consideration shall be selected and applied. When applying this Rule, due account shall be taken, in particular, of the principle of representative democracy, the principle of equal treatment of Members, the right of Members to exercise their parliamentary mandate without impairment, their right to speak in one of the official languages of the European Union and to vote freely, individually and in person, and the Protocol No 6 to the Treaties.
2020/09/24
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 28 #

2020/2098(REG)


Title XIII a (new) – rule 237 b (new)
(Does not affect the English version)
2020/09/24
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 104 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8) Such a substantial connection to the Union should be considered to exist where the service provider has an establishment in the Union or, in its absence, on the basis of the existence of a significant number of users in one or more Member States, or the targeting of activities towards one or more Member States. The targeting of activities towards one or more Member States canshould be determined on the basis of all relevant circumstances, including factors such as the use of a language or a currency generally used in that Member State, or the possibility of ordering products or services, or using a national top level domain. The targeting of activities towards a Member State could also be derived from the availability of an application in the relevant national application store, from the provision of local advertising or advertising in the language used in that Member State, or from the handling of customer relations such as by providing customer service in the language generally used in that Member State. A substantial connection should also be assumed where a service provider directs its activities to one or more Member State as set out in Article 17(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council27 . On the other hand, mere technical accessibility of a website from the Union cannot, on that ground alone, be considered as establishing a substantial connection to the Union. _________________ 27 Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ L351, 20.12.2012, p.1).
2021/07/20
Committee: JURI
Amendment 115 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
(11) It should be clarified that this Regulation is without prejudice to the rules of Union law on copyright and related rights, which establish specific rules and procedures that should remain unaffected and are lex specialis, prevailing over this Regulation.
2021/07/20
Committee: JURI
Amendment 123 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) In order to achieve the objective of ensuring a safe, predictable and trusted online environment, for the purpose of this Regulation the concept of “illegal content” should be defined broadly and also covers information relating to illegal content, products, services and activities. In particular, that concept should be understood to refer to information, irrespective of its form, that under the applicable law is either itself illegal, such as illegal hate speech or terrorist content and unlawful discriminatory content, or that relates to activities that are illegal, such as the sharing of images depicting child sexual abuse, unlawful non- consensual sharing of private images, online stalking, the sale of non-compliant, dangerous or counterfeit products, the non-authorised use of copyright protected material or activities involving infringements of consumer protection law. In this regard, it is immaterial whether the illegality of the information or activity results from Union law or from national law that is consistent with Union law and what the precise nature or subject matter is of the law in question.
2021/07/20
Committee: JURI
Amendment 131 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) Considering the particular characteristics of the services concerned and the corresponding need to make the providers thereof subject to certain specific obligations, it is necessary to distinguish, within the broader category of providers of hosting services as defined in this Regulation, the subcategory of online platforms. Online platforms, such as social networks or online marketplaces, should be defined as providers of hosting services that not only store information provided by the recipients of the service at their request, but that also disseminate that information to the public, again at their request. However, in order to avoid imposing overly broad obligations, providers of hosting services should not be considered as online platforms where the dissemination to the public is merely a minor and purely ancillary feature of anotherthe principal service and that feature cannot, for objective technical reasons, be used without that other, principal service, and the integration of that feature is not a means to circumvent the applicability of the rules of this Regulation applicable to online platforms. For example, the comments section in an online newspaper could constitute such a feature, where it is clear that it is ancillary to the main service represented by the publication of news under the editorial responsibility of the publisher.
2021/07/20
Committee: JURI
Amendment 141 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) The exemptions from liability established in this Regulation should not apply where, instead of confining itself to providing the services neutrally, by a merely technical and automatic processing of the information provided by the recipient of the service, the provider of intermediary services plays an active role of such a kind as to give it knowledge of, or control over, that information. A provider of intermediary services plays an active role when assistance is given to the recipient of the service, notably for the optimizing and the promotion of the content offered. Those exemptions should accordingly not be available in respect of liability relating to information provided not by the recipient of the service but by the provider of intermediary service itself, including where the information has been developed under the editorial responsibility of that provider.
2021/07/20
Committee: JURI
Amendment 144 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
(20) AThe provider should not be able to benefit from exemptions from liability provided for in this Regulation where the main purpose is to engage in or facilitate illegal activities or where a provider of intermediary services that deliberately collaborates with a recipient of the services in order to undertake illegal activities and does not provide its service neutrally and should therefore not be able to benefit from the exemptions from liability provided for in this Regulation.
2021/07/20
Committee: JURI
Amendment 153 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
(23) In order to ensure the effective protection of consumers when engaging in intermediated commercial transactions online, certain providers of hosting services, namely, online platforms that allow consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders on the platforms, should not be able to benefit from the exemption from liability for hosting service providers established in this Regulation, in so far as those online platforms present the relevant information relating to the transactions at issue in such a way that it leads consumers to believe that the information was provided by those online platforms themselves or by recipients of the service acting under their authority or control, and that those online platforms thus have knowledge of or control over the information, even if that may in reality not be the case. In that regard, is should be determined objectively, on the basis of all relevant circumstances, whether the presentation could lead to such a belief on the side of an average and reasonably well- informed consumer.
2021/07/20
Committee: JURI
Amendment 181 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
(32) The orders to provide information regulated by this Regulation concern the production of specific information about individual recipients of the intermediary service concerned who are identified in those orders for the purposes of determining compliance by the recipients of the services with applicable Union or national rules. Therefore, ois information, which should include the relevant email addresses, telephone numbers, IP addresses and other contact details necessary to ensure such compliance, should be available in respect of all types orders. Orders about information on a group of recipients of the service who are not specifically identified, including orders to provide aggregate information required for statistical purposes or evidence-based policy-making, should remain unaffected by the rules of this Regulation on the provision of information.
2021/07/20
Committee: JURI
Amendment 196 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
(40) Providers of hosting services play a particularly important role in tackling illegal content online, as they store information provided by and at the request of the recipients of the service and typically give other recipients access thereto, sometimes on a large scale. It is important that all providers of hosting services, regardless of their size, put in place user-friendly notice and action mechanisms that facilitate the notification of specific items of information that the notifying party considers to be illegal content to the provider of hosting services concerned ('notice'), pursuant to which that provider can decide whether or not it agrees with that assessment and wishes to remove or disable access to that content ('action'). Provided the requirements on notices are met, it should be possible for individuals or entities to notify multiple specific items of allegedly illegal content through a single notice. The obligation to put in place notice and action mechanisms should apply, for instance, to file storage and sharing services, web hosting services, advertising servers and paste bins, in as far as they qualify as providers of hosting services covered by this Regulation.deleted
2021/07/20
Committee: JURI
Amendment 204 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
(41) The rules on such notice and action mechanisms should be harmonised at Union level, so as to provide for the timely, diligent and objective processing of notices on the basis of rules that are uniform, transparent and clear and that provide for robust safeguards to protect the right and legitimate interests of all affected parties, in particular their fundamental rights guaranteed by the Charter, irrespective of the Member State in which those parties are established or reside and of the field of law at issue. The fundamental rights include, as the case may be, the right to freedom of expression and information, the right to respect for private and family life, the right to protection of personal data, the right to non-discrimination and the right to an effective remedy of the recipients of the service; the freedom to conduct a business, including the freedom of contract, of service providers; as well as the right to human dignity, the rights of the child, the right to protection of property, including intellectual property, and the right to non-discrimination of parties affected by illegal content.deleted
2021/07/20
Committee: JURI
Amendment 213 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
(42) Where a hosting service provider decides to remove or disable information provided by a recipient of the service, for instance following receipt of a notice or acting on its own initiative, including through the use of automated means, that provider should inform the recipient of its decision, the reasons for its decision and the available redress possibilities to contest the decision, in view of the negative consequences that such decisions may have for the recipient, including as regards the exercise of its fundamental right to freedom of expression. That obligation should apply irrespective of the reasons for the decision, in particular whether the action has been taken because the information notified is considered to be illegal content or incompatible with the applicable terms and conditions. Available recourses to challenge the decision of the hosting service provider should always include judicial redress.
2021/07/20
Committee: JURI
Amendment 218 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43 a (new)
(43 a) Providers of hosting services play a particularly important role in tackling illegal content online, as they store information provided by and at the request of the recipients of the service and typically give other recipients access thereto, sometimes on a large scale. It is important that all providers of hosting services, regardless of their size, put in place user-friendly notice and action mechanisms that facilitate the notification of specific items of information that the notifying party considers to be illegal content to the provider of hosting services concerned ('notice'), pursuant to which that provider can decide, based on its own assessment, whether or not it agrees with that assessment and wishes to remove or disable access to that content ('action'). Provided the requirements on notices are met, it should be possible for individuals or entities to notify multiple specific items of allegedly illegal content through a single notice. The obligation to put in place notice and action mechanisms should apply, for instance, to file storage and sharing services, web hosting services, advertising servers and paste bins, in as far as they qualify as providers of hosting services covered by this Regulation.
2021/07/20
Committee: JURI
Amendment 219 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43 b (new)
(43 b) The rules on such notice and action mechanisms should be harmonised at Union level, so as to provide for the timely, diligent and objective processing of notices on the basis of rules that are uniform, transparent and clear and that provide for robust safeguards to protect the right and legitimate interests of all affected parties, in particular their fundamental rights guaranteed by the Charter, irrespective of the Member State in which those parties are established or reside and of the field of law at issue. The fundamental rights include, as the case may be, the right to freedom of expression and information, the right to respect for private and family life, the right to protection of personal data, the right to non-discrimination and the right to an effective remedy of the recipients of the service; the freedom to conduct a business, including the freedom of contract, of service providers; as well as the right to human dignity, the rights of the child, the right to protection of property, including intellectual property, and the right to non-discrimination of parties affected by illegal content.
2021/07/20
Committee: JURI
Amendment 245 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
(52) Online advertisement plays an important role in the online environment, including in relation to the provision of the services of online platforms. However,Online advertising is a significant source of financing for many digital business models and an effective tool to reach new costumers, not least for small- and medium sized companies. However, there are some instances when online advertisement can contribute to significant risks, ranging from advertisement that is itself illegal content, to contributing to financial incentives for the publication or amplification of illegal or otherwise harmful content and activities online, or the discriminatory display of advertising with an impact on the equal treatment and opportunities of citizens. In addition toBased on the requirements resulting from Article 6 of Directive 2000/31/EC, online platforms should therefore be required to ensure that the recipients of the service have certain individualised information necessary for them to understand when and on whose behalf the advertisement is displayed. In addition, recipients of the service should have information on the main parameters used for determining that specific advertising is to be displayed to them, providing meaningful explanations of the logic used to that end, including when this is based on profiling. The requirements of this Regulation on the provision of information relating to advertisement is without prejudice to the application of the relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in particular those regarding the right to object, automated individual decision-making, including profiling and specifically the need to obtain consent of the data subject prior to the processing of personal data for targeted advertising. Similarly, it is without prejudice to the provisions laid down in Directive 2002/58/EC in particular those regarding the storage of information in terminal equipment and the access to information stored therein.
2021/07/20
Committee: JURI
Amendment 265 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
(58) Very large online platforms should deploy the necessary and proportionate means to diligently mitigate the systemic risks identified in the risk assessment. Very large online platforms should under such mitigating measures consider, for example, enhancing or otherwise adapting the design and functioning of their content moderation, algorithmic recommender systems and online interfaces, so that they discourage and limit the dissemination of illegal content, adapting their decision- making processes, or adapting their terms and conditions. They may also include corrective measures, such as discontinuing advertising revenue for specific content, or other actions, such as improving the visibility of authoritative information sources. Very large online platforms may reinforce their internal processes or supervision of any of their activities, in particular as regards the detection of systemic risks. They may also initiate or increase cooperation with trusted flaggers, organise training sessions and exchanges with trusted flagger organisations, and cooperate with other service providers, including by initiating or joining existing codes of conduct or other self-regulatory measures. Any measures adopted should respect the due diligence requirements of this Regulation and be effective and appropriate for mitigating the specific risks identified, in the interest of safeguarding public order, protecting privacy and fighting fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices, and should be proportionate in light of the very large online platform’s economic capacity and the need to avoid unnecessary restrictions on the use of their service, taking due account of potential negative effects on the fundamental rights of the recipients of the service.
2021/07/20
Committee: JURI
Amendment 277 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 62
(62) A core part of a very large online platform’s business is the manner in which information is prioritised and presented on its online interface to facilitate and optimise access to information for the recipients of the service. This is done, for example, by algorithmically suggesting, ranking and prioritising information, distinguishing through text or other visual representations, or otherwise curating information provided by recipients. Such recommender systems can have a significantn impact on the ability of recipients to retrieve and interact with information online. They also play an important role in the amplification of certain messages, the viral dissemination of information and the stimulation of online behaviour. Consequently, very large online platforms should ensure that recipients are appropriately informed, and can influence the information presented to them. They should clearly present the main parameters for such recommender systems in an easily comprehensible manner to ensure that the recipients understand how information is prioritised for them. They should also ensure that the recipients enjoy alternative options for the main parameters, including options that are not based on profiling of the recipient.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 279 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 63
(63) Advertising systems used by very large online platforms could pose particular risks and require further public and regulatory supervision on account of their scale and ability to target and reach recipients of the service based on their behaviour within and outside that platform’s online interface. Very large online platforms should ensure public access to repositories of advertisements displayed on their online interfaces to facilitate supervision and research into emerging risks brought about by the distribution of advertising online, for example in relation to illegal advertisements or manipulative techniques and disinformation with a real and foreseeable negative impact on public health, public security, civil discourse, political participation and equality. Repositories should include the content of advertisements and related data on the advertiser and the delivery of the advertisement, in particular where targeted advertising is concerned.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 282 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 64
(64) In order to appropriately supervise the compliance of very large online platforms with the obligations laid down by this Regulation, the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission may require access to or reporting of specific data. Such a requirement may include, for example, the data necessary to assess the risks and possible harms brought about by the platform’s systems, data on the accuracy, functioning and testing of algorithmic systems for content moderation, recommender systems or advertising systems, or data on processes and outputs of content moderation or of internal complaint-handling systems within the meaning of this Regulation. Investigations by researchers on the evolution and severity of online systemic risks are particularly important for bridging information asymmetries and establishing a resilient system of risk mitigation, informing online platforms, Digital Services Coordinators, other competent authorities, the Commission and the public. This Regulation therefore provides a framework for providing information or compelling access to data from very large online platforms to vetted researchers. All requirements f where relevant to a research project. All requests for providing information or access to data under that framework should be proportionate and appropriately protect the rights and legitimate interests, including trade secrets and other confidential information, of the platform and any other parties concerned, including the recipients of the service.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 301 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 69
(69) The rules on codes of conduct under this Regulation could serve as a basis for already established self-regulatory efforts at Union level, including the Product Safety Pledge, the Memorandum of Understanding against counterfeit goods, the Code of Conduct against illegal hate speech as well as the Code of practice on disinformation. In particular for the latter, the Commission will issue guidance for strengthening the Code of practice on disinformation as announced in the European Democracy Action Plan.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 305 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 70
(70) The provision of online advertising generally involves several actors, including intermediary services that connect publishers of advertising with advertisers. Codes of conducts should support and complement the transparency obligations relating to advertisement for online platforms and very large online platforms set out in this Regulation in order to provide for flexible and effective mechanisms to facilitate and enhance the compliance with those obligations, notably as concerns the modalities of the transmission of the relevant information. The involvement of a wide range of stakeholders should ensure that those codes of conduct are widely supported, technically sound, effective and offer the highest levels of user-friendliness to ensure that the transparency obligations achieve their objectives.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 373 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – indent 1
— a significant number of users in relation to their population in one or more Member States; or
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 388 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) ‘online platform’ means a provider of a hosting service which, at the request of a recipient of the service, stores and disseminates to the public information, unless that activity is a minor and purely ancillary feature of anotherthe principal service and, for objective and technical reasons cannot be used without that otherprincipal service, and the integration of the feature into the other service is not a means to circumvent the applicability of this Regulation.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 389 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
(h a) ‘editorial platform’ means an intermediary service which is in connection with a press publication within the meaning of Article 2(4) of Directive (EU) 2019/790 or another editorial media service and which allows users to discuss topics generally covered by the relevant media or to comment editorial content and which is under the supervision of the editorial team of the publication or other editorial media.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 397 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
(i a) 'live streaming platform services' means an information society service which main or one the main purposes is to give the public access to live broadcasted audio or video material and which it organises and promotes for profit-making purposes;
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 400 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o
(o) ‘recommender system’ means a fully or partially automated system, used by an very large online platform to suggest in its online interface specific information to recipients of the service, including as a result of a search initiated by the recipient or otherwise determining the relative order or prominence of information displayed;
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 419 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) upon obtaining such knowledge or awareness, acts expeditiouslyaccording within the deadlines of Article 5Ia new when it comes to remove or toing or disableing access to the illegal content.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 421 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Without prejudice to specific deadlines, set out in Union law or within administrative or legal orders, providers of hosting services shall, upon obtaining actual knowledge or awareness, remove or disable access to illegal content as soon as possible and in any event: (a) within 30 minutes where the illegal content pertains to the broadcast of a live sports or entertainment event; (b) within 24 hours where the illegal content can seriously harm public policy, public security or public health or seriously harm consumers’ health or safety; (c) within seven days in all other cases where the illegal content does not seriously harm public policy, public security, public health or consumers’ health or safety; Where the provider of hosting services cannot comply with the obligation in paragraph 1a on grounds of force majeure or for objectively justifiable technical or operational reasons, it shall, without undue delay, inform the competent authority.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 423 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Paragraph 1 shall not apply when the main purpose of the information society service is to engage in or facilitate illegal activities or when the provider of the information society service deliberately collaborates with a recipient of the services in order to undertake illegal activities.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 425 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Paragraph 1 shall not apply with respect to liability under consumer protection law of online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders on the platform, where such an online platform presents the specific item of information or otherwise enables the specific transaction at issue in a way that would lead an average and reasonably well-informed consumer to believe that the information, or the product or service that is the object of the transaction, is provided either by the online platform itself or by a recipient of the service who is acting under its authority or control.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 430 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5 a The exemptions from liability established in Articles 3, 4 and 5 shall not apply where the information society service plays an active role of such a kind as to give it knowledge of, or control over the information provided by the recipient of the service.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 503 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the order only requires the provider to provide information already collected for the purposes of providing the service and which lies within its control, including email addresses, telephone numbers, IP addresses and other contact details necessary to determine the compliance referred to in (a);
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 525 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of intermediary services which do not have an establishment in the Union but which offer services in the Union shall designate, in writing, a legal or natural person as their legal representative in one of the Member States where the provider offers its services. The Member States may require very large online platforms to designate a legal representative in their Member State.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 528 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. Providers of intermediary services shall mandate their legal representatives to be addressed in addition to or instead of the provider by the Member States’ authorities, the Commission and the Board on all issues necessary for the receipt of, compliance with and enforcement of decisions issued in relation to this Regulation. Providers of intermediary services shall provide their legal representative with the necessary powers and resource to guarantee the proper and timely cooperateion with the Member States’ authorities, the Commission and the Board and comply with those decisions.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 531 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 a (new)
Article 11 a Exclusions Articles 12 and 13 of Section 1,and the provisions of Section 2, and Section 3 of Chapter III shall not apply to: (a) editorial platforms within the meaning of Article 2(h a) of this Regulation; (b) online platforms that qualify as micro and medium-sized enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC. (c) an intermediary service, except very large online platforms, where it would constitute a disproportionate burden in view of its size, the nature of its activity and the risk posed to users.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 537 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of intermediary services shall include information on any restrictions that they impose in relation to the use of their service in respect of information provided by the recipients of the service, in their terms and conditions, which have to respect European and national law. That information shall include information on any policies, procedures, measures and tools used for the purpose of content moderation, including algorithmic decision-making and human review. It shall be set out in clear and unambiguous language and shall be publicly available in an easily accessible format.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 545 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Where very large online platforms within the meaning of Article 25 of this Regulation otherwise allow for the dissemination to the public of press publications within the meaning of Article 2(4) of Directive (EU) 2019/790, such platforms shall not remove, disable access to, suspend or otherwise interfere with such content or the related service or suspend or terminate the related account on the basis of the alleged incompatibility of such content with its terms and conditions, unless it is illegal content
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 564 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the number of orders received from Member States’ authorities, categorised, where possible, by the type of illegal content concerned, including orders issued in accordance with Articles 8 and 9, and the average time needed for taking the action specified in those orders;.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 566 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the number of notices submitted in accordance with Article 14, categorised by the type of alleged illegal content concerned, any action taken pursuant to the notices by differentiating whether the action was taken on the basis of the law or the terms and conditions of the provider, and the average time needed for taking the action;
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 570 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the number of complaints received through the internal complaint-handling system referred to in Article 17, where identifiable, the basis for those complaints, decisions taken in respect of those complaints, the average time needed for taking those decisions and the number of instances where those decisions were reversed.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 575 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to providers of intermediary services that qualify as micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC. In addition, paragraph 1 shall not apply to enterprises that previously qualified for the status of a small or microenterprise within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation2003/361/EC during the twelve months following their loss of that status.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 586 #
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 634 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
4. Providers of hostingaragraphs 2, 3 and 4 shall not apply to providers of intermediary services sthall publish the decisions and the statements of reast qualify as micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC. In additions, referred to in paragraph 1 in a publicly accessible database managed by the Commission. That information shall not contain personal datathose paragraphs shall not apply to enterprises that previously qualified for the status of a micro or small enterprise within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC during the twelve months following their loss of that status.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 647 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 a (new)
Article 16a Notice and action mechanism 1. Providers of hosting services shall put mechanisms in place to allow any individual or entity to notify them of the presence on their service of specific items of information that the individual or entity considers to be illegal content. Those mechanisms shall be easy to access, user-friendly, and allow for the submission of notices exclusively by electronic means. 2. The mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1 shall be such as to facilitate the submission of sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated notices, on the basis of which a diligent economic operator can identify the illegality of the content in question. To that end, the providers shall take the necessary measures to enable and facilitate the submission of notices containing all of the following elements: (a) an explanation of the reasons why the individual or entity considers the information in question to be illegal content; (b) to the extent possible a clear indication of the electronic location of that information, and, where necessary, additional information enabling the identification of the illegal content; (c) the name and an electronic mail address of the individual or entity submitting the notice, except in the case of information considered to involve one of the offences referred to in Articles 3 to 7 of Directive 2011/93/EU; (d) a statement confirming the good faith belief of the individual or entity submitting the notice that the information and allegations contained therein are to the best of their knowledge accurate and complete. 3. Notices that include the elements referred to in paragraph 2 shall be considered to give rise to actual knowledge or awareness for the purposes of Article 5 in respect of the specific item of information concerned. 4. Where the notice contains the name and an electronic mail address of the individual or entity that submitted it, the provider of hosting services shall promptly send a confirmation of receipt of the notice to that individual or entity. 5. The provider shall also, without undue delay, notify that individual or entity of its decision in respect of the information to which the notice relates, providing information on the redress possibilities in respect of that decision. 6. Providers of hosting services shall process any notices that they receive under the mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1, and take their decisions in respect of the information to which the notices relate, within the timelines of Article 5 1a and in a diligent and objective manner. Where they use automated means for that processing or decision- making, they shall include information on such use in the notification referred to in paragraph 4.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 680 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. RAfter internal complaint handling mechanisms are exhausted, recipients of the service addressed by the decisions referred to in Article 17(1), shall be entitled to select any out-of- court dispute that has been certified in accordance with paragraph 2 in order to resolve disputes relating to those decisions, including complaints that could not be resolved by means of the internal complaint-handling system referred to in that Article. Online platforms shall engage, in good faith, with the body selected with a view to resolving the dispute and shall be bound by the decision taken by the body.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 710 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. Online platforms shall take the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure that notices submitted by trusted flaggers through the mechanisms referred to in Article 14, are processed and decided upon with priority and without delayimmediately processed without prejudice to the implementation of a complaint and redress mechanism.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 743 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Online platforms shall, where possible, provide trusted flaggers with access to technical means that help them detect illegal content on a large scale.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 760 #
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 781 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Where an online platform allows consumers to conclude distance contracts with professional traders, it shall ensure that traders can only use its services to promote messages on or to offer products or services to consumers located in the Union if, prior to the use of its services, the online platform has obtained the following information:
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 782 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the bank account details of the trader, where the trader is a natural person;deleted
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 822 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24
Online platforms that display advertising on their online interfaces shall ensure that the recipients of the service can identify, for each specific advertisement displayed to each individual recipient, in a clear and unambiguous manner and in real time: (a) an advertisement; (b) whose behalf the advertisement is displayed; (c) main parameters used to determine the recipient to whom the advertisement is displayed.Article 24 deleted Online advertising transparency that the information displayed is the natural or legal person on meaningful information about the
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 865 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) any negative effects for the exercise of the fundamental rights to respect for private and family life, freedom of expression and information, freedom and pluralism of the media, the prohibition of discrimination and the rights of the child, as enshrined in Articles 7, 11, 21 and 24 of the Charter respectively caused by an illegal activity;
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 870 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) intentional manipulation of their service, including by means of inauthentic use or automated exploitation of the service, with an actual or foreseeable negative and illegal effect on the protection of public health, minors, civic discourse, or actual or foreseeable effects related to electoral processes and public security.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 873 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2
2. When conducting risk assessments, very large online platforms shall take into account, in particular, how their content moderation systems, recommender systems and systems for selecting and displaying advertisement influence any of the systemic risks referred to in paragraph 1, including the potentially rapid and wide dissemination of illegal content and of information that is incompatible with their terms and conditions.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 918 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) any commitmentof voluntary measures undertaken pursuant to the codes of conduct referred to in Articles 35 and 36 and the crisis protocols referred to in Article 37.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 931 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1
1. Very large online platforms that use recommender systems shall set out in their terms and conditions, in a clear, accessible and easily comprehensible manner, the mainshall base the parameters used inof their recommender systems, as well as any options for the recipients of the service to modify or influence those main parameters that they may have made available, including at least one option which is not based on profiling, within the meaning of Article 4 (4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 on Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services (P2B) and set them out in their terms and conditions.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 935 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The parameters used in recommender systems shall always be fair and non-discriminatory.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 938 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2
2. Where several options are available pursuant to paragraph 1, very large online platforms shall provide an easily accessible functionality on their online interface allowing the recipient of the service to select and to modify at any time their preferred option for each of the recommender systems that determines the relative order of information presented to them.deleted
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 946 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1
1. Very large online platforms that display advertising on their online interfaces shall compile and make publicly available through application programming interfaces a repository containing the information referred to in paragraph 2, until one yearfor advertisements that have been seen by more than 5000 recipients of the service and until six months after the advertisement was displayed for the last time on their online interfaces. They shall ensure that the repository does not contain any personal data of the recipients of the service to whom the advertisement was or could have been displayed.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 953 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) whether the advertisement was intended to be displayed specifically to one or more particular groups of recipients of the service and if so, the main parameters used for that purpose;deleted
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 954 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) the total number of recipients of the service reached and, where applicable, aggregate numbers for the group or groups of recipients to whom the advertisement was targeted specifically.deleted
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 966 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1
1. Very large online platforms shall provide the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission, upon their reasoned request and within a reasonable period, specified in the request, provide information and access to data that are necessary to properly monitor and assess compliance with this Regulation. That Digital Services Coordinator and the Commission shall only use that data for those purposes.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 969 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2
2. Upon a reasoned request from the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission, very large online platforms shall, within a reasonable period, as specified in the request, provide access toinformation and access to relevant data to vetted researchers who meet the requirements in paragraphs 4 of this Article, for the sole purpose of conducting research that contributes to the identification and understanding of systemic risks as set out in Article 26(1).
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 973 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 3
3. Very large online platforms shall provide access to data pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 for a limited time and through online databases or application programming interfaces, as appropriate.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 1009 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) transmission of data between advertising intermediaries in support of transparency obligations pursuant to points (b) and (c) of Article 24.deleted
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 1016 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
2. Where significant systemic risk within the meaning of Article 26(1) in relation to the dissemination of illegal content emerge and concern several very large online platforms, the Commission may invite the very large online platforms concerned, other very large online platforms, other online platforms and other providers of intermediary services, as appropriate, as well as civil society organisations and other interested parties, to participate in the drawing up of codes of conduct, including by setting out commitments to take specific risk mitigation measures, as well as a regular reporting framework on any measures taken and their outcomes.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 1019 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
2. Where significant systemic risk within the meaning of Article 26(1) emerge and concern several very large online platforms, the Commission may invite the very large online platforms concerned, other very large online platforms, other online platforms and other providers of intermediary services, as appropriate, as well as civil society organisations and other interested partierelevant stakeholders, to participate in the drawing up of codes of conduct, including by setting out commitments to take specific risk mitigation measures, as well as a regular reporting framework on any measures taken and their outcomes.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 1024 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 3
3. When giving effect to paragraphs 1 and 2, the Commission and the Board shall aim to ensure that the codes of conduct clearly set out their objectives in relation to the dissemination of illegal content, contain key performance indicators to measure the achievement of those objectives and take due account of the needs and interests of all interested partiethe relevant stakeholders, including citizens, at Union level. The Commission and the Board shall also aim to ensure that participants report regularly to the Commission and their respective Digital Service Coordinators of establishment on any measures taken and their outcomes, as measured against the key performance indicators that they contain.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 1032 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall encourage and facilitate the drawing up of codes of conduct at Union level between, online platforms and other relevant service providers, such as providers of online advertising intermediary services or organisations representing recipients of the service and civil society organisations or relevant authorities to contribute to further transparency in online advertising beyond the requirements of Articles 24 30 and 30Article 6 of Directive 2000/31/EC.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 1034 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Commission shall aim to ensure that the codes of conduct pursue an effective transmission of information, in full respect for the rights and interests of all parties involved, and a competitive, transparent and fair environment in online advertising, in accordance with Union and national law, in particular on competition and the protection of personal data. The Commission shall aim to ensure that the codes of conduct address at least: the transmission of information held by providers of online advertising intermediaries to the repositories pursuant to Article 30.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 1035 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the transmission of information held by providers of online advertising intermediaries to recipients of the service with regard to requirements set in points (b) and (c) of Article 24;deleted
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 1036 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the transmission of information held by providers of online advertising intermediaries to the repositories pursuant to Article 30.deleted
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 1044 #
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 1058 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) the power to proportionate adopt interim measures to avoid the risk of serious harm.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 1060 #

2020/0361(COD)

1. Member States shall lay down the rules on penalties including administrative fines applicable to infringements of this Regulation by providers of intermediary services under their jurisdiction and shall take all the necessary measures to ensure that they are properly and effectively implemented in accordance with Article 41.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 1061 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 2
2. Penalties shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. They shall take into particular account the interest of small scale providers and start ups and their economic viability. Member States shall notify the Commission of those rules and of those measures and shall notify it, without delay, of any subsequent amendments affecting them.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 1103 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) contributing to the effective application of Directive 2000/31/EC Article 3 to prevent fragmentation of the digital single market and the obligations of very large platforms of Article 5 of the Platform to Business Regulation 2019/1150
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 1132 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 1
1. In the context of proceedings which may lead to the adoption of a decision of non-compliance pursuant to Article 58(1), where there is an urgency due to the risk of serious damage for the recipients of the service, the Commission may, by decision, order proportionate interim measures against the very large online platform concerned on the basis of a prima facie finding of an infringement.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 1135 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 1
1. For the purposes of carrying out the tasks assigned to it under this Section, the Commission may take the necessary actions to monitor the effective implementation and compliance with this Regulation by the very large online platform concerned. The Commission may also order that platform to provide access to, and explanations relating to, and, where necessary access to its databases and algorithms.
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 1138 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Commission may by decision and in compliance with the proportionality principle impose on the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1) fines not exceeding 1% of the total turnover in the preceding financial year, where they intentionally or negligently:
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 1151 #

2020/0361(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 74 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. It shall apply from [date - threesix months after its entry into force].
2021/07/19
Committee: JURI
Amendment 3 #

2019/2132(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses the need to continuously improve the mechanisms designed to ensure that rule-making is in full compliance with the Treaties, notably the principles of conferral, subsidiarity and proportionality, as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), and with the principle of sincere cooperation as set out in Article 13 of the Treaty on the European Union (TEU);
2020/10/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 17 #

2019/2132(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Notes the importance of avoiding unnecessary complexity and reducing administrative burdens for citizens and businesses alike, calls for the need to provide all necessary help to avoid over- regulation when transposing and applying European Union law;
2020/10/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 22 #

2019/2132(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Deplores inconsistencies in the application and interpretation of EU law which can be attributed to incorrect translations of legal texts; calls therefore on the European Commission to increase efforts to ensure that adopted EU legislation is correctly translated;
2020/10/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 23 #

2019/2132(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises that proper transposition and implementation of EUuropean Union law, on the basis of Article 197 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), is of the utmost importance; calls for appropriate ex post impact assessment of EU law, including sustainability impact assessments; and for appropriate ex ante assessment beforehand during legislative procedures, in line with the pledge of the European Parliament and the Council to carry out impact assessments in relation to their substantial amendments to the Commission's proposal when they consider this to be appropriate and necessary for the legislative process;
2020/10/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 25 #

2019/2132(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Welcomes that the new IIA on better law-making contains provisions that aim at improving the implementation and application of EU law, inter alia, through better identification of national measures that are not strictly related to the Union legislation (gold-plating) and expects Member States to clearly indicate and document such measures; underlines that the Members States when applying EU legislation should avoid the so-called "gold plating", by which unnecessary burdens are added to EU legislation which leads to a misconception of EU legislative activity and increases unjustified EU scepticism amongst the citizen; in this respect calls on the Commission to provide regular information on the documentation of gold-plating measures;
2020/10/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 27 #

2019/2132(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Recognizes that for the proper functioning of the internal market citizens and entrepreneurs need to be informed regarding questions arising from everyday application of EU law, calls for strengthening cooperation through SOLVIT and other means necessary in this field;
2020/10/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 32 #

2019/2132(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Urges the Commission to enhance public debate on its annual report on the monitoring of the application of EU law and to further support Member States in transposing and implementing EU legislation through institutional and administrative capacity-building initiatives; suggests to examine the role of non legally binding guidance documents that aim to assist the Member States in the implementation process;
2020/10/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 41 #

2019/2132(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. Recalls the need to fully safeguard the role of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) to ensure the uniform interpretation and application of EU law in the context of Brexit andimplementation of the Withdrawal Agreement and with regards to the future relationship with the UK.
2020/10/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 18 #

2018/2280(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Reiterates the need for a continuous public debate about the Union’s fields of activity in order to inform citizens about different levels of decision-making; calls for more intensive and structured biannual dialogue between the Committee on Petitions and Members of Committees on Petitions in the National Parliaments on petitions of major concerns to European citizens stimulating a genuine debate between MEPs and national MPs centred on petitions that would further raise awareness of EU policies and clarity on competences of the EU and of Members States;
2018/12/18
Committee: PETI
Amendment 24 #

2018/2280(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Takes note of four public hearings on various topics, namely on ‘Citizens’ rights after Brexit’ together with the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs on 1 February 2018, on ‘European Citizens’ Initiative - Revision of Regulation’ together with the Committee on Constitutional Affairs on 21 February 2018, on ‘Impact of endocrine disruptors on public health’ on 22 March 2018 together with the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, and on ‘The rights of persons with disabilities’ on 9 October 2018; reminds the committee members of the importance of attending public hearings requested and organised by the committee; calls on the petitions network to put forward specific public hearings and topics for EP studies and EP resolutions, which reflect the connection between the ongoing legislative work and the political scrutiny power of the EP and the petitions of major concerns; underlines that the petitions network is the right forum to put forward common initiatives for petitions treatment, which could exhaustively express the European Parliament's contribution to European citizens’ petitions;
2018/12/18
Committee: PETI
Amendment 30 #

2018/2280(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Trusts that the petitions network is a means to make the Committee on Petitions more visible and relevant in the work of the other committees of Parliament, so that petitions are better taken into consideration in legislative work; reaffirms its belief that meetings of the petitions network are vital for strengthening cooperation between the parliamentary committees through exchange of information and sharing of best practices between the network members; calls on the Committee on Petitions to nominate accordingly EP Rapporteurs on EU policies clusters, which could effectively and efficiently work with their respective counterparts of the petitions network in order to streamline common initiatives for the treatment of petitions across the European Parliament;
2018/12/18
Committee: PETI
Amendment 38 #

2018/2280(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Recalls that the Committee on Petitions has adopted opinions attached to reports of Parliament on a wide range of issues raised in petitions, including on monitoring the application of EU law in 2016 , on the coordination of social security systems , on the European citizens’ initiative, on the implementation report as regards Regulation 1/2005 on the protection of animals during transport within and outside the EU , on the proposal for amending Parliament’s Decision 94/262/EC, Euratom of 9 March 1994 on the regulations and general conditions governing the performance of the Ombudsman’s duties , and on the implementation of the Treaty provisions related to EU citizenship; underlines that, since the beginning of this parliamentary term, the Committee on Petitions has provided more opinions to ongoing European legislative texts; highlights the importance of providing justification of amendments by showing a direct reference to citizens‘ petitions;
2018/12/18
Committee: PETI
Amendment 43 #

2018/2280(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Is convinced that the Secretariat of the Committee on Petitions handles petitions efficiently and with great care according to the committee’s guidelines and the petitions lifecycle in the EP administration; stresses that the number of petitions has decreased to 1120 in 2018 compared to 2715 in 2014 as a result of the more efficient treatment of petitions through the administrative petitions’ review and the petitions web portal; calls for further innovating the treatment of petitions taking stock of the most recent technological developments in order to render the whole process clearer and more transparent for European citizens;
2018/12/18
Committee: PETI
Amendment 12 #

2018/2081(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E
E. whereas in 2015, 264 million children and young people of primary or secondary school age were not enrolled in school; whereas in countries affected by fragility and conflict there are 37% more girls than boys out of primary school and young women are nearly 90% more likely to be out of secondary school than their counterparts in countries not affected by conflict;
2018/09/04
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 32 #

2018/2081(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Observes that the efforts of developing countries and increases in ODA will not be sufficient to bridge the funding gap; calls therefore for the creation of innovative funding instruments, which leverage and are aligned with existing funding mechanisms and initiatives, in order to bolster national education systems;
2018/09/04
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 45 #

2018/2081(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Particularly stresses SDG 4.1, whose aim is a full 12-year primary and secondary education cycle, provided free of charge for all; considers that the condition of being ‘free of charge’ should apply not only to schooling itself but also to what would otherwise be ancillary costs; believes that States should consider scholarship schemes to provide schooling for the most disadvantaged children; instructs the European Union and the Member States, in accordance with SDG 4.1 and Article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, not to support private, commercial educational establishments financially;
2018/09/04
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 74 #

2018/2081(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Is concerned about the phenomenon of the ‘brain drain’; calls oin those Member States that devote too much of their aid to scholarships and the expenses of students from developing countries to reduce it; considers that multiple entry visas would enable these students to updparallel to put in place incentives or measures encouraging students to work in the economic or governmental sector of their home country after their return for a minimum period, so thate their knowledge and promote circular mobilitycquired would primarily be at the benefit of partner countries;
2018/09/04
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 85 #

2018/2081(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Notes also the efforts to be made with regard to the recruitment, remuneration, working conditions and initial and in-service training of teachers, as well as the massive investment needed in school infrastructure, in particular to ensure equal access for girls; calls for more exchange programmes between teachers from developing countries and from EU Member States, e.g. Erasmus+;
2018/09/04
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 92 #

2018/2081(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Stresses the importance of new technologies as a way of improving access to education and improving its quality, particularly for the dissemination of knowledge, teacher training and the management of establishments; draws attention to the fact that these new technologies must support educational efforts rather than replacing them and lowering standards of teaching; emphasises the strengthening of digital skills to promote the empowerment of women and girls;
2018/09/04
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 96 #

2018/2081(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Underlines that the numbers of mobile users are now surpassing the numbers of people having access to electricity, sanitation or clean water and insists on the need to use this digitalisation to bring knowledge and modern teaching methods into developing countries;
2018/09/04
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 97 #

2018/2081(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)
20b. Calls for increased efforts to address the challenges of digital exclusion through education and training on essential digital skills and initiatives to facilitate the use of ICTs; further calls for the introduction of digital literacy in school curricula at all levels of education in developing countries, with a view to the acquisition of the skills needed to improve access to information;
2018/09/04
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 115 #

2018/2081(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
26. Calls on the Commission and Member States to assign priority to budget support where possible, with strict criteria, including transparegood governancye, and extensive checks, in particular to avoid corruption; stresses the need to establish a monitoring mechanism to inquire whether development funds have been misused and to implement sanctions as a consequence, including the reallocation of financial means in order to increase the support for countries with better practice in that field;
2018/09/04
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 33 #

2018/2080(INI)


Recital 10
(10) Whereas provisions should be laid down regarding the officials and servants of the Ombudsman´s secretariat which will assist him and the budget thereof; whereas the seat of the Ombudsman should be that of the seat of the European Parliament;
2018/10/19
Committee: PETI
Amendment 39 #

2018/2080(INI)


Article 1 – paragraph 3
3. The Ombudsman mayshall not intervene in cases before courts or question the soundness of a court´s ruling.
2018/10/19
Committee: PETI
Amendment 46 #

2018/2080(INI)


Article 2 – paragraph 9
9. The Ombudsman shall as soon as possible, and in a pre-determined timeframe, inform the person lodging the complaint of the action he has taken on it.
2018/10/19
Committee: PETI
Amendment 49 #

2018/2080(INI)


Article 3 – paragraph 1a (new)
1a. The Ombudsman may conduct, without prejudice to their regular duties of handling complaints, inquiries in order to combat maladministration and promote good administrative practices in the Union institutions, offices, bodies and agencies;
2018/10/19
Committee: PETI
Amendment 53 #

2018/2080(INI)


Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. The CommunityUnion institutions and bodies shall be obliged to supply the Ombudsman with any information he has requested from them and give himprovide access to the files concerned. Access to classified information or documents, in particular to sensitive documents within the meaning of Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, shall be subject to compliance with the rules on security of the CommunityUnion institution or body concerned. The institutions or bodies supplying classified information or documents as mentioned in the previous subparagraph shall inform the Ombudsman of such classification in advance. For the implementation of the rules provided for in the first subparagraph, the Ombudsman shall have agreed in advance with the institution or body concerned the conditions for treatment of classified information or documents and other information covered by the obligation of professional secrecy. The institutions or bodies concerned shall give access to documents originating in a Member State and classed as secret by law or regulation only where that Member State has given its prior agreement. They shall give access to other documents originating in a Member State after having informed the Member State concerned. In both cases, in accordance with Article 4, the Ombudsman may not divulge the content of such documents. Officials and other servants of CommunityUnion institutions and bod, offices, bodies and agencies must testify at the request of the Ombudsman; they shall continue to be bound by the relevant rules of the Staff Regulations, notably their duty of professional secrecy.
2018/10/19
Committee: PETI
Amendment 55 #

2018/2080(INI)


Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. The Member States' authorities shall be obliged to provide the Ombudsman, whenever heit may sobe requested, via the Permanent Representations of the Member States to the European CommunitiesUnion, with any information that may help to clarify instances of maladministration by CommunityUnion institutions or bodies unless such information is covered by laws or regulations on secrecy or by provisions preventing its being communicated. Nonetheless, in the latter case, the Member State concerned may allow the Ombudsman to have this information provided that he undertakes not to divulge it.
2018/10/19
Committee: PETI
Amendment 60 #

2018/2080(INI)


Article 3 – paragraph 7
7. The Ombudsman shallmay then send a report to the European Parliament and to the institution or body concerned. HeThe Ombudsman may make recommendations in his report. The person lodging the complaint shall be informed by the Ombudsman of the outcome of the inquiries, of the opinion expressed by the institution or body concerned and of any recommendations made by the Ombudsman. The Parliament could request the Ombudsman to appear before the plenary when appropriate.
2018/10/19
Committee: PETI
Amendment 65 #

2018/2080(INI)


Article 4a
The Ombudsman and histheir staff shall deal with requests for public access to documents, other than those referred to in Article 4(1), in accordance with the condi in accordance with the conditions and limits provided for in Regulation (EC) No. 1049/2001. With regards to complaints regarding the right of public access to official documents, the Ombudsman shall, following due analysis and all necessary considerations, issue a recommendation concerning the release or else of said documents, to which the concerned institutions, and limitgency or body shall respond within the time frames provided for inby Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001.
2018/10/19
Committee: PETI
Amendment 67 #

2018/2080(INI)


Article 5 paragraph 1
1. In so far as it may help to make his enquiries more efficient and better safeguard the rights and interests of persons who make complaints to him, the Ombudsman may cooperate with authorities of the same type in certain Member States provided they compliesy with the national law applicable. The Ombudsman mayis not by this meansauthorised to demand to see documents to which he would not have access under Article 3.
2018/10/19
Committee: PETI
Amendment 71 #

2018/2080(INI)


Article 5a (new)
5a. The Ombudsman may conduct regular assessments of the whistleblowing policies and procedures in place in the relevant EU institutions, bodies and agencie.s
2018/10/19
Committee: PETI
Amendment 75 #

2018/2080(INI)


Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. The Ombudsman shall be chosen from among persons who are Union citizens, have full civil and political rights, offer every guarantee of independence, and meet the conditions required for the exercise of the highest judicial officepositions in their country orand have the acknowledged competence and experience to undertake the duties of the Ombudsman.
2018/10/19
Committee: PETI
Amendment 77 #

2018/2080(INI)


Article 13
The seat of the Ombudsman shall be that of the seat of the European Parliament.
2018/10/19
Committee: PETI
Amendment 5 #

2018/0336(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014
Article 10 a – paragraph 1
If1. A European political party or a European political foundation shall not influence or attempt to influence the Aouthority becomes aware of a decision ocome of elections to the European Parliament by taking advantage of an infringement, by a natural or legal person, of the applicable rules on the protection of personal data. This paragraph shall only apply if a supervisory authority of a Member State, within the meaning of point 21 of Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council17 finding that a natural or legal person has infringed, has established, by an enforceable decision, that an infringement of the applicable rules on thedata protection of personal data and if it follows from that decision, or where there are otherwise reasonable grounds to believe, that the infringement is linked to political activities by a European political party or a European political foundation in the context of elections to the European Parliament, the Authorhas occurred. 2. When the Authority becomes aware of a conduct covered by the first paragraph, and is notified the enforceable decision of the supervisory authority referred to in that first paragraph, ity shall refer this matter to the committee of independent eminent persons established by Article 11. The committee shall give an opinion without undue delay and no later than 3 months after that notification. The committee shall give an opinion, within a short, reasonable deadline set by the Authority, as to whether or not the European political party or the European political foundation concerned has deliberately influenced or attempted to influence the outcome of eleviolated paragraph 1. Having regard to the committee's opinion, the Authority shall decide, pursuant to Article 27(2)(a), whether to impose financial sanctions ton the European Parliament by taking advantage of that infringement. The Authority shall request the opinion without undue delay and no later than 1 month after the decision of the supervisory authority. The committee shall deliver its opinion within a short, reasonable deadline set by the Authoritpolitical party or European political foundation concerned. The decision of the Authority shall be duly reasoned, in particular with regard to the committee’s opinion, and shall be published expeditiously. _________________ 17 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation), (OJ L 119, 4.5. 2016, p. 1).
2018/11/20
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 12 #

2018/0336(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point a – point vii
(vii) where, in accordance with Article 10a, the committee issues an opinion finding that a European political party or a European political foundation has deliberately influenced or attempted to influence the outcome of elections to the European Parliament by taking advantage of an infringement of the applicable rules on the protection of personal data.;violated Article 10a(1)”
2018/11/20
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 15 #

2018/0336(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014
Article 27 – paragraph 7
7. Where a decision of the national supervisory authority as referred to in Article 10a has been definitively repealed or where a remedy against such decision has been successful and is final, the Authority shall review any sanction imposed pursuant to point (a)(vii) of paragraph 2 at the request of the European political party or European political foundation concerned.
2018/11/20
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 52 #

2018/0082(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The Commission shall ensure that DG AGRI has a functional mailbox available on its website to support small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) both inside and outside of the Union to protect and enforce their rights against unfair trading practices1a, by providing information about the procedures. All relevant information shall be provided in all EU languages. ______________ 1a http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/accessing- markets/trade-defence/actions-against- imports-into-the-eu/
2018/09/03
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 53 #

2018/0082(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. The Commission and the enforcement authorities of the Member States shall apply the terms of this Directive in close cooperation. Further modalities for cooperation amongst the public authorities, including arrangements for information, consultation and allocation of cases of cross-border unfair trading practices, shall be laid down and revised by the Commission, in close cooperation with the Member States.
2018/09/03
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 12 #

2017/2273(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Expresses concern that given many directives’ incongruent translations into the official languages, it is likely that differing language versions cause differing transposition and interpretations of the respective texts in the Member States; deplores, therefore, that such differing transposition and legal interpretations of directives may not be uncovered systematically, but only when being clarified by rulings of the Court of Justice of the European Union;
2018/03/07
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 14 #

2017/2273(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Notes that the Commission’s commitment to be more strategic in enforcing EU law recently led to the closure of infringement cases for political reasons; calls, therefore, on the Commission to explain the considerations behind such decisions in future monitoring reports;
2018/03/07
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 20 #

2017/2273(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Calls on the Commission to effectively monitor the fulfilment of national courts’ responsibility to seek preliminary ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union as stated in Article 267 TFEU; calls, therefore, on the Commission to consider establishing a register containing all national court rulings pertaining to the interpretation of EU law where preliminary ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union has not been sought;
2018/03/07
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 5 #

2017/2222(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas it is worrying that attempts are occasionally made, through the filing of petitions, to use the work of the Committee on Petitions as an extension of national election campaigns;
2017/10/25
Committee: PETI
Amendment 15 #

2017/2222(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F
F. whereas petitions allow Parliament and other EU institutions to assess the transposition and application of EU law and its impact on EU citizens and residentenable the European Parliament to listen to and help to solve problems affecting its citizens, and whereas the impact of EU legislation on the daily life of those living in the EU should be assessed through said petitions;
2017/10/25
Committee: PETI
Amendment 22 #

2017/2222(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital I
I. whereas each petition is carefully assessed and dealt with, and whereas each petitioner has the right to receive a reply from the Committee of Petitions within a reasonable period of timeonsidered fully and examined carefully, efficiently and transparently, and whereas this is done in accordance with the clearly formulated administrative procedure for petitions which was introduced in 2014, which covers the entire life cycle of a petition at the European Parliament and which ultimately ensures that citizens receive an answer in writing within nine months;
2017/10/25
Committee: PETI
Amendment 49 #

2017/2222(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Acknowledges that petitions are an important source of first-hand information, not just about violations and deficiencies in the application of EU law in the Member States, but also about potential loopholes in EU legislation as well as citizens´ suggestions about new legislation that could be adopted, or possible improvements to the legislative texts in force;
2017/10/25
Committee: PETI
Amendment 51 #

2017/2222(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Confirms that the effective treatment of petitions challenges and ultimately enhances the capacity of both, Commission and Parliament, to react to and resolve problems relating to transposition and misapplication; notes that the Commission considers the implementation of EU law a priority, so that citizens can benefit from it in their everyday lives;
2017/10/25
Committee: PETI
Amendment 53 #

2017/2222(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Continues to consider it a particular obligation to ensure that, where petitions are inadmissible or unfounded, no disproportionately long delay occurs before they are declared inadmissible or are closed; Emphasises in this context the requirement that the inadmissibility or closure of petitions on account of being unfounded must be carefully justified vis- à-vis the petitioner;
2017/10/25
Committee: PETI
Amendment 54 #

2017/2222(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Stresses that working groups which have been set up must report on their work in regular intervals and that there is a clearly formulated mandate with limitations in time, which results in intensive processing of the cases to be considered; considers it important that the results of the work of the working group result in prompt completion of work on the petitions concerned;
2017/10/25
Committee: PETI
Amendment 56 #

2017/2222(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that petitions allow Parliament and oAcknowledges the impact of effective application of EU law on strengthening the credibility of ther EU institutions to reconnect with EU citizens who are affected by the application of EU law at different administrative levels; considers enhanced cooperation of EU institutions and other EU bodies; reminds that the right to petition, enshrined in the Lisbon treaty, is an important element of European citizenship and a real barometer for monitoring the application of EU law and identifying possible loopholes; calls on the Committee of Petitions to set up a regular meeting with the national, regional and local author Committees on Petitieons on matterimportant petitions linked to the application of EU law to be a vital means of strengthen order to raise awareness of European citizens´ concerns in the EU and ing the dMemocratic legitimacy and accountability of the Union’s decision-making processber States and strengthen their rights further through better European law making and implementation;
2017/10/25
Committee: PETI
Amendment 67 #

2017/2222(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Asks the Commission to inform the Committee on Petitions regularly on developments with regard to ongoing infringement proceedings, and to guarantee its timely access to relevant Commission documents on infringements, and to EU pilot procedures pertaining to petitions in this regardReferring to the EC annual report on monitoring the application of the EU law 2016, takes serious consideration of the considerable increase by 21% of open infringement cases compared to the previous year; calls on the Commission to follow up on the Parliament’s calls for sharing information on the state of play on ongoing infringement procedures; highlights the important role of petitions for identifying bad implementation or late transposition on European law; reminds the Commission that the Committee on Petition is committed to respond to citizens´ expectations timely and responsibly, while ensuring the democratic scrutiny and proper application of EU law;
2017/10/25
Committee: PETI
Amendment 71 #

2017/2222(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Asks the Commission to provide precise statistics concerning the number of petitions that led to the initiation of an EU Pilot or an infringement procedure; calls therefore on the Commission to send regular reports on cases relating to proceedings and/or procedures under way in order to facilitate structured dialogue and reduce the time frame for settling disputes; calls on the Commission to discuss those reports with the Committee on Petitions, proactively involving the Vice-President responsible for the application of law and simplification;
2017/10/25
Committee: PETI
Amendment 110 #

2017/2222(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Deplores the fact that although Petition 2214/2014 on German war reparations owed to Greece was declared admissible on 7 September 2015, the majority of PETI coordinators in the end decided, on 8 September 2016, to close this petition, alleging that the subject matter falls outside the scope of EU competences;deleted
2017/10/25
Committee: PETI
Amendment 4 #

2017/2206(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls Article 208 TFEU, Agenda 2030 and welcomes the fact that the EU is bound by a rights-based approach to developmenthas contributed to international advancement and recognition of the rights of indigenous people as set out in the UNDRIP ;considers, however, that support to the rights of indigenous people should be better integrated into EU´s development action, and notably in the context of the implementation of the SDG´s; recalls that the European Consensus for Development brings a particular focus on promoting the rights of the most vulnerable groups, including indigenous people;
2018/03/02
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 12 #

2017/2206(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. DeploresNotes with concern the allegations that some ODA projects have negatively affected the rights of indigenous peoples; regrets that the REDD+ programme has failed to secure tenure rights for local forest communities; urges the EU tocalls on the Commission to conduct a proper investigation into these allegations and to make sure that the rights-based approach has been strictly applied and respected in all ODA-related projects, particularly regarding the rights of indigenous people; welcomes the fact that the Paris agreement supports the inclusion of human rights obligationprotection of indigenous people and local communities in all domestic and international mitigation and adaptation instruments;
2018/03/02
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 40 #

2017/2206(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that bilateral investment agreements fail to recognise indigenous peoples’ land rightsmay negatively affect indigenous people’s rights and limit their participation to decision-making; rRecalls that international investment lawagreements hasve to respect international human rights law; calls on development finance institutions to strengthen their human rights safeguard and calls for greater transparency in this regard, notably by setting up adequate consultation procedures and mechanisms in cooperation with indigenous peoples; calls on development finance institutions to strengthen their human rights safeguards to ensure that the exploitation of land and resources in developing countries does not lead to any human rights violations or abuses;
2018/03/02
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 48 #

2017/2206(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Asks the commission to set up an administrative complaint mechanism, which would allow local populations, including indigenous peoples, to report cases of breach of human rights in the implementation of its development policies;
2018/03/02
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 49 #

2017/2206(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Urges partner countries to recognise and protect indigenous´ people’s rights to customary ownership and control of their lands and natural resources as set out in the UNDRIP and ILO Convention 169:calls for the EU to continue to contribute to the prevention of land grabbing by supporting partner countries in applying at national level the principle of free, prior and informed consent to large-scale land acquisitions; as well as the UN Voluntary Guidelines
2018/03/02
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 52 #

2017/2206(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the fact that the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests will becomare binding forcluded in the EU External Investment Plan; insists that they should be binding for and calls on the EU to promote and apply these guidelines across all EUits ODA projects;
2018/03/02
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 56 #

2017/2206(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Welcomes that the European Council made the protection of indigenous people´s rights a priority, as laid out in the Council Conclusions of May 2017;
2018/03/02
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 58 #

2017/2206(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Calls for the EU to take legally binding measures to hold corporations accountable for breacheall necessary measures to make sure that its activities, both in the fields of development and trade, comply with the highest standards of human rights ; in third countries and to provide effective remedy, complaint and sanction mechanisms.s regards, reiterates its supports to the work of the EU in the framework of the negotiations for a UN treaty on human rights and business in order to hold corporations accountable for human rights violations;
2018/03/02
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 66 #

2017/2206(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Insists that the EU has to ensure the coherence and consistence of all its policies when acting in developing countries; further calls on the EU to evaluate systemically the impact of its development, agricultural, trade and energy policies on the livelihoods of the most vulnerable people;
2018/03/02
Committee: DEVE
Amendment 33 #

2017/2054(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas a fixed formula for the distribution of seats should be used in the 2019 European elections;
2017/10/20
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 35 #

2017/2054(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
Eb. whereas a fixed voting deadline for the annual determination of the composition of a future Parliament is useful, and whereas it would be suitable not only for 2019 but also as a future structural deadline for the election period before the third Monday in May1a 1b; __________________ 1A No clashes with Easter until at least the 2074 election and only the following clashes with national public holidays for each election year: 2019: none; 2024: Ascension Day on a Thursday; 2029: Ascension Day on a Thursday; 2034: none; 2039: 4 national public holidays on election day; 2044: 4 national public holidays on election day; 2049: 4 national public holidays on election day; 2054: 3 national public holidays on election day, Ascension Day, Orthodox Sunday; 2059: 3 national public holidays on election day, Ascension Day, Orthodox Sunday; 2064: 3 national public holidays on election day; 2069 & 2074: none 1b Compared with a fixed election date (footnote 1a), there were more clashes with important public holidays in the Member States in the past: 1979: national public holidays in Member States with election day on a Friday; 1984: none; 1989: clash with Whit Sunday; 1994: clashes with 4 national public holidays on Friday and Sunday; 1999: clashes with 4 national public holidays on Thursday and Saturday; 2004: clashes with 5 national public holidays on Thursday, Friday and Saturday; 2009: clashes with 4 national public holidays on Friday; 2014: clashes with 3 national public holidays on Thursday;
2017/10/20
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 54 #

2017/2054(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that, whilst the mathematical formulas display great potential for providing a permanent system for the distribution of seats in the future, the political and legal uncertainty as a result of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU ultimately make it politically unviable for Parliament to suggest a permanent system at this stage; stresses that Brexit is not an obstacle, rather a particularly good opportunity to determine a formula for the distribution of seats which will enable legal certainty and predictability to be ensured;
2017/10/20
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 84 #

2017/2054(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Proposes that this new distribution of seats should be fair, objective and based on the following principles: respect for the principle of degressive proportionality, no loss of seats for any Member State, and the use of only a minimal fraction of the seats vacated by the UK; underlines that Member States may lose seats in future distributions, as a fair distribution of seats must also reflect changes in Member States’ populations;
2017/10/20
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 105 #

2017/2054(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Considers that the proposed distribution based on principles provides a solid foundation for the future establishment of a permanent system and calls for the adoption of such permanent system in thof seats provides a solid starting point for the 2019 election as well as for establishing a mathematical formula as a basis for future allocations of seats; proposes that the number of Members of the European Parliament elected in each Member State as of 2024 shall be based on a fixed mathematical formula under which, first, six seats will be assigned to each Member State, and subsequently the remaining seats will be allocated to the Member States, with a maximum of 90 seats per Member State, on the basis of the d’Hondt method and of the EUROSTAT calculations referred to in Article 2 of the annexed proposal concerning the number of residents in each Member State as at a set date (n-3) before near futurech European election day; proposes that, if this system be chosen well in advance of the elections to the European Parliament in 2024;calculation results in a Member State’s being allocated fewer seats than it had at the previous election, that loss shall be limited to one seat, while at the same time account shall be taken of the criteria laid down in Article 14(2) of the Treaty on European Union.
2017/10/20
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 167 #

2017/2054(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex – Article 4 – paragraph 1
Sufficiently far in advanceThe number of Members of the European Parliament elected in each Member State will, starting from 2024, be determined ofn the beginning of the 2024 – 2029 parliamentary term, the European Parliament shall submit to the European Council, in accordance withasis of a fixed formula. This will result in each Member State firstly being assigned 6 seats. No more than 90 further seats per Member State will then be distributed by means of a D’Hondt distribution of the remaining seats, on the basis of the EUROSTAT calculations referred to in Article 14(2)2 of the Treaty on European Union, a proposal for a permanent method for the allocation of seats between Member States. number of residents in each Member State as at a set date (n-3=2021) before European election day; if this results in a Member State being allocated fewer seats than it had at the previous election, the loss shall be limited to one seat, while at the same time account shall be taken of the criteria laid down in Article 14 (2) of the Treaty on European Union.
2017/10/20
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 168 #

2017/2054(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex – Article 4 – paragraph 1
Sufficiently far in advance of the beginning of the 2024 – 2029 parliamentary term, the European Parliament shall submit to the European Council, in accordance with Article 14(2) of the Treaty on European Union, a proposal for a permanent method for the allocation of seats between Member StatesFrom 2024, the number of Members of the European Parliament elected in each Member State shall be based on a fixed mathematical formula under which, first, six seats will be assigned to each Member State and subsequently the remaining seats will be allocated to the Member States, with a maximum of 90 seats per Member State, on the basis of the d’Hondt method and of the EUROSTAT calculations referred to in Article 2 concerning the number of residents in each Member State at a set date (n-3) before each European election day. If this calculation results in a Member State’s being allocated fewer seats than it had at the previous election, that loss shall be limited to one seat, while at the same time account shall be taken of the criteria laid down in Article 14(2) of the Treaty on European Union.
2017/10/20
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 65 #

2017/2037(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Advocates the consolidation of the involvement of associations representing local authorities and urban interests in policy design, such as the Eurocities network and, the Council of European Municipalities and Regions (CEMR), and considers that such associations should become permanent consultants of EU policies and others as well as their national and regional member organisations, and considers that such associations should become key consultants to the EU Institutions by way of setting up a permanent structured dialogue mechanism, particularly in the pre- legislative stage;
2018/03/26
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 9 #

2016/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas it is primarily in the interest of admissible and well-founded petitions for the work of the Committee on Petitions of the European Parliament not to be burdened with dealing with inadmissible or unfounded petitions for an unduly long period of time;
2016/10/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 10 #

2016/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Db. whereas each petition is considered and examined carefully, efficiently and transparently, and whereas this is done in accordance with the clearly formulated administrative procedure for petitions which was introduced in 2014, which covers the entire life cycle of a petition at the European Parliament and which ultimately ensures that citizens receive an answer in writing within nine months;
2016/10/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 17 #

2016/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas it is worrying that attempts are occasionally made, through the filing of petitions, to use the work of the Committee on Petitions as an extension of national election campaigns;
2016/10/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 18 #

2016/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G
G. whereas the right to petition has to be a key element for a participatory democracy; whereas petitions enable the European Parliament to listen to and help to solve problems affecting its citizens, and whereas the impact of EU legislation on the daily life of those living in the EU should be assessed through said petitions;
2016/10/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 22 #

2016/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H
H. whereas confidence in the system and in the European project as a whole has been dented by recent events in the United Kingdom, the humanitarian refugee crisis, the social and economic impact of the financial crisis, and the rise in xenophobia and racism throughout Europe; whereas the Committee on Petitions has the responsibility and the huge challenge of maintaining dialogue with EU citizens;deleted
2016/10/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 29 #

2016/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital I
I. whereas the Committee on Petitions is best able to show citizens what the European Union does for them and what solutions it can provide at European, national or local level; whereas the Committee on Petitions can do excellent work explaining the successes and benefits of the European project;deleted
2016/10/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 55 #

2016/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital O
O. whereas petitioners actively contribute to the work of the Committee, providing additional information to its members, of the committee and the Commission and representatives of the Member States who may bare present; whereas petitioners, by taking part in these discussions and presenting their petitions along with more detailed information, contribute to establishing a fluid dialogue with Members of the European Parliament and with the European Commission; whereas in 2015, 191 petitioners attended and were involved in the Committee’s deliberations; whereas although this number seems relatively low, the meetings of the Committee on Petitions are broadcast, enabling petitioners to follow live discussions in real time by means of internet streaming;
2016/10/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 60 #

2016/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital P
P. whereas a specific way of handling petitions relating to the welfare of children has been adopted and a special working group created on the issue, and whereas the group was constituted on 17 September 2015, having elected Eleonora Evi as its chair on 17 September 2015;
2016/10/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 62 #

2016/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital P a (new)
Pa. whereas this working group has to report regularly to members of the Committee on Petitions on the work performed and on what has been achieved; whereas the mandate entails clear limitations in time and a specific remit, with the aim of concluding consideration of petitions;
2016/10/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 114 #

2016/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Acknowledges that Parliament also has a crucial political role to play on the Commission's enforcement actions, by scrutinising the annual reports on monitoring the implementation of EU law and adopting relevant parliamentary resolutions; Calls on the EC to take account of the EP resolutions, tabled by the PETI Committee, which identify specific application and implementation gaps of the EU law on the basis of petitions and call on it to act accordingly and report back to the EP on its follow up. Moreover, calls on the Council and the EP to take specific actions in the adoption of the Regulation 2013 /0140 COD on an exemption of Drosophila melanogaster from veterinary checks at EU external border of, as suggested by Nobel Prize laureats (biochemistry professors) in by petition 1358/2011;
2016/10/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 118 #

2016/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the fact that in 2015 the time taken to process petitions fell, maintains nonetheless that the Secretariat of the Committee on Petitions is in need of greater technical resources and personnel in order to guarantee a reduction in the time taken to process petitions; draws attention to the fact that the terms of the administrative reform of 2014 have been complied with, which require petitions that are admissible and that require deliberation to be processed, and the petitioner informed, within nine months of receipt at most;
2016/10/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 122 #

2016/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Continues to consider it a particular obligation to ensure that, where petitions are inadmissible or unfounded, no disproportionately long delay occurs before they are declared inadmissible or are closed; emphasises in this context the requirement that the inadmissibility or closure of petitions on account of being unfounded must be carefully justified vis- à-vis the petitioners;
2016/10/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 129 #

2016/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that, as mentioned by Vice- President Timmermans at his meeting with the Committee on Petitions on 5 May 2015, the Commission is involved with and committed to the petition process and responds as quickly as possible to new petitions forwarded to it by Parliament; points out that Commission replies are usually detailed and pertain to the petitions for which it has jurisdiction; recalls however that on many occasions the Commission does not bring any new information in its replies to petitions for which a review has been requested owing to a change in their status and context; notes that the written responses are monitored, as are explanations given during oral debates held by the Committee on Petitions; notes that when the Commission cannot provide a detailed response to a request from the Committee on Petitions, it is because it has no jurisdiction in the matter; notes the Commission’s commitment in sending generally competent officials to meetings of the Committee on Petitions; regrets that during public debates with petitioners and Members of Parliament the officials sent by the Commission do not provide any new or relevant information that might enable a solution to the issues raised;
2016/10/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 131 #

2016/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Will take greater care in future to ensure that the Commission reports to Parliament regularly on the progress of infringement proceedings which have been brought against individual Member States, in order to facilitate better cooperation and to make it possible to inform the petitioners concerned about progress at an early stage;
2016/10/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 139 #

2016/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Will take greater care in future to avoid giving the impression that petitions which seem to be of importance in connection with an election campaign in a Member State are assigned priority, whether with regard to the speed with which they are considered, with regard to planned fact-finding missions to the Member State in which an election is impending or with regard to deciding the topics to be placed on the agenda of the Committee on Petitions; reminds all concerned within Parliament of their special responsibility not to abuse the powers of the committee, and to avoid giving the impression of this particular form of partiality;
2016/10/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 140 #

2016/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Acknowledges the impact of effective application of EU law on strengthening the credibility of the EU institutions; reminds that the Right to petition, enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty is an important element of European citizenship and a real barometer for monitoring the application of EU law and identifying possible loopholes. Calls on the PETI Committee to set up a regular meeting with the national committees on petitions in order to raise awareness of European citizens' concerns in the EU and in the Members States and strengthen further on their rights of through better European law making and implementation;
2016/10/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 166 #

2016/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Stresses that working groups which have been set up, particularly the Working Group on Child Welfare, must report on their work at regular intervals and that there is a clearly formulated mandate with limitations in time, which results in intensive processing of the cases to be considered; considers it important that the results of the work of the working group result in prompt completion of work on the petitions concerned;
2016/10/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 27 #

2016/0190(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) IParticular attention should be paid to the fact that, in exceptional cases, the authorities of the Member State of habitual residence of the child may not be the most appropriate authorities to deal with the case. In the best interests of the child, as an exception and under certain conditions, the authority having jurisdiction may transfer its jurisdiction in a specific case to an authority of another Member State if this authority is better placed to hear the case. However, in this case the second authority should not be allowed to transfer jurisdiction to a third authority.
2017/03/10
Committee: PETI
Amendment 30 #

2016/0190(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
(23) Proceedings in matters of parental responsibility under this Regulation as well as return proceedings under the 1980 Hague Convention should respect the child’s right to express his or her views freely, and when assessing the child’s best interests, due weight should be given to those views. The hearing of the child in accordance with Article 24(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child plays an important role in the application of this Regulation. This Regulation is howeveremphatically not intended to set out how to hear the child, for instance, whether the child is heard by the judge in person or by a specially trained expert reporting to the court afterwards, or whether the child is heard in the courtroom or in another place.
2017/03/10
Committee: PETI
Amendment 31 #

2016/0190(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
(26) In order to conclude the return proceedings under the 1980 Hague Convention as quickly as possible, Member States should concentrate jurisdiction for those proceedings upon one or more courts, taking into account their internal structures for the administration of justice as appropriate. The concentration of jurisdiction upon a limited number of courts within a Member State is an essential and effective tool for speeding up the handling of child abduction cases in several Member States because the judges hearing a larger number of these cases develop particular expertise. Depending on the structure of the legal system, jurisdiction for child abduction cases could be concentrated in one single court for the whole country or in a limited number of courts, using, for example, the number of appellate courts as point of departure and concentrating jurisdiction for international child abduction cases upon one court of first instance within each district of a court of appeal. Every instance should give its decision no later than six weeks after the application or appeal has been lodged with it. Member States should limit the number of appeals possible against a decision granting or refusing the return of a child under the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention to one. Measures should also be taken to ensure that court judgments handed down in one Member State are recognised in another Member State. When a court judgment has been handed down, it should also be recognised throughout the Union, especially in the interests of children.
2017/03/10
Committee: PETI
Amendment 35 #

2016/0190(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
(28) In all cases concerning children, and in particular in cases of international child abduction, judicial and administrative authorities should consider the possibility of achieving amicable solutions through mediation and other appropriate means, assisted, where appropriate, by existing networks and support structures for mediation in cross-border parental responsibility disputes. Such efforts should not, however, unduly prolong the return proceedings under the 1980 Hague Convention. In addition, the expertise of ombudsmen should be better used and implemented.
2017/03/10
Committee: PETI
Amendment 43 #

2016/0190(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
(46) AIn special cases, an authority of a Member State contemplating a decision on parental responsibility should be absolutely entitled to request the communication of information relevant to the protection of the child from the authorities of another Member State if the best interests of the child so require. Depending on the circumstances, this may include information on proceedings and decisions concerning a parent or siblings of the child, or on the capacity of a parent to care for a child or to have access to the child.
2017/03/10
Committee: PETI
Amendment 44 #

2016/0190(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
(1a) In order to simplify questions of competence, Member States shall designate a court at national level which shall negotiate all cross-border cases involving children.
2017/03/10
Committee: PETI
Amendment 50 #

2016/0190(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) IParticular attention should be paid to the fact that, in exceptional cases, the authorities of the Member State of habitual residence of the child may not be the most appropriate authorities to deal with the case. In the best interests of the child, as an exception and under certain conditions, the authority having jurisdiction may transfer its jurisdiction in a specific case to an authority of another Member State if this authority is better placed to hear the case. However, in this case the second authority should not be allowed to transfer jurisdiction to a third authority .
2017/06/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 53 #

2016/0190(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
(23) Proceedings in matters of parental responsibility under this Regulation as well as return proceedings under the 1980 Hague Convention should respect the child’s right to express his or her views freely, and when assessing the child’s best interests, due weight should be given to those views. The hearing of the child in accordance with Article 24(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child plays an important role in the application of this Regulation. TIt should be stressed that this Regulation is however not intended to set out how to hear the child, for instance, whether the child is heard by the judge in person or by a specially trained expert reporting to the court afterwards, or whether the child is heard in the courtroom or in another place .
2017/06/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 53 #

2016/0190(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Where a person, institution or other body alleging a breach of rights of custody applies to the court in a Member State for a decision on the basis of the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction ( ‘the 1980 Hague Convention’), ordering the return of a child that has been wrongfully removed or retained in a Member State other than the Member State where the child was habitually resident immediately before the wrongful removal or retention, Articles 22 to 26 shall apply. Calls for a support platform for EU citizens who are seeking the return of a child before courts in other Member States. In addition, EU citizens residing in other Member States where they are seeking the return of a child should be assisted by their respective representations.
2017/03/10
Committee: PETI
Amendment 55 #

2016/0190(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23 a (new)
(23a) This Regulation is however not intended to set out how to hear the child, for instance, whether the child is heard by the judge in person or by a specially trained expert reporting to the court afterwards, or whether the child is heard in the courtroom or in another place, but in order to protect the fundamental rights at stake, provision should be made in any case for the hearing of the child to be recorded. The hearing of the child must provide all the guarantees that allow to preserve the emotional integrity and the best interest of the child. Both holders of parental responsibility and their legal advisors must have the opportunity to see the hearing recorded.
2017/06/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 56 #

2016/0190(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
(26) In order to conclude the return proceedings under the 1980 Hague Convention as quickly as possible, Member States should concentrate jurisdiction for those proceedings upon one or more courts, taking into account their internal structures for the administration of justice as appropriate. The concentration of jurisdiction upon a limited number of courts within a Member State is an essential and effective tool for speeding up the handling of child abduction cases in several Member States because the judges hearing a larger number of these cases develop particular expertise. Depending on the structure of the legal system, jurisdiction for child abduction cases could be concentrated in one single court for the whole country or in a limited number of courts, using, for example, the number of appellate courts as point of departure and concentrating jurisdiction for international child abduction cases upon one court of first instance within each district of a court of appeal. Every instance should give its decision no later than six weeks after the application or appeal has been lodged with it. Member States should limit the number of appeals possible against a decision granting or refusing the return of a child under the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention to one. Measures should also be taken to ensure that court judgments handed down in one Member State are recognised in another Member State. When a court judgment has been handed down, it must also be recognised throughout the European Union, especially in the interests of children.
2017/06/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 58 #

2016/0190(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 63 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) They shall inform the holders of parental responsibility about legal aid and assistance, for example about specialised bilingual lawyers, in order to prevent holders of parental responsibility giving their consent without having understood the scope of their consent.
2017/03/10
Committee: PETI
Amendment 60 #

2016/0190(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 1 a (new)
(1a) Social workers and other staff of authorities dealing with the cross-border placement of children in homes or with foster families shall receive training to raise their awareness of the issues involved.
2017/03/10
Committee: PETI
Amendment 61 #

2016/0190(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 1 b (new)
(1b) Member States shall guarantee the parents regular right of access, except where this would jeopardise the well- being of the child.
2017/03/10
Committee: PETI
Amendment 62 #

2016/0190(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
(28) In all cases concerning children, and in particular in cases of international child abduction, judicial and administrative authorities should consider the possibility of achieving amicable solutions through mediation and other appropriate means, assisted, where appropriate, by existing networks and support structures for mediation in cross-border parental responsibility disputes. Such efforts should not, however, unduly prolong the return proceedings under the 1980 Hague Convention. In addition, the expertise of ombudsmen should be better used and implemented.
2017/06/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 62 #

2016/0190(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 4 a (new)
(4a) If the competent authority intends to send social workers to another Member State in order to determine whether a placement or adoption there is compatible with the well-being of the child, it shall inform the Member State concerned accordingly.
2017/03/10
Committee: PETI
Amendment 82 #

2016/0190(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
(46) AIn special cases, an authority of a Member State contemplating a decision on parental responsibility should be absolutely entitled to request the communication of information relevant to the protection of the child from the authorities of another Member State if the best interests of the child so require. Depending on the circumstances, this may include information on proceedings and decisions concerning a parent or siblings of the child, or on the capacity of a parent to care for a child or to have access to the child.
2017/06/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 123 #

2016/0190(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
In so far as the protection of the best interests of the child so requires, the authority having taken the protective measures shall inform the authority of the Member State having jurisdiction under this Regulation as to the substance of the matter, either directly or through the Central Authority designated pursuant to Article 60. This authority must ensure that the parents involved in the proceedings are thoroughly informed without delay about all the measures in question, in a language they understand.
2017/06/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 24 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas without a binding definition of lobbying no binding rules on lobbying can be adopted;
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 29 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that the Commission, Parliament and the Council should record and disclose all input received from lobbyists/interest representatives on draft policies, laws and amendments as a ‘legislative footprint’; suggests that this legislative footprint should consist of a form annexed to reports, detailing all the lobbyists with whom those in charge of a particular file have met in the process of drawing up each report and a second document listing all written input received;deleted
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 80 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that an amendment should introduce mandatory monthlyprompt updates on lobby expenditures;
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 86 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Reiterates its longstanding call to back up the EU lobby register with a legal act to close all loopholes and achieve a fully mandatory register for all lobbyists; considers that the proposal for this legal act could take into account the progress achieved by changes in the inter- institutional agreement and Parliament’s Code of Conduct;(Does not affect the English version.)
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 92 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Reiterates its call to the Council to join the lobby register as soon as possible; considers it regrettable that the Council has still not adopted a code of conduct for its members; considers that all EU institutions should reach agreement on a common code of conduct; insists that the Council must be just as accountable and transparent as the other institutions; (Partially quoted from the opinion of the Committee on Budgetary Control)
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 121 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Asks the Bureau, in accordance with Article 15 TFEU and Article 11 TEU, to restrict access to Parliament’s premises for non-registered organisations or individuals by making all visitors to its premises sign a declaration that they are not lobbyists falling within the scope of the register or otherwise declare their registration;
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 139 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Believes that at least 5 % of declarations should be checked each year on the basis of random sampling;
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 150 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Believes that representations of national, regional and local governments should not fall under the EU lobby register if they have their own mandatory lobby register and do not offer workspace for private or corporate actors within their representations, and their respective umbrella organisations, should not fall under the EU lobby register;
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 165 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Believes that three members of the Advisory Committee chosen from among Members of the European Parliament should be complemented by a majority of externally chosen members who must be qualified experts in the fieldtwo external former Members or former judges from the Court of Justice of ethics regulation and should be drawn from an open call and include members of civil societye EU, likewise chosen by Parliament;
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 188 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Believes that the Rules of Procedure should be amended with regard to Members’ declarations of financial interests to task the Advisory Committee and the supportive administration with factual checks in samples and to empower them to ask for proof where necessary;deleted
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 241 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Believes that the Code of Conduct should be amended to provide for a three- year ‘cooling-off period’ during which Members may not engage in lobbying work in the area of their parliamentary responsibilities;deleted
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 275 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
24. Supports the Ombudsman’s call for entry in the lobby register to be made a requirement forexpected in the case of appointment to expert groups provided that the Members concerned are not government officials and do not receive all or the vast majority of their other income from state institutions such as universities;
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 285 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
25. Considers control by Parliament of the financing of European political parties to be an unnecessary conflict of interest;deleted
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 313 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
29. Considers that Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 should be updated as a matter of urgencyevaluated, as required by the Treaty of Lisbon, by widening its scope to encompass all EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies currently not covered, such as the European Council, the European Central Bank, the European Court of Justice, Europol and Eurojustand that consideration should be given to both the drawing up of a document and its scope with a view to the EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies currently not covered;
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 327 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
31. Believes that Parliament’s right of access, and that of its political groups and Members, to the documents of other EU institutions should never be regarded as weaker than that of individual citizens, under Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 and Article 15 TFEU;
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 337 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
33. Believes, therefore, that preparatory meetings within the Council should be as public as meetings of Parliament’s committees;deleted
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 375 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
37. Deems it unacceptable that Parliament has less, or less open, access to documents in trade negotiations than some members of national parliamentsWelcomes the fact that Parliament now has comprehensive access to documents in relevant negotiations (as in the case of TTIP) and calls for similar access to documents in other negotiations as well (such as the negotiations on the recent climate summit in Paris); welcomes the Commission’s efforts towards greater transparency in this area;
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 379 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
38. Calls onWelcomes the fact that the Commission tois putting into practice all the Ombudsman’s recommendations in favour of more transparency in trade negotiations;
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 384 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
39. Recognises the progress made in the transparency of trade negotiations, but insists that these advances with respect to TTIP must be extended to all trade negotiations referred to in paragraph 37;
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 392 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
40. Believes that, when the Commission engages in trade negotiations, it should publish theits negotiation mandates, and all negotiating positions, all requests and offers and all consolidated draft negotiation texts prior to each negotiation round, sorelevant texts concerning negotiations in which it is involved, provided that the negotiating position is not weakened as a result; considers it desirable that the European Parliament and national parliaments, as well as civil society organisations and the wider public, canshould be able to make recommendations thereon before the negotiations are closed for comments and the agreement goes to ratification;
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 401 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
41. Calls on the Commission to propose an interinstitutional agreement in order to codify those principles for all trade negotiations;
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 412 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
42. Believes that decisions taken or prepared in the Eurogroup, in the Economic and Financial Committee, ‘informal’ Ecofin Council meetings and Euro summits, or in the run-up to negotiations in contexts similar to, say, the recent Paris Climate Conference, must become as transparent and accountable, including through the publication of their minutess possible, without undermining the EU negotiating position, and must also satisfy the requirement of accountability;
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 436 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
45. Believes that the ongoing review of EU election law should include a rule that persons found guilty of corruption against the EU’s financial interests or within Member States may not run for office in the next two terms of the European Parliamentnominations of candidates within parties must be carried out in secret, and with a proper say for the members, and that persons convicted by a final judgment of corruption against the EU’s financial interests or within Member States will forfeit the right to stand for election for a period commensurate with the seriousness of the offence;
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 442 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
46. Believes that persons or companies led or owned by such persons who are found guilty of corruption in the EUconvicted by a final judgment of corruption in the EU or companies led by persons who committed acts of corruption for the benefit of their company and have been convicted by a final judgment on those grounds should, for at least three years, not be allowed to enter into procurement contracts with the European Union or be allowed to profit from EU funds;
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 456 #

2015/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47
47. Calls on the Commission to draw up a framework regulation relating to all EU agencies, under which Parliament will be granted codecision powers in the election or dismissal of directors of such agencies and a direct right to question and hear them;
2016/03/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 51 #

2015/2035(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)
Ka. whereas the procedure for nominating candidates for elections to the European Parliament varies considerably from Member State to Member State and from party to party, in particular as regards transparency and democratic standards;
2015/09/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 65 #

2015/2035(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Recital N
N. whereas although Article 10(2) of the Electoral Act expressly prohibits the early publication of the results of elections, such results have been made public in the past; whereas a harmonised time for the close of polling in all Member States, and at least for the submission of postal votes, would contribute strongly to the common European character of the European elections and would reduce the possibility of their outcome being influenced if election results in some Member States are made public before the close of polling in all Member States;
2015/09/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 93 #

2015/2035(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Recital R
R. whereas postal, electronic and internet voting could make the conduct of European elections more efficient and more appealing for voters, provided that the highest possible standards of data protection are ensured;deleted
2015/09/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 101 #

2015/2035(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Recital T
T. whereas first projections of the electoral results should be announced simultaneously in all Member States on the last day of the election period at 210:00 hours CET;
2015/09/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 104 #

2015/2035(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Recital T a (new)
Ta. whereas the current system for the allocation of seats is not based on the proper application of the principle of degressive proportionality;
2015/09/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 109 #

2015/2035(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Recital T b (new)
Tb. whereas a fixed electoral period for the European elections would increase voter interest; whereas a fixed period which includes as few national holidays as possible would boost turnout;
2015/09/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 127 #

2015/2035(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Proposes that the visibility of European political parties be enhanced by placingmaking it possible for their names and logos to be placed on the ballot papers, and recommends that the same should also appear on posters and other material used in European election campaigns, since those measures would render European elections more transparent and improve the democratic manner in which they are conducted, as citizens will be able to clearly link their vote with the impact it has on the size of a European political group in the European Parliament;
2015/09/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 137 #

2015/2035(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Proposes that procedures for nominating candidates for the European elections must meet minimum standards as regards transparency and intra-party democracy; recommends that national parties should be required to hold democratic elections to choose their candidates for European elections;
2015/09/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 153 #

2015/2035(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Proposes that elections in all Member States end by 210:00 hours CET on the Sunday of the European elections, as this would ensure the correct application of Article 10(2) of the Electoral Act and thus reduce the possibility of the outcome of the elections being influenced if the election results in some Member States are made public before the close of polling in all Member States;
2015/09/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 157 #

2015/2035(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Determines to set a common deadline for the nomination of lead candidates by European political parties 12 weeks in advance of European elections; considers that the process of nomination of lead candidates constitutes an important aspect of electoral campaigns due to the implicit link between the results of European elections and the selection of the Commission President as enshrined in the Treaty of Lisbon;deleted
2015/09/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 177 #

2015/2035(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. As a future step, recommends to Member States that they should consider ways to harmonise the minimum age of voters at 16, in order to further enhance electoral equality among Union citizens;deleted
2015/09/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 185 #

2015/2035(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Encourages Member States to use postal electronic and internet voting in order to make voting easier for people with reduced mobility and for those living abroad;deleted
2015/09/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 199 #

2015/2035(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Determines to give Parliament the right to fix the electoral period for elections to the European Parliament after consulting the Council, and proposes that this period should always end on the second Sunday in May;
2015/09/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 200 #

2015/2035(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Proposes that the current system for allocating seats in the European Parliament should be reviewed with the aim of devising a reliable method of calculating the number of seats to which each Member State is entitled;
2015/09/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 234 #

2015/2035(INL)


Article 3 b (new)
Article 3b Member States shall allow national parties to have information about their membership of European political parties included on the ballot paper.
2015/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 258 #

2015/2035(INL)


Article 10 – paragraph 1
Elections to the European Parliament shall be held on the date and at the times fixed by each Member State; for all Member States this date shall fall within the same period starting on a Thursday morning and ending on the followingin all Member States within the same period starting on a Thursday morning and ending on the following Sunday. The Sunday in question shall always be the second Sunday in May. The election shall end in all Member States at the latest at 20:00 hours CET on that Sunday.
2015/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 263 #

2015/2035(INL)


Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. Member States may not officially make public the results of their count until after the close of polling in the Member State whose electors are the last to vote within the period referred to in paragraph 1. Prior to this no exit poll-based forecasts may be published either.
2015/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 264 #

2015/2035(INL)


Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The counting of postal votes shall begin in all Member States once the polls have closed in the Member State whose voters vote last within the period referred to in paragraph 1.
2015/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 266 #

2015/2035(INL)


Article 11 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Should it prove impossible to hold the elections in the Community during that period, the Council acting unanimously shall, after consulting the European Parliament, determine, at least one year before the end of the five-year term referred to in Article 5, another electoral period which shall not be more than two months before or one month after the period fixed pursuant to the preceding subparagraph.deleted
2015/09/02
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 132 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital I
I. whereas, while Article 16 of the TSCG provides that within five years of the date of entry into force (before 1 January 2018) the necessary steps must have been taken to incorporate the Fiscal Compact into the legal framework of the Union, it is clear that the resilience of the euro area, including the completion of the banking union, cannot be achieved without further fiscal deepening steps together withsteps towards the establishment of a more reliable, effective and democratic form of governance; whereas this will complete the current Stability and Growth Pact, which, ever since it came into existence, even after its reform by the so- called six-pack and two-pack, has never been applied for any obvious political reasons;
2016/11/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 167 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital L
L. whereas the European Union is a constitutional system based on the rule of law; whereas the Treaties musthad to be changed to give the European Court of Justice (ECJ) jurisdiction over all aspects of EU law, in particular common foreign and security policy (Article 24(1) TEU) and monetary and economic policy (Article 126(10) TFEU);
2016/11/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 209 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital P
P. whereas these changes in the Union’s primary law have become unavoidable, as regrettablyare controversial, as none of the ‘passerelle clauses’ provided for in the Lisbon Treaty with a view to facilitating the reform of the Union’s governance have been deployed, and are unlikely to be so in the present circumstances; whereas this is in sharp contrast with the attitude of the European Council in the matter of the envisaged reduction in the number of members of the European Commission, where the ‘let-out’ clause was used instantly;
2016/11/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 232 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital R
R. whereas, finally, the urgency for reform of the Union has been dramatically increased by the United Kingdom’s decision, through a referendum, to leave the European Union has brought in a period of reflection which must urgently be used to sound out acceptance for potential solutions; whereas it is crystal clear that the negotiations to set out the arrangements for the UK’s withdrawal also need to take account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union; whereas this agreement must be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) TFEU and be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament;
2016/11/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 253 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital S
S. whereas the UK’s decision creates an opportunity to reduce and drastically simplify the ‘variable geometry’ and complexity of the Union; whereas it offers at least the opportunity to clarify what membership of the Union really means; and what could beereas a clear structure is necessary in the future for the EU’s relationship with non- members in our periphery (the United Kingdom, Norway, Turkey, Ukraine, etc.); whereas the founding fathers of the Union had already envisaged a type of ‘associate status’;
2016/11/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 261 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that the time of crisis management by means of ad hoc and incremental decisions has passed, as it only leads to measures that are too little, too late; is convinced that it is now time to carry out a period of profound reflection on how to address the shortcomings of the governance of the European Union by undertaking, in which the short and medium term focus must be on solutions which can be realised within the existing Treaties; notes that there is no support at this time for a comprehensive, in-depth reform of the Lisbon Treaty amongst the governments of the Member States;
2016/11/16
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 388 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Proposes that the next revision of the Treaties should rationalise the current disorderly ‘variable geometry’ , i.e. ‘l’Europe à la carte’, by ending the disruptive practice of opt-outs, opt-ins and exceptions;
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 405 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Recommends that , instead of the multiple derogations currently in effect, a type of ‘associate status’ could be proposed to those states in the periphery that only want to participate on the sideline, i.e. in some specific Union policies; this status should be accompanied by obligations corresponding to the associated rights;
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 416 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Notes that this new type of ‘associate status’ could also be one of the possible outcomes to respect the will of the majority of the citizens of the United Kingdom to leave the EU; stresses that this wish must be respected, given that the withdrawal of the United Kingdom, as one of the larger Member States, and as the largest non-euro-area member, affects the strength and the institutional balance of the Union – a new situation that adds to the need for revision of the Treaties;
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 486 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Considers that neither the Stability and Growth Pact norand the ‘no bail-out’ clause (Article 125 TFEU) provide the intended solutions, and that they have furthermore lost credibility in their current form, as the pact has been infringed by several Member States without political or legal consequences, while Greece has been bailed out on a large scale on three occasionsform a stable framework for economic control, but is concerned, as the pact has been infringed by several Member States without political or legal consequences, and considers that, above all because of excessive deficits in several Member States, macroeconomic adjust programmes were necessary;
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 495 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Acknowledges the improvements brought by the European Semester, the six- pack and the two-pack aimed at addressing these issues, but concludes that they have not solved the problems; believes, moreover, that they have contributed to making the system overly complex, are not binding with regard to country-specific recommendations and do not cover spill- over effects between one Member State and another, or to the euro area or the EU as a wholemust be used and consistently implemented;
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 523 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Is acutely aware of the need to review the efficacy of the many recent crisis- management measures taken by the EU, and is considering whether it is necessary to codify in primary law certain decision- making procedures – such as ‘reverse qualified majority voting’ – as well as the need to entrench the legal bases of the new regulatory framework for the financial sector; agrees with the Five Presidents’ Report that the ‘open method of coordination’ as the basis for Europe’s economic strategy does not function and needs to be elevated into binding legal actsneeds to be better coordinated;
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 533 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Proposes therefore merging the deficit and debt procedures, the macroeconomic imbalance procedure and the country-specific recommendations into a single ‘convergence code’ of a legally binding nature, setting minimum and maximum standards , where only compliance with this code would allow access to EU funds for investment projects or participation in new instruments that combine economic reform with fiscal incentives such as a fiscal capacity for the euro area or a common debt instrument; the coordination of economic policies as provided for in Article 5 TFEU would therefore become a ‘shared competence’ between the Union and the Member Statea ‘convergence code’, where only compliance with this code would allow access to EU funds for investment projects or participation in new instruments that combine economic reform with fiscal incentives such as the programme to support structural reforms;
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 547 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Believes that, in order to reduce the still excessively high debt burden of Member States, such a common debt instrument needs to be established, inspired by the proposal by the German Council of Economic Experts of 9 November 2011, whereby euro-area members would undertake joint and several liability for a sinking fund, with strong individual commitments on structural reforms to reduce the debt-to- GDP ratio to the required maximum of 60 %; insists that euro-area members would only be able to participate when they are in compliance with the convergence code, as this will prevent moral hazard;deleted
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 576 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Stresses , however, that conditionality in thisany new debtincentive instrument will only be credible if complemented by an insolvency procedure for sovereigns, which will not only provide predictability to the markets in the event of an insolvent state, but also safeguard market discipline for both Member States and private creditors;
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 590 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Calls for the integration of the Fiscal Compact into the EU legal framework as well asnd notes that the incorporation of the ESM and the Single Resolution Fund into EU law, wiwould only be possible by turning away from the courresponding democratic oversight by Parliamentnt principles of economic control;
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 595 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Is of the opinion that, in order to increase financial stability, mitigate cross- border asymmetric shocks and reduce the effects of recession, the euro area needs a fiscal capacity based on genuine own resources and a proper treasury facility equipped with a capacity to borrow; this treasury must be based in the Commission and be subject to democratic scrutiny and accountability through Parliament and the Council;deleted
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 626 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Points out that, because compliance with the new code is crucial to the functioning of the Economic and Monetary Union, stronger governmental instituobligations and implementations are required than those currently provided by the Commission and/or the Eurogroup;
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 656 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
24. Considers it necessary to endow the Finance MinisterCommission with proportionate powers to intervene in the setting of national economic and fiscal policies in cases where the convergence code is not respected, and the power to use the fiscal capacity or the common bond instrument for those Member States that are compliant with the convergence codeStability and Growth Pact is not respected;
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 673 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
25. Considers it necessary to endow the European Central Bank with the status of lpreserve the independernce of last resort enjoying the full powers of a federal reserve bthe European Central Bank;
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 679 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
26. Calls for the suppression of Article 126(10) TFEU in order that the European Court of Justice gain full jurisdiction over the operation of the EMU, as is appropriate in a democratic system of economic governance based on the rule of law and the principle of equality among Member States;deleted
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 704 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
27. Calls, finally, for the banking union to be completed as soon as possible on the basis of a fast-track timelinegradually completed;
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 724 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
28. Recognises the geopolitical, economic need for a genuine Europeand environmental need for the creation of a genuine European energy union; notes that this will require the removal of the constraint that EU policy must not affect a state’s right toergy union to be created for European citizens, which is based on energy efficiency and renewable sources; notes that this could lead to a gradual elimination of national flexibility regarding the determineation of the conditions for exploiting itsof use of energy sources, wits choice between different energyh a view to achieving the objectives of increasing renewable sources andin the general structure of ita state’s energy supply (Article 194(2), paragraph 2, TFEUE);
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 787 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
32. Is of the opinion, while reiterating that more progress could and should be made under the terms of the Lisbon Treaty, including as regards use of the provisions to act by qualified majority voting, that the Vice-President / High Representative should be named EU Foreign Minister and be supported in her efforts to become the main external representative of the European Union in international fora, not least at the level of the UN; considers it essential that, owing to the broad and heavy workload, the Foreign Minister should be able to appoint political deputies; proposes a review of the functionality of the current European External Action Service;
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 864 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
36. Reiterates its call for the size of the renewed Commission to be reduced substantially and for itsthe number of vice- presidents to be reduced to two: the Finance Minister and the Foreign Minister; suggests that the same reduction be applied to the Court of Auditors;
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 874 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
37. Welcomes the successful new procedure whereby European political parties promote their top candidates for the President of the European executive, but believes that they should be able to stand during the next elections as official candidates in all Member States; proposes, therefore, following its legislative proposal on the reform of the electoral law of the European Union, empowering the electorate by giving them two votes, one for the national or regional lists and a second one for the European party lists; these European lists will be headed by the parties’ nominees to become President of the European executive or government and will be composed of candidates drawn from at least one third of the Member States;
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 914 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
40. Notes that, despite the prohibition in Article 15(1) TEU, the European Council has undertaken various legislative initiatives; proposes abolishing Article 15(1) and integrating the European Council into a Council of States that could engage legitimately in the law- making process and provide direction and coherence to the other specialised Council configurations, and expressly calls for compliance with Article 15(1);
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 937 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
43. Stresses that, following the creation of the role of EU Finance Minister, the Eurogroup should be considered as a specialised configuration of the Council with legislative and control functions but no executive tasks;
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 1013 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
52. Believes, finally, that the current Treaty ratification procedure is too rigid to befit such a supranational polity as the European Union; proposes allowing amendments to the Treaties to come into force if not by an EU-wide referendum then after being ratified by a qualified majority of four-fifths of the Member States, having obtained the consent of Parliament; correspondingly, once this threshold has been met, Member States which still decline to ratify the amended Treaty should decide, in accordance with their own constitutional requirements, whether to start the process of secession or to opt for an associate statuvery lengthy and linked with political uncertainties;
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 1036 #

2014/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
54. Is of the opinion that the 60th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome would be an appropriate moment to modernise the European Union and to start a Convention with the purpose of making the European Union ready for the decades ahead;
2016/11/09
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 32 #

2014/2218(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G
G. whereas each petition is carefully assessed and dealt with, efficiently, promptly and transparently assessed and dealt with in a manner that preserves the participatory rights of the Members of the Committee on Petitions and each petitioner has the right to receive a reply within a reasonable period of time;
2015/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 38 #

2014/2218(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas an efficient and prompt processing of petitions must be guaranteed, including during the transition between legislative terms and the subsequent changes in personnel;
2015/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 39 #

2014/2218(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G b (new)
Gb. whereas it is primarily in the interest of admissible and well-founded petitions for the work of the Committee on Petitions of the European Parliament not to be burdened with dealing with inadmissible or unfounded petitions for an unduly long period of time.
2015/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 40 #

2014/2218(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G c (new)
Gc. whereas there is currently a grey area between the admissibility of a petition and the question of whether it is well-founded, on the one hand, and between keeping a petition open and closing it, on the other hand, not only for the petitioners, but also with regard to what is to be addressed by the European institutions.
2015/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 52 #

2014/2218(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Ja. whereas it is worrying that attempts are occasionally made, through the filing of petitions, to use the work of the Committee on Petitions as an extension of national election campaigns;
2015/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 69 #

2014/2218(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital O
O. whereas the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) is an extraordinary and innovative tool for participatory democracy in the European Union, whose potential must be exploited fully and unreservedly and further enhanced in order to achieve the best results;
2015/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 93 #

2014/2218(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Also considers it a particular obligation to ensure that inadmissible or unfounded petitions are not declared inadmissible or are not closed for an unjustifiably long period of time; emphasises in this context the requirement that the inadmissibility or closure of petitions on account of being unfounded must be carefully justified vis-à-vis the petitioners.
2015/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 94 #

2014/2218(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Calls on the Committee on Petitions and, if necessary, the Parliament committees responsible for amending the Rules of Procedure to more clearly structure the distinction between admissibility and whether a petition is well-founded and between keeping a petition open or closing it, and also to make this structure apparent to potential petitioners.
2015/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 95 #

2014/2218(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses the Commission’s significant role in assisting with cases raised by petitioners, and calls on it to monitor proactively certain projects reported by petitioners in which there is well-founded evidence that EU law may be breached; calls on the Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, to remedy those cases of incorrect transposition of EU law or of failure to transpose EU law reported in a large number of petitions filed with Parliament; also calls on the Commission to be less hesitant to make use of the initiation of infringement proceedings in this regard; emphasises that the impression that greater account is taken of larger Member States when infringement proceedings are initiated must be counteracted; calls on the Commission to keep the Committee on Petitions informed of developments in infringement proceedings directly linked to any one petition;
2015/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 104 #

2014/2218(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
(a) considers it essential that high-ranking officials of the Commission or the responsible commissioner personally participates in the discussions of the Committee on Petitions in important cases.
2015/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 109 #

2014/2218(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Considers it essential that cooperation with the parliaments, their relevant committees, and governments of Member States be strengthened and that Member State authorities be encouraged to be fully transparent in transposing and applying EU law; stresses the importance of collaboration with the Commission and the Member States and welcomes the presence of representatives of some Member States at meetings;
2015/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 114 #

2014/2218(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. In the future, greater attention will be paid to avoiding the impression that petitions that appear to be important in the context of an election campaign in a Member State are treated with preference, whether that be with regard to the speed of processing or with regard to the opportunities in terms of presentation and awareness afforded by the processing; reminds all the stakeholders within Parliament of their particular responsibility to avoid the impression of this particular type of partiality.
2015/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 139 #

2014/2218(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Stresses the wide range of the subjects raised in the petitions filed by citizens, such as fundamental rights, the internal market, environmental law, public health issues, child welfare, transport, the disabled and animal rights;deleted
2015/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 158 #

2014/2218(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Calls for a common approach by the European Parliament, the national parliaments and the lower levels of the Member States, with appropriate appeal bodies, in order to make it transparently clear to citizens which level and which instance can by addressed by their petitions, and shall make every effort with his own policies to explain this matter, in the most comprehensive way possible, to citizens who have selected the objectively incorrect level with a petition to the European Parliament, and to provide those citizens with advice regarding where the petition can be effectively filed.
2015/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 164 #

2014/2218(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Recalls that fact-finding visits are one of the most important investigation tools the Committee on Petitions has, even though there were none during 2014; calls on Greece to take note of the recommendations made in onsiders it essential that, particularly withe report on the fact-finding visit on wastgard to the necessary fact-finding missions, the cfollection and the siting of lowing-up of petitions does not come to a standfstills, in Greece, which was adopted in committee in February 2014;cluding between re-elections and reconstitution of Parliament, and calls on the Ccommission to monitor carefully the use made of funds allocated to waste collection; calls on Member States to comply with the EU directives on recycling waste;ttees of Parliament to make appropriate arrangements.
2015/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 168 #

2014/2218(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Calls on Greece to take note of the recommendations made in the report on the fact-finding visit on waste collection and the siting of landfills in Greece, which was adopted in committee in February 2014; calls on the Commission to monitor carefully the use made of funds allocated to waste collection; calls on the Member States to comply with the EU directives on recycling waste;
2015/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 171 #

2014/2218(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Attaches great importance to the presence and active cooperation of representatives of the Member States during meetings of the Committee on Petitions; welcomes the presence of representatives from the public authorities of the Member State concerned, their participation and their active cooperation, with particular reference to the representatives of certain Member States such as Greece, Italy and Spain; encourages other Member States to follow their example and set an example via the presence of government representatives, where appropriate;
2015/11/09
Committee: PETI
Amendment 12 #

2014/2010(ACI)

Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Considers that in any event, a further evaluation of the Transparency Register should be completed before the end of 2017 at the latest;
2014/02/27
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 14 #

2014/2010(ACI)

Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 7 – indent 1 a (new)
– performance, or any active promotion, of activities in the field of communication with the institutions and their Members or staff which are liable to impair the functionality of the institutions’ communication systems, particularly in cases where such activities are performed anonymously;
2014/02/27
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 25 #

2014/2010(ACI)

Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Notes that, in some Member States, statutory provisions exist on the rules governing the exercise of professions, which in particular objectively prevent lawyers’ firms from having themselves entered in the Transparency Register and in the process revealing the information about their clients which the Register requires; also, however, perceives a substantial risk in the circumstance that these statutory provisions can also be abused to avoid publishing information required for a correct entry in the register; welcomes, in this connection, the perceptible readiness of professional organisations to work in partnership to ensure that, in the interests of the profession, such withholding of information is confined exclusively to what the legislation objectively permits; calls on the Commission and the President of Parliament to secure a practical outcome from this readiness and as soon as possible to enshrine a result in the amended agreement;
2014/02/27
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 1 #

2013/2180(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
(6a) Calls on the Commission to step up its efforts to enforce youth and consumer protection provisions; calls for the same data protection requirements to apply to all media and communication service providers on the territory of the European Union;
2013/12/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 2 #

2013/2180(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
(6b) Takes the view that any exchange of data taking place in the background must be visible to consumers; urges that consumers must be able to alter their privacy settings easily and at any time;
2013/12/02
Committee: JURI
Amendment 3 #

2013/2119(INI)

1a. Points out that petitions submitted by European Union citizens refer to violations of EU law, particularly in the fields of fundamental rights, environment, internal market and property rights; considers that petitions give evidence that there are still frequent and widespread instances of incomplete transposition or of misapplication of EU law;
2013/10/31
Committee: PETI
Amendment 7 #

2013/2119(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Points out that, by discussing petitions, the Committee on Petitions helps to draw attention to the misapplication of EU law; proposes that Member State representatives might be present during these discussions in the committee;
2013/10/31
Committee: PETI
Amendment 9 #

2013/2119(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights the significant number of petitions received on issues related to the economic and social crises and the austerity measures, which risk to undermine the citizens’ social rights and remembers that Europe needs to put the citizens first and work for their well- being;deleted
2013/10/31
Committee: PETI
Amendment 17 #

2013/2119(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines that due to the poor management of a public sector, the burden on the citizens is constantly rising; therefore urges the Commission and Member States to put more efforts in this sphere in order to improve the management of this sector and reduce costs;deleted
2013/10/31
Committee: PETI
Amendment 21 #

2013/2119(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that citizens, businesses and other stakeholders expect a simple and, predictable and reliable regulatory framework; indicates that excessive as well as too few regulation disrupts competitiveness and retards the growth of economy; points, therefore, to the need of a reduction in bureaucracy and administrative burdens and calls on the Commission to identify the pieces of legislation where regulatory costs can be reduced;
2013/10/31
Committee: PETI
Amendment 26 #

2013/2119(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
8. Urges Member States to avoid unnecessary administrative requirements and burdens for enterprises; Member States therefore should clearly identify mandatory provisions of EU law and measures for their implementation proposed by parliaments on the national level, together with clarifications regarding the establishment of additional (not that indicated in the EU law) provisions;deleted
2013/10/31
Committee: PETI
Amendment 32 #

2013/2119(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Welcomes the case law of the European Court of Justice on the interpretation of Article 51 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which emphasises in respect of the Equal Rights Trust that the institutions of the Member States shall be bound by the overriding fundamental rights of the Union even if they wish to use national measures to restrict the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU);
2013/10/31
Committee: PETI
Amendment 35 #

2013/2119(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Welcomes the fact that all the Member States are taking part in EU Pilot; hopes that this will lead to a further reduction in infringement proceedings; calls for more to be done to inform citizens about EU Pilot;
2013/10/31
Committee: PETI
Amendment 37 #

2013/2119(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Calls on the Commission to take stronger action against the late transposition of directives; encourages the Commission to make more use of penalty payments; stresses the importance of linking new legislation to correct implementation in the Member States, in view of the late transposition of EU law in some of the Member States;
2013/10/31
Committee: PETI
Amendment 40 #

2013/2119(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 15
Calls on the Commission to provide public access to information on infringement cases through a user-friendly database, providing comprehensive information on the infringements related to specific EU legislative acts or to a Member State;deleted
2013/10/31
Committee: PETI
Amendment 16 #

2013/2031(REG)


Rule 6 – paragraph 1
1. In the exercise of its powers in respect of privileges and immunities, Parliament shall seek primarily to uphold its integrity as a democratic legislative assembly and to secure the independence of its Members in the performance of their duties. Parliament may not waive the immunity provided for in Article 8 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union.
2013/06/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 16 #

2013/2031(REG)


Rule 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Parliamentary immunity is not a Member’s personal privilege, but a guarantee of the independence of Parliament as a whole and its Members.
2013/10/24
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 18 #

2013/2031(REG)


Rule 6 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Acting on its own initiative or at the request of the Member concerned, Parliament may, at any stage of the procedure, review a decision to waive or defend immunity if the circumstances giving rise to an earlier decision have materially altered or if, given the course of the procedure to date, such action seems warranted.
2013/10/24
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 19 #

2013/2031(REG)


Rule 6 a (new)
Rule 6a Defence of privileges and immunity 1. In cases where the privileges and immunities of a Member or former Member are alleged to have been breached by the authorities of a Member State, a request for a Parliament decision as to whether there has, in fact, been a breach of those privileges and immunities may be made in accordance with Rule 7(-1). 2. In particular, such a request for the defence of privileges and immunities may be made if it is considered that the circumstances constitute an administrative or other restriction imposed on the free movement of Members travelling to or from the place of meeting of Parliament or on an opinion expressed or a vote cast in the performance of the mandate or that they fall within aspects of Article 9 of the Protocol on Privileges and Immunities of the European Union. 3. A request for the defence of the privileges and immunities of a Member shall not be admissible if a request for the waiver or defence of that Member’s immunity has already been received in respect of the same legal proceedings, whether or not a decision has been taken at that time. 4. No further consideration shall be given to a request for the defence of the privileges and immunities of a Member if a request for the waiver of that Member’s immunity is received in respect of the same legal proceedings. 5. In cases where a decision has been taken not to defend the privileges and immunities of a Member, the Member may make a request to reconsider the decision, submitting new evidence. The request for reconsideration shall be inadmissible if proceedings have been instituted against the decision under Article 263 TFEU, or if the President considers that the new evidence submitted is not sufficiently substantiated to warrant reconsideration.
2013/10/24
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 20 #

2013/2031(REG)


Rule 7 – paragraph -1 (new)
-1. A competent authority of a Member State may address a request to the President to waive a Member’s immunity; a Member or a former Member may address a request to the President to defend privileges and immunities. Such requests shall be announced in Parliament and referred to the committee responsible.
2013/10/24
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 21 #

2013/2031(REG)


Rule 7 – paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. The committee shall lay down principles for the application of this Rule.
2013/10/24
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 22 #

2013/2031(REG)


Rule 6 a (new)
Defence of immunity 1. In cases where the privileges and immunities of a Member or former Member are alleged to have been breached by the authorities of a Member State, a request may be made for a Parliament decision as to whether there has, in fact, been a breach of those privileges and immunities. That decision shall invite the authority concerned to draw the necessary conclusions. 2. In particular, a request for the defence of immunity or privileges may be made if it is considered that the circumstances constitute an administrative or other restriction imposed on the free movement of Members travelling to or from the place of meeting of Parliament or an opinion expressed or a vote cast in the performance of the mandate or fall within aspects of Article 9 of the Protocol on Privileges and Immunities. 3. Acting on its own authority or at the request of the Member concerned, Parliament may, at any stage of the procedure, review a decision to waive or defend immunity if the circumstances giving rise to an earlier decision have materially altered or if, given the course of the procedure to date, such action seems warranted.
2013/06/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 1 #

2013/2013(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas, subject to Protocol 30 of the Treaty, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has already acquired legally binding force through the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon1 ; whereas the right of citizens to submit petitions to the European Parliament has already been enshrined in the Treaty since the entry into force of the Maastricht Treaty on 1 November 1993; whereas Parliament objects to the restrictive interpretation of the scope of application of the Charter put forth by the European Commission; whereas the same Treaty also establishes the legal basis for the EU to accede to the European Convention on Human Rights, as well as the European Citizens’ Initiative;
2013/07/12
Committee: PETI
Amendment 9 #

2013/2013(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas in 2012, 577 petitions were submitted which did not come within the EU’s field of activities; Or. de (See amendment 6)
2013/07/12
Committee: PETI
Amendment 52 #

2013/2013(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital O a (new)
Oa. whereas individuals and local communities, as well as voluntary organisations and businesses, are well placed to assess the effectiveness of European legislation as it applies to them, and to signal possible loopholes that need to be analysed in order to ensure better, more uniform and comparable implementation of EU law in all the Member States;
2013/07/12
Committee: PETI
Amendment 53 #

2013/2013(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital O b (new)
Ob. whereas the Judgment of 14 September 2011 in Case T-308/07 made it clear that procedural decisions by Parliament in petition cases are also subject to judicial review;
2013/07/12
Committee: PETI
Amendment 54 #

2013/2013(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital O c (new)
Oc. whereas the efficiency of the Committee’s work is largely the result of swiftness and thoroughness, and this could be improved further, in particular by optimising the time taken to process petitions and by systematising the procedure for their assessment;
2013/07/12
Committee: PETI
Amendment 65 #

2013/2013(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers that an interactive guide placed on the Internet by the European Parliament, by analogy with what the European Ombudsman has placed on the Internet, could reduce the number of petitions submitted which do not fall within the field of activity of the EU;
2013/07/12
Committee: PETI
Amendment 66 #

2013/2013(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Confirms the key role of the Committee on Petitions in identifying non-judicial remedies for citizens, thus providing a reality check on the way in which the European Union is seen by the people of Europe, enabling conclusions to be drawn regarding whether European legislation actually delivers the expected results and responds to what people expect of the Union;
2013/07/12
Committee: PETI
Amendment 67 #

2013/2013(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Calls on the Committee on Petitions to examine the effects of the Equal Rights Trust case law on the admissibility of petitions and to investigate the question of what actual obstacles exist for citizens of the Union in obtaining a reliable interpretation of central issues under European legislation in cases before the national courts by applying for a preliminary ruling from the European Court of Justice;
2013/07/12
Committee: PETI
Amendment 68 #

2013/2013(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. As part of the efforts to improve the work of the Committee, calls for a procedure involving fact-finding missions that on the one hand ensures the right of all members of a fact-finding mission to present the facts from their point of view, while also guaranteeing all Committee members the opportunity to participate in the decision-making process in regard to the conclusions to be drawn by the Committee on Petitions;
2013/07/12
Committee: PETI
Amendment 69 #

2013/2013(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 e (new)
2e. Emphasises the need for continuity in processing petitions, despite the changes in legislative periods and the resulting changes in personnel;
2013/07/12
Committee: PETI
Amendment 70 #

2013/2013(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 f (new)
2f. Is determined to make the petition procedure more efficient, transparent, and impartial, while preserving the participatory rights of the Members of the Committee on Petitions, so that the handling of petitions will stand up to judicial review even at a procedural level;
2013/07/12
Committee: PETI
Amendment 84 #

2013/2013(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Takes the view that procedures must be developed for urgent petitions whereby fact-finding missions can also be carried out in the long ‘white’ period with no parliamentary business during the European elections and also – if the nature of the petition suggests it – during the ‘white’ period in summer (e.g. Damüls, where the summer months were the only possible time for a fact-finding mission);
2013/07/12
Committee: PETI
Amendment 20 #

2012/2309(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Undertakes to submit sufficiently far in advance of the beginning of the 2019- 2024 parliamentary term, before the end of 2015, a new proposal for a decision of the European Council with the aim of establishing, sufficiently far in advance of the beginning of the 2019-2024 parliamentary term, a system which in future, before each election to the European Parliament, will allow, whenever necessary, a reallocation of the seats the seats to be allocated amongst the Member States in an objective manner, based on the principle of degressive proportionality as set forth in Article 1 of the decision, taking account of any increase in their number and demographic trends in their population as duly ascertained, and without excluding the possibility of reserving a number of seats to members elected on transnational lists;
2013/02/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 21 #

2012/2309(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Undertakes to submit sufficiently far in advance of the beginning of the 2019-2024 parliamentary termby the end of 2015 a new proposal for a decision of the European Council with the aim of establishing sufficiently far in advance of the beginning of the 2019-2024 parliamentary term a system which in future, before each election to the European Parliament, will allow, whenever necessary, a re allocation of the seats amongst the Member States in an objective manner, based on the principle of degressive proportionality as set forth in Article 1 of the decision, taking account of any increase in their number and demographic trends in their population as duly ascertained, and without excluding the possibility of reserving a number of seats to members elected on transnational lists;
2013/02/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 58 #

2012/2309(INI)

Proposal for a Decision establishing the composition of the European Parliament
Article 4
This Decision shall be revised by the end of 2015 with the aim of establishing sufficiently far in advance of the beginning of the 2019- 2024 parliamentary term with the aim of establishing a system which in future will make it possible, before each fresh election to the European Parliament, to reallocate the seats between the Member States in an objective manner, based on the principle of degressive proportionality set forth in Article 1, taking account of any increase in their number and demographic trends in their population as duly ascertained.
2013/02/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 59 #

2012/2309(INI)

Proposal for a decision establishing the composition of the European Parliament
Article 4
This Decision shall be revised before the end of 2015 with the aim of establishing, sufficiently far in advance of the beginning of the 2019-2024 parliamentary term with the aim of establishing, a system which in future will make it possible, before each fresh election to the European Parliament, to reallocate the seats between the Member States in an objective manner, based on the principle of degressive proportionality set forth in Article 1, taking account of any increase in their number and demographic trends in their population as duly ascertained.
2013/02/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 9 #

2012/2308(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph A
A. whereas certain petitions have been deposited requesting that the establishment of the European Parliament in more than one place of work be discontinued;
2013/06/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 19 #

2012/2308(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital -A (new)
-A. whereas arrangements affecting Parliament’s right of organisational self- determination are among the foremost concerns for a parliamentary system;
2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 52 #

2012/2308(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital M
M. whereas the additional annual costs resulting from the geographic dispersion of Parliament have conservatively been estimated to range between EUR 169 million and EUR 204 million4, which is equivalent to between 15% and 20% of Parliament’s annual budget, while the environmental impact is also significant, with the CO2 emissions associated with the transfers to and from the three working locations estimated to amount to at least 19 000 tonnes5; __________________ 4 Discharge 2010: EU general budget, European Parliament (Liberadzki Report) (A7-0120/2012), texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0155. 5 ‘European Parliament two-seat operation: Environmental costs, transport & energy’, report prepared by Eco-Logica Ltd. for the Greens/EFA, November 2007.deleted
2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 85 #

2012/2308(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Notes that in addition to the subjects dealt with in this report, there are other essential matters directly related to Parliament’s status and its function within the EU institutional machinery and – on those points – convincing solutions have yet to be found; notes that these unresolved questions include electoral law, rules for a no-protest zone, immunity matters, and points related to the Statute for Members and that they should either be encompassed within Parliament’s right of organisational self-determination, exercised in the form of a general decision-making power, or, at the very least, be brought within the scope of the ordinary legislative procedure based on codecision;
2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 88 #

2012/2308(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Agrees with the principle that the European Parliament would be more effective, cost-efficient and respectful of the environment if it were located in a single place; and notes that the continuation of the monthly migration between Brussels and Strasbourg has become a symbolic negative issue amongst most EU citizens which is detrimental to Parliament’s reputationIs aware that most EU citizens take a critical view of the European Parliament's monthly migration between places of work;
2013/06/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 110 #

2012/2308(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Respects the historic reasons for the location of its plenary sessions in Strasbourg and the Treaty requirements that necessitate the two-seat systemsystem of a single seat but three places of work; nevertheless insists that such an arrangement cannot continue in perpetuity and that Parliament itself must be able to state a preference for its future;
2013/06/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 1 #

2012/2132(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Reminds the Commission of its commitment to the smart regulation agenda, and the importance of making timely and pertinent ex-post controls of EU legislation in order to manage the quality of regulation throughout the policy cycle; notes in this respect that, under Article 33 of the Directive, the Commission was under an obligation to submit the report on the application of the Directive no later than 19 December 2011; notes that the report was not submitted until 4 May 2012; encourages the Commission to assure proper and timely implementation of directives in the Member States
2013/01/04
Committee: JURI
Amendment 2 #

2012/2132(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the fact that the Commission has finally presented a proposal for a directive on collective management of copyright; calls on the Commission and the Council to work together with Parliament to find a balanced solution regarding the rules applicable to collecting societies in the audiovisual sector, paying due attention to a high level of transparency, good governance and the question of music embedded in films and other audiovisual works; in this regard, calls on the Commission to ensure that the requisiappropriate adjustments are made to the Audiovisual Media Services Directive in order to guarantee that both Directives work well togethensure consistency between both Directives while respecting the rights of the property holder;
2013/01/04
Committee: JURI
Amendment 3 #

2012/2132(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission, in its next report on the application of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive, to assess whether the Member States have implemented the Directive in such a way as to preserve the necessary balance between, on the one hand,otect right holders' property while also safeguarding the principle of freedom of access to information, especially with regard to events of high interest to society and, on the other, protecting right holders' property;
2013/01/04
Committee: JURI
Amendment 5 #

2012/2132(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the personal commitment made by Commissioner Barnier in relation to the ongoing negotiations on a Treaty on copyright limitations and exceptions for visually impaired persons and persons with print disabilities; calls on the Commission to ensure that aids for persons with impaired vision are widegenerally available for accessing audiovisual products and services; believes that Article 7 of the Directive should therefore be reworded in order to include stronger, binding language, requiring media service providers to ensure that their services are made available to people with disabilities;
2013/01/04
Committee: JURI
Amendment 2 #

2012/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 13 a (new)
- having regard to the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty on improving inter- parliamentary cooperation (Article 12 TEU, Subsidiarity Protocol, Protocol on the role of national Parliaments),
2013/09/13
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 40 #

2012/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Takes the view, regarding policies implemented in the context of flexible integration, that vertical cooperation by the European Parliament with national Parliaments of the vanguard group and with national Parliaments of the group of countries not initially forming part of the vanguard, as well as horizontal cooperation between these two groups and between individual committees and Members, must be encouraged and enhanced; stresses, however, that this cannot be a substitute for the formal involvement of the European Parliament in all policies pursued by means of flexible integration;
2013/09/13
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 41 #

2012/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Takes the view that it is the responsibility of parliaments at the various levels to create opportunities for exchange and coordination, so as to ensure that there is democratic control even when treaties are concluded at inter- governmental level;
2013/09/13
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 70 #

2012/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Takes the view that improving inter- parliamentary cooperation in the context of flexible integration policies can further enhance democratic legitimacy, but that this is no substitute for a formal strengthening of the European Parliament;
2013/09/13
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 87 #

2012/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
25. Recalls that the democratic legitimacy and accountability of the EMU cannot be guaranteed by interparliamentary cooperation, and must, rather,must be ensured at the level at which decisions are taken and implemented, which means at the EU and EMU level by the European Parliament and at Member State level by the national parliaments, though inter- parliamentary cooperation is also an important complementary factor;
2013/09/13
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 88 #

2012/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25 a. Considers it necessary, over and above inter-parliamentary cooperation, for networking to take place between administrations at working level in order to improve knowledge of procedures and their state of play at European level and to improve existing information channels;
2013/09/13
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 5 #

2012/2020(REG)

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 15 – paragraph 1
The Vice-Presidents shall then be elected on a single ballot paper. To be valid, the ballot paper must show that more than half the available votes have been used. Those who on the first ballot, up to the number of 14, secure an absolute majority of the votes cast shall be declared elected in order of the number of votes obtained. If the number of candidates elected is less than the number of seats to be filled, a second ballot shall be held under the same conditions to fill the remaining seats. Should a third ballot be necessary, a relative majority shall suffice for election to the remaining seats. In the event of a tie the oldest candidates shall be declared elected.
2012/11/15
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 74 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
(2) ‘political alliance’ means structured cooperation between political parties and/or natural persons from different Member States,
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 77 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
3 a) ‘member party’ means a political party or political alliance belonging to a European political party.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 78 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 b (new)
3 b) ‘individual members’ means natural persons belonging directly to a European political party, where the statutes of the party permit this.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 81 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
(5) ‘regional Parliament’ or ‘regional assembly’ means a body whose members either hold a regional electoral mandate or are politically accountable toof a territorial entity established at the level immediately below that of the state and elected assemblyndowed with legislative powers,
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 87 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(a a) it must not pursue profit goals.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 88 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) it must be represented, in at least one quarter of the Member States, by Members of the European Parliament or in the national Parliaments, regional Parliaments or regional assemblies, or it must have received, in at least one quarter of the Member States, at least three per cent of the votes cast in each of those Member States at the most recent elections to the European Parliament,deleted
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 101 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) it must have participated in elections to the European Parliament, or have expressed publicly the intention tomember parties of the political alliance must be represented in at least one third of the Member States and must have participated in the nexpast elections to the European Parliament, the national parliament or a regional parliament.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 102 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) it must not pursue profit goals.deleted
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 103 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(e a) In determining the number referred to in subparagraph (b) only member parties which meet the criteria under Article 4 shall be taken into account.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 118 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point j
(j) the dissolution of the entity as a recognised European political party.deleted
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 121 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the admission, resignation and exclusion of the party'smember parties and individual members, with the list of members annexed to it,
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 127 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the rights and duties associated with all types of membership, including the rules guaranteeing the representation rights of all members, be they natural or legal persons, and the relevant voting rights,
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 128 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) the functioning of a general assembly, at which the representation of all members must be ensured,comprising delegates from the member parties, in proportion to those parties’ size, elected by those parties in a secret ballot. Where the statutes permit individual membership, suitable arrangements must be made for the representation of individual members;
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 130 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) the democratic election ofpowers and democratic decision- making processes ofor all other governing bodies, specifying for each its powers, responsibilities and composition, and including the modalities for the appointment and dismissal of its members and clear and transparent criteria for the selection of candidates and the election of office-holders, whose mandate must be limited in time but may be renewable, and their composition;
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 133 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
(d a) the arrangements for the appointment of members of all other governing bodies in a secret ballot for a period not exceeding two years, and for their re-election and removal;
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 134 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) the party'sother internal decision-making processes, in particular the voting procedures and quorum requirements,rules of the European political party concerning decision-making, elections, quorum requirements and amendments to the statutes;
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 138 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point g
(g) the procedure for amending the statutes.deleted
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 141 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)
(g a) the procedure for dissolution of the entity as a recognised European political party, including the necessary implementing methods.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 145 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point g
(g) a list of the foundation's bodies, specifying for each its powers, responsibilities and composition, and including the modalities for the appointment and dismissal of its members and managersthe powers and democratic decision- making procedures of the foundation’s bodies and their composition,
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 146 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point g a (new)
(ga) the rules on the appointment of members of the foundation’s bodies by secret ballot, their re-election and their dismissal;
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 147 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point g b (new)
(gb) the other internal rules of the European political foundation on taking decisions, elections, quorums required and amendment of their statutes;
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 148 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point j
(j) the procedure for amending the statutes,deleted
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 160 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5
5. Within three months following the reception of the application for registration, the European Parliament, acting in accordance with its Rules of Procedure, shall adopt a decision, which it shall publish in the Official Journal of the European Union, together with the party or foundation statutes or, where an application has not been approved, the grounds for rejection.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 175 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. The European Parliament shall verify annually that the conditions and requirements set out in Articles 3, 4 and 5 continue to be met by the European political parties and the European political foundations. Where relevant, the timing of the annual verification referred to in this paragraph shall be aligned with the application procedure for funding set out in Article 13, in order for the Registry and the Authorising Officer to coordinate and exchange information as necessary.deleted
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 188 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Whenever requested to do so by one quarter ofIf the European Parliament, the European Commission or the Council its members, representing at least three political groups in the European Parliament, the European Parliament shall decide by a majority of its members whether the condition in Article 3(1)(c) for a European political party and in Arof the opinion that a registered European political party or European political foundation no longer fulfils the requirements and conditions laid down in Article 3(1)(c) and Article 3(2)(h), any of those institutions may decide to refer the matter to the Court of Justicle 3(2)(c) for a European political foundation continues to be metof the European Union, which, after performing a verification, shall decide on removal from the Registry.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 204 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. In all other cases governed by Articles 3, 4 and 5, the Administration of the European Parliament shall verify annually that the formal requirements and conditions continue to be met by the European political parties and European political foundations. Before any decision is taken, the European political party shall be given the opportunity to be heard. The decision may be reviewed by the Court of Justice of the European Union upon application by the European political party. Where relevant, the timing of the annual verification referred to in this paragraph shall be aligned with the application procedure for funding set out in Article 13, in order for the Registry and the Authorising Officer to coordinate and exchange information as necessary.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 224 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) its governingcompetent body decides to wind up the European political party or the European political foundation,
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 227 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) its governingcompetent body decides to convert the European political party or the European political foundation into a legal entity recognised in the legal order of a Member State,
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 228 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) a European political party no longer meets the requirements in Article 3(1)(b) following changes to its membership or following elections to the European Parliament,deleted
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 232 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) it is removed from the Registry pursuant to the provisions in Article 22(1) or (4) or in accordance with Article 7(5).
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 244 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. A European political party or a European political foundation in one of the cases provided for under paragraph 1 points (a), (b) or (c) shall have any ongoing decision on Union funding received under this Regulation withdrawn or any ongoing agreement on such funding terminatedshall lapse when legal status is withdrawn, and any unspent Union funding shall be recovered, including any unspent Union funds from previous years.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 250 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. A European political party registered in accordance with the conditions and procedures laid down in this Regulation, which is represented in the European Parliament by at least one of its members, and which is not in one of the situations of exclusion referred to in Article [93] of the Financial Regulation may apply for funding from the general budget of the European Union, in accordance with the terms and conditions published by the European Parliament in a call for [contributions].
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 254 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3
3. For the purposes of determining eligibility for funding from the general budget of the European Union in accordance with paragraph 1 and Article 3(1)(b), and for the application of the provisions in Article 14(1), a Member of the European Parliament shall be considered as a member of only one European political party, which shall, where relevant, be the one to which his or her national or regional political party is affiliated on the final date for the submission of applications.deleted
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 259 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – indent 1
– 15 % shall be distributed in equal shares,deleted
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 260 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – indent 1a (new)
– 10% shall be distributed in proportion to the number of votes cast for them as a percentage of the total votes cast in the most recent European elections for European political parties which reached the threshold of at least 1% of the votes cast.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 261 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – indent 1b (new)
– 10% shall be distributed equally among the European parties concerned which are represented by at least one Member in the European Parliament.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 262 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – indent 1c (new)
– 80% shall be distributed in proportion to their share of elected members of the European Parliament among the beneficiary European political parties.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 263 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – indent 2
– 85% shall be distributed in proportion to their share of delected members of the European Parliament among the beneficiary European political parties.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 264 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The same distribution key shall be used to award funding to European political foundations, on the basis of their affiliation with a European political party.deleted
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 265 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
TIn implementing the distribution referred to in paragraph 1 shall be based, only the number ofose elected members in the European Parliament who are members of the applicant European political party on the final shall be taken into account who have been nominated, by secret ballot, by a governing body of the party in which the party’s members are represented, as candidates for the submission of applications, taking into account the provisions of Article 12(3)election to the European Parliament. The date of the application shall be taken as the criterion for this purpose.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 266 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
After this date, any changes to the number shall not affect the respective share of funding between European political parties or European political foundations. This is without prejudice to the requirement in Article 12(1) for the European political party to be represented in the European Parliament by at least one of its members in the current application period.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 267 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
For the purpose of allocating the appropriations, a Member of the European Parliament may be designated as belonging to only one European political party, which shall, where relevant, be the party to which his national or regional party is affiliated on the final date for the submission of applications.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 268 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The same distribution key shall be used to award funding to European political foundations, on the basis of their affiliation with a European political party.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 287 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 7
7. Contributions to a European political party from its members shall be admissible. These contributions shall not exceed 40 % of the annual budget of that European political party.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 289 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The funding of European political parties from the general budget of the European Union or from any other source may be used to finance campaigns conducted by the European political parties in the context of the elections to the European Parliament, in which they participate as required in Article 3(1)(d)accordance with Article 8 of the Act concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage, stipulating that the funding and limitation of election expenses for all parties and candidates at elections to the European Parliament is governed in each Member State by national provisions.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 291 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
In accordance with Article 8 of the Act concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament19 by direct universal suffrage, the funding and limitation of election expenses for all parties and candidates at elections to the European Parliament is governed in each Member State by national provisions.deleted
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 299 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. The funding of European political parties from the general budget of the European Union or from any other source shall not be used for the direct or indirect funding of national, regional or local elections or other political parties, and in particular national political parties or candidates.deleted
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 301 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2
2. The funding of European political foundations from the general budget of the European Union or from any other source shall not be used for any other purpose than for financing their tasks as defined in Article 2 point (4) and to meet expenditure directly linked to the objectives set out in their statutes according to Article 5. It shall in particular not be used for the direct or indirect funding of European, national, regional or local elections or referendums, political parties, candidates or foundations.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 302 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 3
3. The funding of European political parties and European political foundations from the general budget of the European Union or from any other source shall not be used to finance national, regional or local referenda campaigns.deleted
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 310 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Where, under the terms of this regulation, funds are withdrawn from European political parties in accordance with the Financial Regulation or fines imposed, the amounts in question shall, in accordance with Article 14, be entered additionally under appropriations for the current year.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 320 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
All technical support from the European Parliament to European political parties shall be based on the principle of equal treatment. It shall be granted on conditions no less favourable than those granted to other external organisations and associations that may be accorded similar facilities and shall be supplied against invoice and payment.deleted
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 323 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1a (new)
All technical support from the European Parliament to European political parties shall be based on the principle of equal treatment. It shall be granted on conditions no less favourable than those granted to other external organisations and associations that may be accorded similar facilities and shall be supplied against invoice and payment.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 324 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1b (new)
The European Parliament shall adopt implementing provisions laying down the conditions under which political groups may, together with the European political parties which they represent in the European Parliament, organise events which could be regarded as indirect support, particularly if they are held on European Parliament premises.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 325 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 c (new)
In accordance with Article 24, the European Parliament shall publish details of the technical support provided to each European political party in an annual report, within three months following the end of the financial year.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 326 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2
In accordance with Article 24, the European Parliament shall publish details of the technical support provided to each European political party in an annual report, within three months following the end of the financial year.deleted
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 342 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3
3. When setting the amount of a fine imposed on a European political party or a European political foundation pursuant to paragraph 2, the European Parliament shall take into account the gravity, duration and, where relevant, recurrence of the infringement, the time that has elapsed, the intention or degree of negligence, and any measures taken to comply with the conditions and requirements of this Regulation, while ensuring that the amount of the fine is at least twice the value of the advantage obtained. Any fine must be effective and dissuasive, and may not exceed 10% of the annual budget of the European political party or the European political foundation in question corresponding to the year in which the sanction is imposed. Under certain circumstances, the fine may be paid in appropriate instalments.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 352 #

2012/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. Before taking a final decision related to any of the penalties in Article 22, the European Parliamen is taken, it shall give the European political party or the European political foundation concerned the opportunity to present its observations and, where relevant and appropriate, to introduce the measures required to remedy the situation within a reasonable time period.
2013/01/18
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 2 #

2011/2317(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital -A (new)
A. whereas the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has acquired legally binding force through the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon;
2012/05/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 4 #

2011/2317(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas the right of citizens to petition the European Parliament has already been enshrined in the Treaty since the entry into force of the Maastricht Treaty on 1 November 1993;
2012/05/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 6 #

2011/2317(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas – subject to Protocol 30 of the Treaty – the Charter of Fundamental Rights has become legally binding since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty on 1 December 2009; whereas the Lisbon Treaty also establishes the legal basis for the EU to accede to the European Convention on Human Rights, as well as the European Citizens’ Initiative;
2012/05/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 11 #

2011/2317(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas the Committee on Petitions has the duty to constantly review and, where possible, to enhance its role, notably with regard to the development of democratic principles, and whereas in its regular activity the Committee works closely with the Commission acting as the ‘Guardian of the Treaty’ which defines the Commission’s role and prevents it from intervening in matters not covered by EU legislation;
2012/05/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 13 #

2011/2317(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Da. welcomes the case law of the European Court of Justice on the interpretation of Article 51 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which emphasises in respect of the Equal Rights Trust that the institutions of the Member States shall be bound by the overriding fundamental rights of the Union even if they wish to use national measures to restrict the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU);
2012/05/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 16 #

2011/2317(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E
E. whereas European citizens and residents have legitimate expectations that the issues they raise with the Committee on Petitions may find a solution within the legal framework of the European Union, which they look upon to uphold their rights as citizens of the Union, in particular to defend their natural environment, health, freedom of movement, dignity and fundamental rights;
2012/05/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 25 #

2011/2317(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G
G. considering that individuals and local communities, as well as voluntary associations and businesses, are well placed to assess the effectiveness of European legislation as it applies to them, and to signal possible loopholes that need to be analysed in order to ensure better, more uniform and comparable implementation of EU law in all the Member States;
2012/05/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 45 #

2011/2317(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Q. whereas the judgment of the EU Tribunal of 14 September 2011 in case T- 308/07 upheld the petitioner’s (0095/2007) complaint against the Committee’s decision to declare his petition inadmissible and in so doing laid down clear parameters for dealing with petitions which are declared inadmissiblemade it clear that procedural decisions by Parliament in relation to petitions are also subject to legal review;
2012/05/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 46 #

2011/2317(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q a (new)
Qa. whereas the efficiency of the Committee’s work is largely characterised by swiftness and thoroughness and could be further improved in particular by optimising the time taken to process petitions and by systematising the procedure for their assessment;
2012/05/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 50 #

2011/2317(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Confirms the key role of the Committee on Petitions in identifying non-judicial remedies for citizens, inby providing a reality check on the way in which the European Union is seen by the people of Europe, and as a reflection of citizens’ viewsenabling conclusions to be drawn regarding whether European legislation actually delivers the expected result and responds to what people expect of the Union;
2012/05/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 57 #

2011/2317(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Believes, therefore, that this role and responsibility should lead Parliament to consider ways of revitalising this fundamental part of parliamentary work both in terms of its visibility and in terms of improving its ability to raise issues of importance to European citizens in plenary, as well as by reinforcing its competence to call witnesses and investigate more independently issues raised by citizens; welcomes the increased opportunities available to Parliament to take a more independent approach in relation to issues raised by citizens through the instrument of the committees of inquiry;
2012/05/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 65 #

2011/2317(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point a (new)
(a) Calls on the Committee on Petitions to examine the effects of the Equal Rights Trust case law on the reliability of petitions and to investigate the question of what actual obstacles exist for citizens of the Union in obtaining a reliable interpretation of central issues under European legislation in cases before the national courts by applying for a preliminary ruling from the European Court of Justice;
2012/05/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 96 #

2011/2317(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Urges the Spanish Government to revise the Ley de Costas in such a way as to guarantee title to those who have properly and in good faith acquired property within the reach of the jurisdiction of the Ley de Costas; in particular, calls for a reform of the Ley de Costas which ensures due process, a right of appeal with interim legal protection, a right of appeal, access to the preliminary ruling procedure of the European Court of Justice, proper compensation, and the right to information and which protects against retroactive or discriminatory actions;
2012/05/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 104 #

2011/2317(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point a (new)
(a) Is determined to make the petition procedure more efficient, transparent, and impartial, while preserving the participatory rights of the Members of the Committee on Petitions, so that the handling of petitions will stand up to judicial review even at a procedural level;
2012/05/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 105 #

2011/2317(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point b (new)
(b) Emphasises the need for continuity in processing petitions, despite changes in legislative periods and the resulting changes in personnel;
2012/05/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 106 #

2011/2317(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point c (new)
(c) Regards the participation of Members of Parliament in fact-finding missions not just as a participatory parliamentary right, but also as an obligation in relation to petitioners;
2012/05/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 107 #

2011/2317(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point d (new)
(d) As part of the efforts to improve the work of the Committee, calls for a procedure involving fact-finding missions that on the one hand ensures the right of all members of a fact-finding mission to present the facts from their point of view, while also guaranteeing all Committee Members the opportunity to participate in the decision-making process in regard to the conclusions to be drawn by the Committee on Petitions;
2012/05/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 108 #

2011/2317(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point e (new)
(e) Emphasises that the Committee on Petitions, along with other institutions and bodies, such as the committees of inquiry, the European Citizens’ Initiative and the European Ombudsman, play an independent and clearly defined role as points of contact for each individual citizen;
2012/05/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 109 #

2011/2317(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point f (new)
(f) Calls on the Conference of Presidents to examine the extent to which an amendment to the Rules of Procedure would seem appropriate for the implementation of these formal requirements in relation to the petitioning procedure;
2012/05/24
Committee: PETI
Amendment 4 #

2011/2257(REG)

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 196
Rules 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 36 to 44, 148, 149(2) and (10), 152, 154, 156 to 159, 161, 163(1), 164, 165, 168, to 169, 171 to 174, 177 and 178 shall apply mutatis mutandis to committee meetings.
2012/02/29
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 15 #

2011/2182(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas the Lisbon Treaty enhanced the concept of EU citizenship and the rights derived therefrom; whereas the formulation of those rights is also driven by case law;
2012/01/20
Committee: PETI
Amendment 18 #

2011/2182(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Ba. welcoming the case law of the European Court of Justice as regards the interpretation of Article 51 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which emphasises in the ERT ruling that the institutions of the Member States are also bound by the overriding fundamental rights of the Union if they wish to use national measures to restrict the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU);
2012/01/20
Committee: PETI
Amendment 45 #

2011/2182(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital K
K. whereas discrimination on the grounds of nationality was vigorously denounced by petitioners in the case of the German Youth Welfare Office (Jugendamt), which - according to the petitions received –petitioners accuse the German Youth Welfare Office (Jugendamt) of discriminatesing against the non-German spouse in mixed marriages;.
2012/01/20
Committee: PETI
Amendment 15 #

2011/0154(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Title 1
Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and on the right to communicate upon arrestdoes not affect the English version
2011/11/17
Committee: JURI
Amendment 16 #

2011/0154(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Title 1
Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and on the right to communicate uponin the event of arrest
2011/11/17
Committee: JURI
Amendment 21 #

2011/0154(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2a Definitions For the purpose of this Directive: (a) "child" means a person below the age of 18 years; (b) "lawyer" means a person who is entitled under national legislation to assist in all stages of criminal proceedings.
2011/11/17
Committee: JURI
Amendment 22 #

2011/0154(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. This Directive applies from the timin cases where a person is made aware by the competent authorities of a Member State, by official notification or otherwise, that he is suspected or accused of having committed a criminal offence until the conclusion of the proceedings, which is understood to mean the final determination of the question whether the suspected or accused person has committed the offence, including, where applicable, sentencing and the resolution of any appeal.
2011/11/17
Committee: JURI
Amendment 23 #

2011/0154(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2a Content of the right of access to a lawyer 1. The suspect or accused person shall have the right at all stages of the proceedings to request to meet with the lawyer representing him. 2. The lawyer shall have the right to be present at any questioning and hearing. He shall have the right to ask questions, request clarification and make statements, which shall be recorded in accordance with national law. 3. The lawyer shall have the right to be present at any other investigative or evidence-gathering act at which the suspect or accused person’s presence is required or permitted as a right, in accordance with national law, unless this would prejudice the acquisition of evidence. 4. The lawyer shall have the right to check the conditions in which the suspect or accused person is detained and to this end shall have access to the place where the person is detained. 5. The duration and frequency of meetings between the suspect or accused person and his lawyer shall not be limited in any way that may prejudice the exercise of his rights of defence.
2011/11/17
Committee: JURI
Amendment 24 #

2011/0154(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall ensureIf and to the extent that suspects andor accused persons are grantedquest access to a lawyer, Member States shall ensure that they can have such access as soon as possible and in any event:
2011/11/17
Committee: JURI
Amendment 27 #

2011/0154(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4
Content of the right of access to a lawyer 1. The suspect or accused person shall have the right to meet with the lawyer representing him. 2. The lawyer shall have the right to be present at any questioning and hearing. He shall have the right to ask questions, request clarification and make statements, which shall be recorded in accordance with national law. 3. The lawyer shall have the right to be present at any other investigative or evidence-gathering act at which the suspect or accused person’s presence is required or permitted as a right, in accordance with national law, unless this would prejudice the acquisition of evidence. 4. The lawyer shall have the right to check the conditions in which the suspect or accused person is detained and to this end shall have access to the place where the person is detained. 5. The duration and frequency of meetings between the suspect or accused person and his lawyer shall not be limited in any way that may prejudice the exercise of his rights of defence.deleted
2011/11/17
Committee: JURI
Amendment 35 #

2011/0154(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 a (new)
Article 6a Information 1. Member States shall ensure that suspects and accused persons are informed, without delay and in an understandable form, about their right of access to a lawyer and the fact that the right continues to apply at all subsequent stages of the proceedings even if they did not exercise it at an earlier stage. Without prejudice to national law that requires the mandatory presence or assistance of a lawyer, any waiver of the right to a lawyer referred to in this Directive shall be subject to the following conditions: a) the suspect or accused person has received prior legal advice on the consequences of the waiver or has otherwise obtained full knowledge of these consequences; b) he has the necessary capacity to understand these consequences; and c) the waiver is given voluntarily and unequivocally. 2. A record shall be kept, in accordance with the law of the Member State concerned, of the suspect’s or accused person’s having been informed about the right of access to a lawyer. The waiver and the circumstances in which it was given shall be recorded in accordance with the law of the Member State concerned. 3. Member States shall ensure that a waiver can be subsequently revoked at any stage of the proceedings.
2011/11/17
Committee: JURI
Amendment 37 #

2011/0154(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Member States shall not derogate from any of the provisions of this Directive save, in exceptional circumstances, from Article 3, Article 4 paragraphs 1 to 3, and Articles 5 and Article 6to 7. Any such derogation:
2011/11/17
Committee: JURI
Amendment 38 #

2011/0154(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a
a) shall be justified by compelling reasons pertaining to the urgent need to avert serious adverse consequences for the life or physical integrity of a person;
2011/11/17
Committee: JURI
Amendment 39 #

2011/0154(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Without prejudice to national law that requires the mandatory presence or assistance of a lawyer, any waiver of the right to a lawyer referred to in this Directive shall be subject to the following conditions: a) the suspect or accused person has received prior legal advice on the consequences of the waiver or has otherwise obtained full knowledge of these consequences; b) he has the necessary capacity to understand these consequences and c) the waiver is given voluntarily and unequivocally.deleted
2011/11/17
Committee: JURI
Amendment 43 #

2011/0154(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by [24 months after publication of this Directive in the Official Journalits entry into force] at the latest.
2011/11/17
Committee: JURI
Amendment 44 #

2011/0154(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1
This Directive shall enter into force onat the twentieth daybeginning of the second month following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
2011/11/17
Committee: JURI
Amendment 85 #

2011/0136(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Directive concerns certain uses of orphan works undertaken by publicly accessible libraries, educational establishments or museums as well as by archives, film heritage institutions, publishers of the works listed in point 1 of paragraph 2 and public service broadcasting organizations.
2011/10/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 87 #

2011/0136(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. This Directive applies to worksthe use by the establishments referred to in paragraph 1 of works from their own archives which were first published or broadcast in a Member State and which are:
2011/10/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 95 #

2011/0136(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point 3
(3) Cinematographic, audio or audiovisual works produced by public service broadcasting organisations before the 31 December 2002 and contained in their archives.
2011/10/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 103 #

2011/0136(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2
2. Where a work has more than one rightholder, and at least one of the rightholders has not been identified andor located, that work shall not be considered an orphan work. The rights of known or identified rightholders shall not be affected.
2011/10/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 117 #

2011/0136(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. A diligent search is required to be carried out only ion the territory of the Member State of first publication or broadcast. If there is evidence to suggest that rightholders from the territory of other Member States were involved in the creation of the work, the diligent search shall be deemed to have been concluded only if it also encompassed the territories of those Member States.
2011/10/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 128 #

2011/0136(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5
If a work considered to be orphan has only one rightholder, Member States shall ensure that athat rightholder in a work considered to be orphan has, at any time, the possibility of putting an end to the orphan status. has, at any time, the possibility of putting an end to the orphan status; if a work considered to be orphan has more than one rightholder, its status as an orphan work may be brought to an end only if all the rightholders have been identified and located, in accordance with the provisions of Article 2(2).
2011/10/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 141 #

2011/0136(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. If, in the case of an orphan work, one or more rightholders has been identified but not located, the name(s) of the rightholder(s) shall be indicated every time a work is used.
2011/10/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 11 #

2010/2291(ACI)

Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 6 – point b
(b) the scope of the register, which covers all relevant actors but excludes, among others, – particularly in paragraphs 11, 12 and 13 – social partners as actors in the social dialogue, as well as churches, political parties and local, regional and municipal authorities;
2011/04/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 25 #

2010/2291(ACI)

Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Underlines that the representations and other bodies maintained by the actors listed in paragraphs 11, 12 and 13 must be given preferential treatment when implementing paragraphs 13 to 27 of the agreement, with particular regard to paragraph 17;
2011/04/01
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 54 #

2010/0215(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. For the purposes of this directive, the term ‘child’ shall mean any person under the age of 18.
2011/01/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 57 #

2010/0215(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that any person who is suspected or accused of having committed a criminal offence is provided promptly with information on his procedural rights in simple and accessible language, either orally or in writing.
2011/01/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 60 #

2010/0215(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. The information referred to in paragraph 1 shall include as a minimum: – the right of access to a lawyer, where necessaryto interpreting and translation, – the right of access to legal assistance and the conditions for access to legal assistance free of charge, – the right to be informed of the charge and, where appropriate,, – the right to be given access to the case- file, – the right to interpretation and translation and to the evidence, including evidence held by the authorities, insofar as this does not compromise investigations, – the right to remain silent, – the right to request the collection of evidence, – the right to be brought promptly before a court if the suspected or accused person is arrested.
2011/01/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 82 #

2010/0215(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
In addition to the information to be given under Article 3(2), the person deprived of liberty shall be informed of the following: a) for how many hours/days he or she may be deprived of liberty before being brought before a judicial authority; b) how to challenge the arrest and how to secure a review of his or her detention; c) the maximum period he or she may legally be held in pre-trial detention.
2011/01/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 91 #

2010/0215(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that a suspected or accused person is provided with sufficient information about the charge to safeguard the fairness of the criminal proceedingseffectively exercise his or her right of defence.
2011/01/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 94 #

2010/0215(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. The information required pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be delivered promptly and in detail and in a language that the suspected or accused person understands. In the case of a child or a person with a mental disability, information about the chargesaccusation shall be provided in a manner adapppropriated to his age, level of maturity and intellectual and emotional capacbilities.
2011/01/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 96 #

2010/0215(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. The information to be given shall include: (a), at least, a description of the circumstances in which the offence was committed, including the time, place and degree of participation in the offence by the suspected or accused person and (b) the nature and legal classification of the offence.
2011/01/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 4 #

2009/2212(INI)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2a (new)
Detailed arrangements shall be laid down in Parliament’s Rules of Procedure.
2011/09/15
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 5 #

2009/2212(INI)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) its composition based on a balanced representation of political forces, in accordance with Parliament’s Rules of Procedure;
2011/09/15
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 6 #

2009/2212(INI)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) the time-limit for submission of its report, which shall not exceed [twelve] months from the date on which it first meets, without prejudice to extensions of time under paragraph 4.
2011/09/15
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 7 #

2009/2212(INI)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) the time-limit for submission of its report, which shall not exceed [twelve] months, without prejudice to exten and may, by reasoned decisions of time under paragraph 4Parliament, [twice] be extended by no more than [three] months.
2011/09/15
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 8 #

2009/2212(INI)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Parliament’s Rules of Procedure shall, for all future committees of inquiry in a given parliamentary term, lay down in advance the procedure whereby the various political groups shall have the right to propose the committee chair.
2011/09/15
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 9 #

2009/2212(INI)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 4
4. The European Parliament may by reasoned decision [twice] extend the period for submission of the report of the committee of inquiry by [three] months.deleted
2011/09/15
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 10 #

2009/2212(INI)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – point c
(c) in any event, at the close of the parliamentary term. when the newly elected Parliament first meets.
2011/09/15
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 11 #

2009/2212(INI)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3a Renewed inquiries A temporary committee of inquiry may not be set up or re-established with regard to matters into which an inquiry has already been held by a temporary committee of inquiry until at least twelve months have elapsed since the submission of the report on that inquiry or the end of its assignment and unless any new facts have emerged. A committee may be set up in any case where new and serious facts have emerged that may be deemed likely to alter substantive findings.
2011/09/15
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 12 #

2009/2212(INI)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
2. Exceptionally, proceedings shall take place in camera if this is requested by [one quarter] of the members of the committee of inquiry, by an institution or a body of the Union or by national authorities concerned. Witnesses and experts shall have the right to make a statement or provide testimonymay, if they so request, be heard in camera.
2011/09/15
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 13 #

2009/2212(INI)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. After the inquiry has been closed, the final report of the committee of inquiry shall be submitted to the European Parliament, which may take any appropriate actionshall adopt or reject it without amendment.
2011/09/15
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 14 #

2009/2212(INI)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. If it adopts the report, Parliament may decide to take appropriate action.
2011/09/15
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 15 #

2009/2212(INI)

1b. The committee’s final report may include minority conclusions as an official part of the text, provided such conclusions are supported by at least one quarter of the committee’s members.
2011/09/15
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 26 #

2009/2212(INI)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The President of the European Parliament may announce such refusals or failures in plenary and shall, in full or in part, the points of which formal note was taken and arrange for them announcement to be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.
2011/09/15
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 27 #

2009/2212(INI)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Those sanctions shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive and shall reflect the sanctions for corresponding infringements in relation to the work of committees of inquiry in the national parliaments.
2011/09/15
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 28 #

2009/2212(INI)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. Any natural or legal person other than institutions and bodies of the Union and the Member States may submit a reasoned written complaint against a decision of the committee of inquiry, taken in application of Section 3, which is addressed to that person or of direct and individual concern to him or her. The complaint shall specify the alleged violation of Union or national lawlaw or of the national law applicable to the complainant.
2011/09/15
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 29 #

2009/2212(INI)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 3
3. The European Parliament shall take a reasoned decision on the complaint at the first part-session following the expiry of a period of [10 working days] from receipt of the complaint. IThe decision may include a stipulation that the complaint shall not have suspensory effect. Parliament shall notify the complainant of that decision within [10 working days] and shall inform the complainant of the remedies open to him or her, namely instituting court proceedings against the European Parliament and/or making a complaint to the European Ombudsman, under the conditions laid down in Articles 263 and 228 respectively of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
2011/09/15
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 30 #

2009/2212(INI)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 a (new)
Article 19a Costs The travel and accommodation expenses of members and officials of the Union institutions and bodies shall be borne by those institutions and bodies. Travel and accommodation expenses of other persons who appear before a committee of inquiry shall be reimbursed by the European Parliament in accordance with the rules governing hearings of experts.
2011/09/15
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 8 #

2009/2134(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital S
S. Parliament’s electoral procedure must, like the procedure for the nomination of candidates by parties at national level, uphold the practice of free, fair and secret elections, achieve overall proportionality of representation, and be durable and comprehensible,
2011/11/10
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 27 #

2009/2134(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point (ii)
(ii) Proposes to enter into a dialogue with the European Council to explore the possibility of reaching agreement on a durable and transparent mathematical formula for the apportionment of seon the allocation of the Member States’ seats in the European Parliament; It should be founded on the following main principles: - There shall be 751 seats allocated to constituencies established in the Member States. Representation of citizens shall be degressively proportional, with a minimum threshold of six members per Member State. No Member State shall be allocated more than 96 seats. - The distribution of those seats among the States shall be reviewed regularly in accordance with a formula based on the Union population of the States. The population statistics as at the end of the third calendar year before each European election submitted by the Member States and by the Statistical Office of the European Union (Eurostat) will be examined jointly by the Council and the European Parliament by the end of the second calendar year at the latest, using objective criteria, and established by the Council, acting unanimously after Parliament has given its consent, as the basis for the calculations. - In the event of accessions, new Member States in Parliament respecting the criteria laid down in the Treaties and the principles of plurality between political parties and solidarity among States; will, until the regular elections of the whole European Parliament following their accession, be assigned a number of seats over and above the ceiling of 750 Members corresponding to the number which would have been obtained from a complete calculation which included the new Member States at the time of the previous European elections. The population figure to be used for this purpose will be that which obtained at the end of the third calendar year before accession. - For the purposes of distributing seats between Member States in accordance with the principle of degressive proportionality pursuant to Article 14(2a) of the Treaty on European Union, the seats allocated to each Member State shall be distributed on the basis of the Union population of the States in accordance with the procedure described below. (a) Each Member State will first be assigned 6 seats. (b) The remaining seats, up to the ceiling of 751, will be assigned to the individual Member States on the basis of their population statistics using the d’Hondt system. Member States which have attained a maximum of 96 seats in total will no longer be taken into account in the further allocation. (c) In order to avoid unfair hardship when the number of seats for Member States is amended in accordance with the principles set out above, seats in future European elections can be allocated so that Member States with a population of less than 5% of the total EU population lose no more than one seat as compared with their total at the previous election when European Parliament elections take place.
2011/11/10
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 30 #

2009/2134(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Determines to bring forward the timing of the European elections from June to May; insists that the date of the 2014 European elections be fixed by 31.03.2012 at the latest;
2011/11/10
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 36 #

2009/2134(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Considers that, in view of Article 17(7) of the Lisbon Treaty and the fact that the European public knows more about Members of the European Commission than they used to, the candidature and eligibility of Commissioners-in-office and members of other bodies in Article 7 of the ‘Act concerning the election of the Members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage’ annexed to the Council decision of 20 September 1976 (amended version) should be regulated in such a way that no short-term and short- lasting personnel reshuffles are carried out in the time context of a European Parliament election and institutional appointments;
2011/11/10
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 39 #

2009/2134(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital M
M. across the 27 States the minimum age for eligibility to stand as a candidate now varies between 18 and 25, and for eligibility to vote between 16 and 18; it is important to encourage young people to participate in elections,(Does not affect English version.)
2011/03/14
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 41 #

2009/2134(INI)


Article 7 – paragraph 1 – indent 2 a (new)
- member of a national or regional parliament with legislative powers,
2011/11/10
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 43 #

2009/2134(INI)


Article 9
During the sessions1. Any restriction of a Member’s personal freedom shall be permitted only with the consent of the European Parliament, its Members shall enjoy: (a) in the territory of their own Stexcept where he/she is caught in the act of committing an offence. 1a. The spirit of paragraph 1 applies to any legal action that seeks to bring a Member’s mandate, the immunities accorded to members of their parliament; (b) in the territory of any other Member State, immunity from any measure of detention and from legal proceedings. Immunity shall likewise apply to Members while they are travelling to and from the place of o an end. 2. The seizure of a Member’s documents or electronic records or the searching of his/her person, office or place of residence or interception of his/her mail or telephone calls may be ordered only with the consent of the European Parliament. 3. A Member shall be entitled to decline to give evidence about information which that Member has obtained in the exercise of his/her mandate or about persons from or to whom he/she has obtained or given such information. 4. Investigations or criminal proceedings against a Member shall be suspended at the request of the European Parliament; insofar as the opening of such proceedings in accordance with a Member State’s domeesting of the European Parliament. Immunity cannot be claimed when a Member is found in the act of committing an offence and shall not prevent the European Parliament from exercising its right to waive the immunity of one of its Memberc provisions require the waiver of immunity, the European Parliament shall be responsible for waiving the immunity, deciding on the basis of a request from the competent national authorities. 5. Consent pursuant to paragraph 2 may be applied for only by the authorities competent under national law. 6. Consent pursuant to paragraph 2, or suspension pursuant to paragraph 4, may be granted conditionally, for a limited period or on a restricted basis.
2011/11/10
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 52 #

2009/2134(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital T
T. Parliament's electoral procedure must 1 Declaration of 3 June 2005 by Representatives of the Member States meeting within the Council. 2 Declaration of 3 June 2005 by Representa, as does the procedure for the nomination of candidates by partives of the Member States meeting within the Council. at national level, uphold the practice of free, fair and secret elections, achieve overall proportionality of representation, and be durable and comprehensible,
2011/03/14
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 84 #

2009/2134(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Repeats its proposal to bring forward the timing of the election from June to May; calls on the Council, after consulting Parliament, to determine the date of the 2014 European elections by 31.12.2011 at the latest;
2011/03/14
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 86 #

2009/2134(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Urges States and political parties to promote the better representation of women and ethnic minority candidates at both the EU and the national level;deleted
2011/03/14
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 93 #

2009/2134(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Considers that, in view of Article 17(7) of the Lisbon Treaty and the fact that the European public knows more about Members of the European Commission than they used to, the candidature and eligibility of Commissioners-in-office and members of other bodies in Article 7 of the ‘Act concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage’ of 20 September 1976 should be regulated in such a way that no short-term and short-lasting personnel reshuffles are carried out in the time context of a European Parliament election and institutional appointments;
2011/03/14
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 98 #

2009/2134(INI)


Rule 14 – paragraph 2
2. The European Parliament shall be composed of representatives of the Union's citizens. 2a. Theyre shall not exceedbe seven hundred and fifty in number, plus the Presidentone seats allocated to constituencies established in the Member States. Representation of citizens shall be degressively proportional, with a minimum threshold of six members per Member State. No Member State shall be allocated more than ninety-six seats. The European Council shall adopt by unanimity, on the initiative of the European Parliament and with its consent, a decision establishing the composidistribution of those seats among the States shall be reviewed regularly in accordance with a formula based on the Union population of the States. The population statistics as at the end of the third calendar year before each European election submitted by the Member States and by the Statistical Office of the European Union (Eurostat) will be examined jointly by the Council and the European Parliament by the end of the second calendar year at the latest, using objective criteria, and established by the Council, acting unanimously after Parliament has given its consent, as the basis for the calculations. In the event of accessions, new Member States will, until the regular elections of the whole European Parliament, respecting the principles referred to in the first subparagraph. following their accession, be assigned a number of seats over and above the ceiling of 750 Members corresponding to the number which would have been obtained from a complete calculation which included the new Member States at the time of the previous European elections. The population figure to be used for this purpose will be that which obtained at the end of the third calendar year before accession. 2b. In addition, there shall be twenty-five seats allocated to a single constituency comprising the entire territory of the Union.
2011/03/14
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 108 #

2009/2134(INI)


Article 9
During the sessions of the European Parliament, its Members shall enjoy: (a) in the territory of their own State, the immunities accorded to members of their parliament; (b) in the territory of any other Member State, immunity from any measure of detention and from legal proceedings. Immunity shall likewise apply to Members while they are travelling to and from the place of meeting of the European Parliament. Immunity cannot be claimed when a Member is found in the act of committing an offence and shall not prevent the European Parliament from exercising its right to1. Any restriction of a Member’s personal freedom shall be permitted only with the consent of the European Parliament, except where he/she is caught in the act of committing an offence. 1 a) The same applies to any legal action that seeks to bring a Member's mandate to an end. 2. The seizure of a Member’s documents or electronic records or the searching of his/her person, office or place of residence or interception of his/her mail and telephone calls may be ordered only with the consent of the European Parliament. 3. A Member shall be entitled to decline to give evidence about information which that Member has obtained in the exercise of his/her mandate or about persons from or to whom he/she has obtained or given such information. 4. Investigations or criminal proceedings against a Member shall be suspended at the request of the European Parliament; insofar as the opening of such proceedings in accordance with a Member State's provisions against members of its parliament require the waiver of immunity, the European Parliament shall be responsible for waiveing the immunity of one of its Members, deciding on the basis of a request from the competent national authorities. 5. Consent pursuant to paragraph 2 may be applied for only by the authorities competent under national law.
2011/03/14
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 116 #

2009/2134(INI)


Article 2 a (new)
Article 2a 1. For the purposes of distributing seats between Member States in accordance with the principle of degressive proportionality pursuant to Article 14(2a) of the Treaty on European Union, the seats allocated to each Member State shall be distributed on the basis of the Union population of the States in accordance with the procedure described below. 2. Each Member State will first be assigned 6 seats. 3. The remaining seats, up to the ceiling of 750, will be assigned to the individual Member States on the basis of their population statistics using the 'd'Hondt system'. Member States which have attained a maximum of 96 seats in total will no longer be taken into account in the further allocation.
2011/03/14
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 121 #

2009/2134(INI)


Article 3
1. Member States may set a minimum threshold for the allocation of seats distributed in national and/or regional constituencies. At national level this threshold may not exceed 5 per cent of votes cast. 2. The European Parliament shall be responsible for setting the minimum threshold in the constituency described in Article 2b(1).
2011/03/14
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 124 #

2009/2134(INI)


Article 4
Each Member State may set a ceiling for candidates' campaign expensethe campaign expenses of candidates and political parties at the national and/or regional level. The electoral authority shall set a ceiling for the campaign expenses of candidates and political parties at the European Union level. The provisions of Article 3(1a) shall apply mutatis mutandis.
2011/03/14
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 126 #

2009/2134(INI)


Article 7 – paragraph 1 – indent 1 a (new)
– member of a national or regional parliament with legislative powers,
2011/03/14
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 133 #

2009/2134(INI)


Article 13 a (new)
Article 13a 1. In the case of the Members elected in the Member States, and subject to the other provisions of this Act, each State shall lay down appropriate procedures for filling any seat which falls vacant during the five-year term of office referred to in Article 5 for the remainder of that period. The provisions of Article 3(1a) shall apply mutatis mutandis. 2. Where the law of a Member State provides for a temporary replacement of a member of its national parliament on maternity leave, that State may decide that such provisions are to apply mutatis mutandis to the Members of the European Parliament elected in that State.
2011/03/14
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 2 #

2008/2072(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 5a (new)
- whereas Written Declaration 48/2008 by Anna Záborská, Bernd Posselt, Francis Wurtz, Zita Gurmai and Marian Harkin on multilingualism has so far gathered 237 signatories,
2008/09/18
Committee: PETI
Amendment 33 #

2008/0122(COD)

Proposal for a decision – amending act
Article 1 – point 2 – subpoint a
Decision 2001/470/EC
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
'(b) facilitating the effective access of the public to justice, in particular through measures providing information on the working of Community and international instruments concerning judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters.'
2008/10/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 39 #

2008/0122(COD)

Proposal for a decision – amending act
Article 1 – point 3 – subpoint b – subpoint ii
Decision 2001/470/EC
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point c a
'c)a inform the public on judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters in the European Union, relevant Community and international instruments and the domestic law of the Member States, with particular reference to access to justice;'deleted
2008/10/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 45 #

2008/0122(COD)

Proposal for a decision – amending act
Article 1 – point 3 – subpoint b – subpoint ii d (new)
Decision 2001/470/EC
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point (e)
(iid) point (e) is replaced by the following: '(e) assist with the preparation and updating of the information referred to in Title III, and in particular with the information system for the public, in accordance with the rules laid down in that Title, by providing information on the domestic law of the Member States through the website of the Network,.'
2008/10/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 60 #

2008/0122(COD)

Proposal for a decision – amending act
Article 1 – point 11
Decision 2001/470/EC
Article 13 a
ProvisionAvailability of information to the public by the contact points The Network's contact points shall gradually be made more accessible to the public, usingThe Network shall use the most appropriate technological facilities to inform it about the content and applicationmake available the content of Community or international instruments on judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters and, where necessary, to direct it to the authorities responsible for their actual application, in particular those referred to in Article 6.'
2008/10/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 67 #

0000/2013(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Insists that no result be published in any Member State until 20h00 CET on Sunday 25 May 2014; calls on the Commission to ensure compliance with Article 10 of the 1976 Elections Act by threatening and imposing effective penalties;
2013/05/08
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 72 #

0000/2013(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Considers that, in view of Article 17(7) of the Treaty on European Union and the fact that Members of the Commission are better known to the European public than used to be the case, the candidature and eligibility of Commissioners-in-office and members of other bodies in Article 7 of the Act of 20 September 1976 concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage should be regulated in such a way as to avert the need for short-lived short-term personnel reshuffles coinciding with a European Parliament election and institutional appointments;
2013/05/08
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 76 #

0000/2013(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Calls on the Council and Commission to ensure that the relevant provisions of the Elections Act are amended to the effect that Parliament would be convened for the first time on the 30th day following the last day of the European election;
2013/05/08
Committee: AFCO