13 Amendments of Jiří MAŠTÁLKA related to 2016/2018(INI)
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that the new IIA aims to develop a more open and transparent relationship between the three Institutions with a view to delivering high-quality legislation in the interest of EU citizens; considers that better law-making in the interests of the Union's citizens can also mean more regulation, inter alia in the fields of common social, consumer protection, environmental and civil- society challenges and interests within the European Union and its Member States and a harmonization of national disparities in legislation; considers that, although the principle of sincere cooperation among Institutions is only mentioned in paragraphs 9 and 32 in relation to specific areas covered by the new IIA, it should be observed throughout the legislative cycle as one of the principles enshrined in Article 13 TEU;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the three Institutions’ agreement to reinforce the Union’s annual and multiannual programming in accordance with Article 17(1) TEU by means of a more structured procedure with a precise timeline; notes with satisfaction that the first exercise of interinstitutional annual programming under the new IIA saw the active participation of the three Institutions, participation that led to a joint declaration on the EU’s legislative priorities for 2017, with 59 key legislative proposals identified as priorities for 2017 and, further to a joint declaration on legislative priorities for 2018-2019, 31 key legislative proposals identified as priorities until the end of the current term; particularly welcomes, in this context, the active involvement of the Council and trusts that it will continue in the future, including as regards multiannual programming for the new term; considers, however, that priority treatment for certain legislative files agreed upon in joint declarations should not be used to exert undue pressure on the co-legislators and that greater speed should not be prioritised at the expense of legislative quality; on the other hand, regards it as a Parliament's task derived from Treaty obligations to act to overcome a legislative standstill or blocking or undermining of legislation in the field of social environmental and consumer protection standards as well as transparency standards;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that the strong focus on the Commission's work programme cannot be taken to justify any restriction of Parliament's own legislative powers or right of initiative and expresses its strong determination to resist any attempt to undermine the legislative powers of the European Parliament by means of a modification of the legal basis or relevant means;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Welcomes the new IIA’s provisions on impact assessments, notably the principle that they may inform but never be a substitute for political decisions or cause undue delays to the legislative process; recalls that the Commission, in the Small Business Act, made a commitment to implementing the ‘think small first’ principle in its policymaking, and that this includes the SME test to assess the impact of forthcoming legislation and administrative initiatives on SMEs27 ; recalls that in its decision of 9 March 2016 on the new IIA Parliament stated that the wording of the new IIA does not sufficiently commit the three Institutions to include SME and competitiveness tests in their impact assessments28 ; underlines that, throughout the legislative procedure and in all assessments of the impact of proposed legislation, particular attention must be paid to the potential impacts on those who have least opportunity to present their concerns to decision takers, including SMEs and others who do not have the advantage of easy access to the Institutions; stresses the importance of taking into account and paying attention to the needs of SMEs at all stages of the legislative cycle and expresses satisfaction that the Commission’s Better Regulation Guidelines prescribe that potential impacts on SMEs and competitiveness should be considered and reported systematically in all impact assessments; encourages the Commission to consider how the impact on SMEs can be taken into account even better, including in connection with the European added value of a proposal, and intends to follow this issue closely in the years to come; believes that impact assessments must pay equal attention to the evaluation of social, health and environmental consequences, in particular, and that the impact on the fundamental rights of citizens and on equality between women and men must be assessed; _________________ 27 See Parliament’s resolution of 27 November 2014 on the revision of the Commission’s impact assessment guidelines and the role of the SME test (OJ C 289, 9.8.2016, p. 53), paragraph 16. 28 See Parliament’s resolution of 9 March 2016 on the conclusion of an Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0081), paragraph 4.
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Welcomes the commitment made by the Commission, before adopting a proposal, to consult widely and encourage, in particular, the direct participation of SMEs and other end-users in consultations; notes with satisfaction that the Commission’s revised Better Regulation Guidelines take such a direction; notes, however, that the Commission's consultations do not take trade unions into consideration enough, and that workers' and vulnerable groups' interests are often not taken into account;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Emphasises that such assessments of administrative burdens must go far beyond the cost assessments which are undertaken and thus also - on at least an equal footing and assigning equal political weight on these aspects- take account of the social benefits of legislative measures and the consequences of failure to act with regard to social, environmental and consumer protection standards;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 b (new)
Paragraph 24 b (new)
24b. Underlines that the goal of reducing the administrative burden should not be used as a pretext for deregulation that weakens social protection, consumer protection, environmental standards, animal welfare standards or social dialogue;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Draws attention to the fact that in paragraph 25 of the new IIA, the Commission only committed to taking ‘due account of the difference in nature and effects between regulations and directives’; reiterates its request that, pursuing the same approach as that outlined in the Monti report, greater use should be made of regulations in legislative proposals30 , in accordance with the legal requirements and principles of subsidiarity and proportionality established by the Treaties as to their use, in order to ensure consistency, simplicity, and legal certainty across the Union; _________________ 30 See Parliament’s resolution of 14 September 2011 on better legislation, subsidiarity and proportionality and smart regulation, paragraph 5.
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Welcomes the three Institutions’ commitment to exchanging views on modifications of the legal basis, as referred to in paragraph 25 of the new IIA; stresses the role and the expertise of its Committee on Legal Affairs in verifying legal bases31 ; recalls Parliament’s position that it will resist any attempt to undermine the legislative powers of Parliament by means of unwarranted modifications of the legal basis; deplores, however, the Council's reluctance to fully respect this commitment in some politically sensitive files; _________________ 31 See Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament, Annex V, point XVI.1.
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Requests that paragraphs 33 and 34 of the new IIA be fully implemented; asks the Council, in particular, that the agendas, working documents and presidency proposals of working parties and the Committee of Permanent Representatives of the Governments of the Member States (Coreper), be transmitted to Parliament in a regular and structured manner in order to allow for a matching level of information between co-legislators; considers that paragraphs 33 and 34 of the new IIA should be interpreted to the effect that, in addition to informal exchanges of views, Parliament mayshould be invited to send a representative to the meetings of the Council’s working parties and Coreper;
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Welcomes the commitment made in paragraph 46 of the new IIA for a more frequent use of the legislative technique of recasting; reiterates that this technique should constitute the ordinary legislative technique as an invaluable tool to achieve simplification41 ; deplores the fact that Commission's recast proposals often lack ambition compared to the requests of Parliament; considers, however, that in the event of a complete policy overhaul, the Commission should, instead of using the recasting technique, put forward a proposal for an entirely new legal act repealing existing legislation, so that the co-legislators can engage in broad and effective political discussions and see their prerogatives as enshrined in the Treaties fully preserved; _________________ 41 See Parliament’s resolution of 14 September 2011, cited above, paragraph 41.
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
Paragraph 53
53. Welcomes the Commission’s first annual burden survey undertaken in the context of simplification of EU legislation, for which it carried out a Flash Eurobarometer survey on business perceptions of regulation, interviewing over 10 000 businesses across the 28 Member States, mainly SMEs and reflecting the distribution of business in the EU; draws attention to the findings of the survey, which confirm that the focus on cutting unnecessary costs remains appropriate and suggest that there is a complex interplay of different factors that influence the perception of businesses, which may also be caused by variations in national administrative and legal set ups concerning the implementation of legislation; points out that gold plating and even inaccurate media coverage can also affect such perception; agrees with the Commission that the only way to identify concretely what can actually be simplified, streamlined or eliminated is to seek views from all stakeholders on specific pieces of legislation or various pieces of legislation that apply to a particular sector; calls on the Commission to refine the annual burden survey, on the basis of the lessons learnt from the first edition, to apply transparent and verifiable data collection methods, to pay particular regard to SMEs’ needs, and to include both actual and perceived burdens; emphasizes that such fine-tuning must go far beyond the cost assessments which are undertaken and thus also - on at least an equal footing and assigning equal political weight to these aspects - take account of the social benefits of legislative measures and the consequences of failure to act with regard to social, environmental and consumer protection standards;
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53 a (new)
Paragraph 53 a (new)
53a. Stresses that in the process of defining the annual burden, the Commission shall take particular caution in assessing national environmental, labour and social legislation, making sure that it does not undermine its positive impacts;