344 Amendments of Kazimierz Michał UJAZDOWSKI
Amendment 32 #
2018/2099(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that close cooperation between the Union and its closest allies, such as the UK and the USA, and increasing spending on defence by the EU countries remains of the utmost importance.
Amendment 17 #
2017/2054(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. wWhereas its resolution of 11 November 2015 on the reform of the electoral law of the European Union2 outlined its position on establishing a joint constituency in which lists are headed by each political family’s candidate for the post of President of the Commission; __________________ 2establishing a joint constituency is not legally possible, and the election of Members of the European Parliament in the Member States guarantees strong ties to the citizenry; Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0395.
Amendment 22 #
2017/2054(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
Amendment 42 #
2017/2054(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Acknowledges that the current distribution of seats only partially respects the principle of degressive proportionality, and therefore should be corrected as soon as possiblin the future;
Amendment 65 #
2017/2054(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Notes that the most practical solution providing the Member States with legal certainty would be to refrain from distributing seats currently held by Members from the United Kingdom; considers that reducing the number of Members of the European Parliament to 678 will be conducive to work efficiency, making savings and rebuilding public trust;
Amendment 72 #
2017/2054(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. PropoRecognises that a new distribution of seats in Parliament should immediately apply once there is legal certainty and the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the Union becomes legally effective; insists that the MEPs that will occupy the seats resulting from this new distribution shall all take up their seats in Parliament at the same timen increase in the number of Members of the European Parliament may occur in connection with the accession of new Member States;
Amendment 75 #
2017/2054(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 88 #
2017/2054(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 109 #
2017/2054(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
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 the near future; proposes that this system be chosen well inobligation to establish a lasting system to distribute seats in the European Parliament, pursuant to European Parliament resolution of 13 March 2013 on the composition of the European Parliament with a view to the 20141a elections, should be fulfilled in appropriate advance of the elections to the European Parliament in 2024; __________________ 1a Texts Adopted, P7_TA(2013)0082.
Amendment 113 #
2017/2054(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. 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) of the Treaty on European Union; underlines the urgent need to adopt that decision, which requires its consent, 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 2019 - 2024 parliamentary term;
Amendment 134 #
Amendment 138 #
2017/2054(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – table
Annex – Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – table
Amendment 152 #
2017/2054(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – Article 3 – paragraph 2
Annex – Article 3 – paragraph 2
Amendment 162 #
2017/2054(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – Article 3 – paragraph 3
Annex – Article 3 – paragraph 3
Amendment 2 #
2017/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Regrets that the absence of a binding effect of these reasoned opinions finally reduces the control of subsidiarity by national parliament to a simple right to protest ("yellow card") or in the best case to ask the European legislator for a second deliberation ("orange card") ;reminds in that regard that since the Lisbon treaty entered into force, only 3 "yellow cards" could be issued by national chambers for which the Commission has refused to withdraw its proposals in the two last cases (Revision of the directive on the posting of workers and establishment of the European public Prosecutor's Office), and went back in the first one only due to a lack of majority in the Council while denying in a press release any non compliance with the subsidiarity principle ("Monti II" revision) ;
Amendment 10 #
2017/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Regrets that Delegated acts and Implementing acts that are much abused to complete the EU legislative acts are however still not transmitted to the national Parliaments under the subsidiarity control ;
Amendment 13 #
2017/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Reminds that the real and ultimate judge of the subsidiarity is the Court of Justice of the European Union which has until now never annulled any community or EU Act on such a basis of an infringement of the subsidiarity principle, perhaps because to comply with the specific definition of subsidiarity as laid down in article 5 TEU one can always find a transnational dimension to any issue justifying the EU competence and, last but not least, because the EU Court is itself both judge and defendant ;
Amendment 20 #
2017/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Calls for the introduction, through an interinstitutional agreement, of an interparliamentary pillar to organise the network of the national parliaments, allowing them to : – truly scrutinise subsidiarity henceforth to be understood as allowing the Union to act under two cumulative conditions : (1) if the objectives of the envisaged action cannot be satisfactorily realised at the national level ;and (2) if democratic control is not thereby diminished ; – intervene should they so wish in EU decision-making, by exercising a collective right of veto ("red card") and an individual right of non-participation to an EU legislation or Policy, allowing the development of differentiated integration and cooperation ; – exercise both prior and follow-up monitoring of all Council of Ministers meetings at EU level through specialised interparliamentary groupings of their members ; – take decisions of a European nature that are immediately applicable in their respective Member States ;
Amendment 25 #
2017/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Reiterates the need to enhance the flexibility of the early warning system, and notably of the eighttwelve-week period for submitting reasoned opinions, and to continue to reflect on the introduction of a green card mechanism with legally binding effect ;
Amendment 40 #
2017/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Welcomes the reference to subsidiarity in the Rome Declaration of 25 March 2017; takes the view that subsidiarity and national parliaments should have a prominent place in reflection on the EU’s future. in order to address the "structural democratic deficit" especially mentioned by the German Constitutional Court which, in its judgement of 30 June 2009 "Treaty of Lisbon", reminds that the national parliaments are sovereign assemblies conferring the main source of democratic legitimacy to the EU and should therefore exert, on behalf of their respective sovereign peoples, a genuine intervention and control over the EU decision making and process, in order to remain in compliance with our Constitutions and democratic principles ;
Amendment 14 #
2017/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) For reasons of transparency and in order to strengthen the scrutiny and the democratic accountability of European political parties and the link between European civil society and the Union institutions, in particular the European Parliament, access to funding from the general budget of the European Union should be made conditional upon the publication by the majority of its member parties of the programme and logo of the European political party concerned, as well as information regarding the gender representation among the candidates at the last elections to the European Parliament and among the members of the European Parliament.
Amendment 17 #
2017/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) The new requirements regarding publicity of the programme and logo of European political parties and of information regarding gender representation should apply to the largest possible extent already to applications for funding for 2019, the year in which elections to the European Parliament will take place. Therefore, transitional arrangements should be provided for.
Amendment 18 #
2017/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 a (new)
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a) In order to ensure greater transparency, legal certainty and full respect of the rules by all, a permanent Working Group on Transparency of European Parties and Foundations’ Activities should be established within the European Parliament. The Working Group should review all rules and procedures currently applicable on the eligibility for funding from the general budget of the European Union of activities performed by European parties and foundations. That review should focus on the activities performed and on the practices observed to date as well as on the decisions of eligibility adopted by the Bureau of the European Parliament. The Working Group should propose any clarification or amendment to those rules and procedures it considers appropriate and should advise on decisions of eligibility to be adopted by the Bureau of the European Parliament.
Amendment 26 #
2017/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No. 1141/2014
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b – subparagraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b – subparagraph 1
Amendment 33 #
2017/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No. 1141/2014
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
(1a) Article 17(3) is replaced by the following: “3. For the purposes of determining eligibility for funding from the general budget of the European Union in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article and point (b) of Article 3(1), and for the application of Article 19(1), a member of a regional parliament or assembly, of a national parliament or of the European Parliament shall be considered asto be 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 for funding. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014R1141&from=EN)Furthermore those members who belong to a political party that is not affiliated to a European party shall be considered as members of the European party whose Board accepted them in writing as members.” Or. en
Amendment 40 #
2017/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No. 1141/2014
Article 18 – paragraph 3 a
Article 18 – paragraph 3 a
3a. A European political party shall include in its application evidence demonstrating that the majority of its member parties have continuously published on their websites, during 12 months preceding the moment at which the applications is made, the political programme and logo of the European political party as well asnd are encouraged to include information, in relation to each of the member parties of the European political party, on the gender representation among the candidates at the last elections to the European Parliament and among the Members of the European Parliament.
Amendment 42 #
2017/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No. 1141/2014
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Amendment 63 #
2017/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new)
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No. 1141/2014
Article 32 a
Article 32 a
Amendment 17 #
2017/0035(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The system established by Regulation (EC) No 182/2011 has, overall, proven to work well in practice and struck an appropriate institutional balance as regards the roles of the Commission and the other actors involved. That system should therefore continue to function unchanged except for certain targeted amendments concerning specific aspects of procedure at the level of the appeal committee as well as the introduction of a right to call back implementing acts, inspired by work on the Convention on the Future of Europe and essential to any worthwhile scrutiny of the implementing powers conferred on the Commission. These amendments are intended to ensure wider political accountability and ownership of politically sensitive implementing acts without, however, modifying the legal and institutional responsibilities for implementing acts as organised by Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.
Amendment 28 #
2017/0035(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The Commission should have the possibility, in specific cases, to ask the Council to indicate its views and orientation on the wider implications of the absence of an opinion, including the institutional, legal, political and international implications. The Commission should take account ofendorse any position expressed by the Council within 3 months after the referral. In duly justified cases, the Commission may indicate a shorter deadline in the referral.
Amendment 31 #
2017/0035(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)
Regulation (EU) No 182/2011
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
(-1) Paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: "3. The chair shall submit to the committee the draft implementing act to be adopted by the Commission. or any other implementing act that a committee member has proposed be called back."
Amendment 32 #
2017/0035(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1- paragraph 1 -point -1 a (new)
Article 1- paragraph 1 -point -1 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 182/2011
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
(-1a) In paragraph 3 the following subparagraph is added: "Any committee member may propose on duly justified grounds that an implementing act be called back in order to scrutinise the measures implemented and where necessary propose amendments to the act."
Amendment 39 #
2017/0035(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Regulation (EU) No 182/2011
Article 6 – paragraph 3 a
Article 6 – paragraph 3 a
3a. Where no opinion is delivered in the appeal committee, the Commission may refer the matter to the Council for an opinion indicating its views and orientation on the wider implications of the absence of opinion, including the institutional, legal, political and international implications. The Commission shall take account ofendorse any position expressed by the Council within 3 months after the referral. In duly justified cases, the Commission may indicate a shorter deadline in the referral.
Amendment 876 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 4 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Rule 4 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Where the competent authorities of the Member States ornotify the President of the Unionend orf the Member concerned notify the President of an appointment or election to an office incompatible with the office of Member of the European Parliament within the meaning ofterm of office of a Member of the European Parliament as a result either of an additional incompatibility established by the law of that Member State in accordance with Article 7(1) or (23) of the Act of 20 September 1976, the President shall inform Parliament, which shall establish that there is a vacancy or of the withdrawal of the Member's mandate pursuant to Article 13(3) of that Act, the President shall inform Parliament that the term of office of that Member ended on the date communicated by the Member State. Where no such date is communicated, the date of the end of the term of office shall be the date of the notification by that Member State.
Amendment 898 #
2016/2114(REG)
Rule 11 – paragraph 8 – indent 2 a (new)
– the holder has refused to take part in a public hearing or turned down another invitation from a committee without proper justification.
Amendment 904 #
2016/2114(REG)
Rule 15 – paragraph 1
The President, Vice-Presidents and Quaestors shall be elected by secret ballot, in accordance with Rule 182roll call. Nominations shall be with consent. They may only be made by a political group or by at least 40 Members. However, if the number of nominations does not exceed the number of seats to be filled, the candidates may be elected by acclamation.
Amendment 982 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 63 – paragraph 1 – indent 1
Rule 63 – paragraph 1 – indent 1
– where the Commission withdrawsreplaces, substantially amends or intends substantially to amend its initial proposal after Parliament has adopted its position, in order to replace it with another text, except where this is done in order to take account of Parliament's position; orif the Commission intends to modify the legal basis provided for in its initial proposal, with the result that the ordinary legislative procedure would no longer apply, the President may also act at the request of the committee responsible for legal affairs;
Amendment 985 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 63 – paragraph 2
Rule 63 – paragraph 2
2. ParliamThe President shall, at the request of the committee responsible, ask the Council to refer again to Parliament a proposal submitted by the Commission pursuant to Article 294 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Unio for the subject-matter or the committee responsible for legal affairs, ask the Council to refer a draft legislative act to Parliament again, where the Council intends to modify the legal basis of the proposalprovided for in Parliament's position at first reading with the result that the ordinary legislative procedure willould no longer apply.
Amendment 1077 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 141 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Rule 141 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. In urgent cases, the President, where possible after consulting the Chair and rapporteur of the committee responsible for legal affairs, may take precautionary action in order to comply with the relevant time-limits. In such cases, the procedure provided for in paragraphs 3 or 4 shall, as applicable, be implemented at the earliest opportunity.
Amendment 1100 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 168 a (new)
Rule 168 a (new)
Amendment 1129 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 182 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Rule 182 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
In the case of appointments, voting shall be by secret ballot without prejudice to Rules 15(1), 199(1) and 204(2), second subparagraphunless the Rules state otherwise.
Amendment 1257 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 8 – paragraph 1
Annex I – Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Where there is reason to think that a Member of the European Parliament may have breached this Code of Conduct, the President may refer the matter to the Advisory CommitteeAdvisory Committee may, on its own initiative or at the request of the President, investigate the details of the breach.
Amendment 1261 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Annex I – Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Any citizen may provide the Advisory Committee with substantiated information on a suspected breach of the current code of conduct by a Member of the European Parliament.
Amendment 1267 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Annex I – Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
If, taking into account that recommendation, the President concludes that the Member concerned has breached the Code of Conduct, he shall, after hearing the Member, adopt a reasoned decision laying down a penalty, which he shall notify to the Member. If the President’s decision is at odds with the recommendations of the Advisory Committee, that decision must be duly substantiated and published together with the content of the Advisory Committee’s recommendation.
Amendment 19 #
2016/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Notes that Article 42 of the TEU states that the CSDP of the EU shall not prejudice the specific character of the security and defence policy of certain Member States and their commitments under NATO obligations.
Amendment 24 #
2016/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the VP/HR and the Member States to use the full potential of the TEU, especially Article 44 on the implementation of a CSDP task by a group of Member States which notified their intention to participate in the task and have necessary capability for that and Article 46 on permanent structured cooperation with regard to a faster and more flexible deployment of CSDP missions and operations; welcomes the activation of Article 42(7) on the mutual defence clause;.
Amendment 38 #
2016/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 57 #
2016/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Reiterates the need to ensure and to further strengthen the strategic partnership between the EU and NATO, which is vitally important for Europe’s security.
Amendment 63 #
2016/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Encourages the Member States to step up financial accountability for Europe’s security and to set aside at least 2% of GDP for defence expenditure.
Amendment 22 #
2016/2018(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 – point a (new)
Paragraph 6 – point a (new)
(a) Considers the establishment of the 'Task force on subsidiarity, proportionality and doing less more efficiently' is a positive step forward; believes that its recommendation with regards to identifying policy areas where work could be re-delegated or definitely returned to Member States, to improving involvement of regional and local authorities in EU decision- making process could increase the trust of citizens and enhance democratic legitimacy of the EU.
Amendment 33 #
2016/2018(INI)
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; recalls that SMEs represent 99% of all businesses in the EU, generate 58% of EU’s turnover and employ two thirds of the total private employment; 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; _________________ 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 49 #
2016/2018(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Recalls that the principle of subsidiarity is a key aspect of the democratic process; emphasises the need for greater flexibility in the enforcement of the eight-week deadline for national parliaments to issue a reasoned opinion on non-compliance with the principle of subsidiarity; believes that the use of a yellow card by national parliaments should be sufficient reason to suspend the legislation procedure;
Amendment 96 #
2016/2018(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. WarnNotes that the inclusion of the obligation for the Commission of systematic recourse to Member States’ experts in connection with the preparation of delegated acts should not amount to making the relevant procedure very similar, if not altogether identical, to that established for the preparation of implementing acts, especially as regards procedural prerogatives conferred upon those experts; considers that this may also blur the differences between the two types of acts to the extent that it could imply a de facto revival of the pre-Lisbon comitology mechanism; believes that steps should be taken to facilitate the review of implementing acts by national parliaments, thereby enhancing the democratic credentials and legitimacy of the EU legislation;
Amendment 138 #
2016/2018(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54 – point a (new)
Paragraph 54 – point a (new)
(a) Calls on the Commission to come up with an initiative to establish targets for the reduction of burdens in key sectors, to avoid unnecessary regulatory and administrative burden and to lower costs for administrations and businesses, including SME;
Amendment 3 #
2016/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that ‘human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities’ are the values on which the EU is founded, as stated in Article 2 TEU; underlines the utmost importance of ensuring full respect for these values both at Union and Member State level, which will be fostered by respect for the Member States' own acquis as expressed in their constitutional identity;
Amendment 14 #
2016/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that in case of systemic threats to the rule of law, Article 7 and Rule of Law Framework procedures should be launched to provide remedies; considers it important to establish, through a partnership dialogue, a new consensus between the EU and its Member States regarding respect for democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights;
Amendment 35 #
2016/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Notes that rule of law monitoring must strictly comply with the Treaty rules, as highlighted in the Council Legal Service's opinion no 10296/14 of 27.5.2014;
Amendment 13 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas following the reccurrent crises in the economic, political, cultural and social fields that havare severely affecteding individual Member States and the Union as a whole, citizens’ relationship with politics and more generally political, intellectual and media elites has become increasingly strained, as the publiceople feels that it is not represented nor ruled adequately; whereas the engagement and involvement of citizens and civil society in democratic life are essential for the good functioning of democracy and for the legitimacy and accountability of both national and EU representational systems;
Amendment 27 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas it is crucial to regain citizens’ confidence and interest in the European project by improving participationeffective control, accountability and transparency in decision- making, buttressing democratic oversight mechanisms, making political parties more open and reforming electoral systems to give the publiceople more voice in them;
Amendment 54 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas e-democracy could represent an alternativecomplementary form of engagement capable of providing a solution to public disaffection with traditional politics, and could help promote grassroots support for EU policiereforms;
Amendment 72 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that the purpose of e- democracy is to facilitate democratic practice, to enhance transparency and efficiency of political institutions, and to improve the democratic character of decision-making procedures; and not to establish an alternative democratic system or to promote a certain type of democracy;
Amendment 83 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights and encourages the use of e-participation as a key characteristic of e-democracy, encompassing three forms of interaction between EU institutions and governments on one hand, citizens on the other hand, mainly e-information, e- consultation and e-decision-making; acknowledges that many national, regional and local e-participation cases can be taken as good examples of how ICT can be used in participatory democracy;
Amendment 92 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. PNotes that electronic voting does not increase voter turnout, nevertheless, points to the importance of e-voting as a system offering many potential advantages,. in particular for young people, home- bound people, people with reduced mobility and people living or working in a Member Sstate of which they are not a citizen or in a third country;
Amendment 96 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls the first successful European example of online voting in Estonia in its legally binding elections in 2005 as a positive example, but maintains that if the take-up of e-voting across Europe is to be successful, it will be necessary to assess the costs, benefits and implications of different or divergent technological approaches; in order to address in priority issues of various deficiencies and fundamental security vulnerabilities that undermine voting system honesty and confidence, identified by numerous experts assessments for more than ten years, like the Security analysis of the Secure Electronic Registration and Voting Experiment (SERVE) in United States;
Amendment 115 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that democratic processes require extensive debate, on every level of EU society, proper scrutiny and reflection which are conducive to fair and rational deliberation, but that this could be overshadowed by specific sectorial interests which abuse the influence of ICT;
Amendment 129 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on thePoints out at significant digital divide between countries in terms of digital infrastructure and citizens experience with e-participation, calls on Member States and the EU to provide educational and technical means for improving ICT competences and digital access for all EU citizens in order to bridge the digital divide (eE-inclusion), for the ultimate benefit of democracy; encourages the Member States to integrate the acquisition of digital skills into school curricula, to foresee digital training programmes for elderly people, and supports the development of networks with universities and educational institutions to promote research on and implementation of new participation tools;
Amendment 136 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Member States and the EU to provide educational and technical means for improving ICT competences and digital access for all EU citizens in order to bridge the digital divide (e-inclusion), for the ultimate benefit of democracy; encourages the Member States to integrate the acquisition of digital skills into school curricula and supports the development of networks with universities and educational institutions toand design skills for public agents as a necessary condition to develop, simplify and facilitate the accessibility to administrative services online, and promote research on and implementation of new participation tools;
Amendment 148 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Urges the Member States and the EU to deliver affordable and high-speed digital infrastructure, particularly in peripheral regions and rural and economically less developed areas, and to ensure that equality between citizens is guaranteed; recommends that public libraries and schools be appropriately resourced and that IT infrastructure be accessible to all citizens;
Amendment 152 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Encourages the Member States and the EU to promote and support mechanisms that enable the participation of the public and their interaction with governments and EU institutions; highlights that ICT should facilitate access to information, transparency, active listening and debate for better decision- making ; commits to make all the existing tools of legislative follow-up more accessible, understandable, educational and interactive, invites the Commission to do the same on its own website;
Amendment 171 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission to realise the full potential of the European Citizens’' Initiative by improving the ECI's rules, to make them more flexible and less complex, through a wider use of ICT, in order to make this important tool more cost-effective, user-friendly and widely publicised; believes that the use of new technology could improve, in particular, the online signature collection system;
Amendment 173 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Notes that since 2012, 56 ECIs have been submitted to the European Commission, 36 were registered, and 20 were rejected; regrets that only three initiatives - 'Right to water', 'One of us', and 'Stop Vivisection' have succeeded in reaching one million signatures; states that because of excessive complexity, poor outcomes, and low certainty of impact active citizens are discouraged from using this instrument of participatory democracy;
Amendment 192 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls for more cooperation at EU level and recommends the sharing of best practices for e-democracy projects as a way to move towards a form of democracy that is more participatory and deliberative and that responds to the requests and interests of the publicinterests of the different people of Europe; highlight the key-role of new technologies to support the development of national parliaments network, their horizontal exchanges and coordination with the aim of using all the potential allowed by the Treaties to improve subsidiarity control, Council accountability and EU laws legitimation ; calls on the Commission to provide an assessment of possible models of online voting for consideration by the Member States by the end of 2017, in time for the next European elections in 2019;
Amendment 207 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Stresses the need to protect privacy and personal data when using e-democracy tools and to foster a more secure internet environment, particularly with regard to information and data security, the setting- up of secure digital public registers and the validation of electronic signatures in order to prevent fraudulent multiple interactions; underlines that security issues must not become a deterrent to the inclusion of individuals and groups in democratic processesfull involvement for every citizens without exception or distinction;
Amendment 11 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomNotes the agreement reached between the institutions and considers this a good basis forfirst step in establishing a new relationship between them with a view to delivering better law-making in the interest of the Union's citizens;
Amendment 13 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Deeply regrets, in the context of better law-making, that negotiations on the IIA failed to follow established practice in terms of a committee procedure in the European Parliament; believes that the manner in which the negotiations were conducted undermines the democratic legitimacy of the agreement;
Amendment 16 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes a number of elements contained in the agreement which represent a first step in ensuring that legislation is clear and simple and that it will have a positive impact on citizens' lives with proportionate and bearable costs; notes in particular the results of the negotiations as regards multiannual interinstitutional programming, the Commission's follow-up to Parliament's legislative initiatives, and the provision of justifications for and consultations on envisaged withdrawals of legislative proposals; also welcomes the agreed interinstitutional exchange of views in the event that a modification of the legal basis of an act is envisaged;
Amendment 28 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines the importance of the provisions of the new IIA on better law- making tools (impact assessments, public and stakeholder consultations, evaluations, etc.), which should be used both in the preparatory phase and throughout the entire legislative process, for a well- informed, inclusive and transparent decision-making process and for the correct application of legislation, whilst safeguarding the prerogatives of the legislators; welcomes the aim of improving the implementation and application of Union legislation, inter alia through better identification of national measures that bear no relation to the Union legislation that is to be transposed ("gold-plating"); believes that the concept of "gold-plating" must be understood as meaning any measure that exceeds minimum requirements;
Amendment 29 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Is concerned that the wording in relation to impact assessments in no way commits the three Institutions to include SMEs and competitiveness tests in their impact assessments notwithstanding that this would have helped ensure that companies, and SMEs in particular, are not overburdened by legislation;
Amendment 30 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Believes that thorough impact assessments which comprehensively evaluate compliance with the principle of subsidiarity, and enhanced subsidiarity checks by all Institutions are essential throughout the legislative process and that the inclusion of a subsidiarity check in the agreement would have been a welcome step forward in improving the trust of citizens, who regard the subsidiarity principle as a key aspect of the democratic process;
Amendment 31 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Regrets that the wording of the agreement does not explicitly indicate that impact assessments should be living documents that must as a matter of course be updated when new significant amendments are introduced during the legislative process;
Amendment 32 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Notes that the cumulative cost of legislation can result in significant difficulties for businesses and individuals affected by Union rules; expresses regret that that this agreement has failed to address this, and calls on the three institutions to consider the benefits of introducing regulatory offsetting, whereby new rules that add to administrative and regulatory burdens can only be imposed if a corresponding cut in existing burdens can be identified;
Amendment 33 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Takes note of the letter of 15 December 2015 from the First Vice -President of the Commission on the functioning of the new Regulatory Scrutiny Board, which is to oversee the quality of the Commission's impact assessments; strongly believes that the establishment of the RSP represents a missed opportunity which should have shown more ambition; believes that an external, independent Regulatory Scrutiny Board involving independent experts throughout the legislative cycle and common to the three institutions should have been agreed upon; points out that the legislators may also carry out their own impact assessments where they consider this necessary; underlines that, furthermore, the new IIA provides for exchanges of information between the institutions on best practice and methodologies relating to impact assessments, thus providing an opportunity to review the functioning of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board in due time;
Amendment 45 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines the importance of the agreed "Annual Burden Survey" as a tool to help avoid and eliminate overregulation and reduce administrative burdens; points out that the feasibility and desirability of establishing objectives for the reduction of burdens in specific sectors must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis in close cooperation between the institution in order to monitor, in a clear and transparent manner, the burden reduction; urges that the Annual Burden Survey must identify the burdens imposed by individual Commission legislative proposals and acts and by individual Member States; welcomes in this respect the fact that the three institutions have agreed that impact assessments should also address the impact of proposals on administrative burdens, particularly as regards small and medium- sized enterprises;
Amendment 56 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Regrets that the appropriate use of first and second-reading procedures has not been addressed; believes that the practice of conducting trilogues to achieve first-reading agreements may lack transparency and reduce the possibility for citizens and stakeholders to follow and provide input during fast-tracked procedures; calls for improvements to be made to the transparency of Parliament's own procedures, especially in first- reading agreements; believes in this regard that a "cooling-off" period, applied after the conclusion of negotiations, should be further utilised for the completion of an impact assessment and subsidiarity check;
Amendment 67 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Also believes that more concrete arrangements are needed in order to enhance the political dialogue with national parliaments; emphasises the need for greater flexibility in the enforcement of the eight-week deadline for national parliaments to issue a reasoned opinion on non-compliance with the principle of subsidiarity; believes that the use of a yellow card by national parliaments should be sufficient reason to suspend the legislative procedure;
Amendment 68 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Also believes that more concrete arrangements are needed in order to enhance the political dialogue with national parliaments; believes that steps should be taken to facilitate the review by national parliaments of implementing acts and their ability to call for further consideration to be given to them;
Amendment 72 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Regrets that the three institutions have not made a greater commitment with regard to implementation; believes that the European Parliament could have gone further by agreeing to set aside committee time and to undertake analyses of the implementation of legislation applying in their sectors; believes that such evaluation should be supported by the Commission, which should be represented by a senior official during these meetings and should be expected to answer questions in detail;
Amendment 74 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Considers that such simplification and reduction of red tape in the application of Union legislation should be carried through once all practical arrangements to implement the new IIA in its entirety are in place, whereupon the institutions could also evaluate whether adjustments to the new IIA may be necessary in light of experience gained up until that point in time with the implementation of the new IIA;
Amendment 77 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 – introductory part
Paragraph 12 – introductory part
12. Points out that the following issues, in particular, the need further follow-up at technical and/or political level:
Amendment 84 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 – indent 3
Paragraph 12 – indent 3
- the transparency and coordination of the legislative process, including the use of a "cooling off" period after the conclusion of trilogue negotiations for the completion of an impact assessment and a subsidiarity check (practical arrangements for exchanges of views, information- sharing and comparison of time-tables, transparency in the context of trilateral negotiations, development of platforms and tools for the establishment of a joint database on the state of play of legislative files, the provision of information to national parliaments and practical arrangements for cooperation and information-sharing regarding negotiations on, and the conclusion of, international agreements);
Amendment 85 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 – indent 3 a (new)
Paragraph 12 – indent 3 a (new)
- an evaluation and possible follow up of the independence of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board in fulfilling its role in supervising and providing objective advice on respective impact assessments;
Amendment 86 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 – indent 3 b (new)
Paragraph 12 – indent 3 b (new)
- inclusion of a binding target for a 25% reduction by 2020 of the economic costs linked to regulatory burdens for businesses in each policy area, with a longer-term target for halving the burden of existing Union regulations by 2030;
Amendment 90 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 – indent 4 a (new)
Paragraph 12 – indent 4 a (new)
- further consolidation of the principle of subsidiarity by ensuring that it is always applied by Parliament, which requires substantial changes to be made to the Rules of Procedure;
Amendment 92 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. ApproveRejects the draft agreement contained in Annex I to this decision;
Amendment 97 #
2016/2005(ACI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Instructs its President not to sign the new IIA with the President of the Council and the President of the Commission and to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union;
Amendment 288 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) “higher professional qualifications” means qualifications attested by evidence of higher education qualifications or, where provided for by national law, higher professional skills;
Amendment 296 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) “higher professional skills” means skills attested by at least threfive years of professional experience of a level comparable to higher education qualifications and which is relevant in the profession or sector specified in the work contract or binding job offer;
Amendment 328 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall not issue any other permit than an EU Blue Card to third-country nationals for the purpose of highly skilled employmentThis Directive shall be without prejudice to the right of the Member States to issue residence permits other than an EU Blue Card for any purpose of employment. Such residence permits shall not confer the right of residence in the other Member States as provided in this Directive.
Amendment 336 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) bilateral or multilateral agreements already concluded between one or more Member States and one or more third countries before the date of entry into force of this Directive.
Amendment 345 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) for unregulated professions, present evidence attesting higher professional qualifications in relation to the work to be carried out;
Amendment 356 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. In addition to the conditions laid down in paragraph 1, the gross annual salary resulting from the monthly or annual salary specified in the work contract or binding job offer shall not be inferior to the salary threshold set and published for that purpose by the Member States. The salary threshold set by the Member States shall be at least 1.0 times but not higher than 1.42.0 times the average gross annual salary in the Member State concerned.
Amendment 369 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. By way of derogation from paragraph 2, and for employment in professions which are in particular need of third-country national workers and which belong to major groups 1 and 2 of ISCO, theMember States may apply a lower salary threshold shall beof at least 80 percent of the salary threshold set by the Member State concerned in accordance with paragraph 2.
Amendment 377 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
By way of derogation from paragraph 2, as regards third-country nationals who have obtained a higher education qualification not more than three years before submitting the application for an EU Blue Card, theMember States may apply a lower salary threshold shall beof at least 80 percent of the salary threshold set by the Member State concerned in accordance with paragraph 2. The period of three years shall reapply after the attainment of each level of higher education qualifications.
Amendment 396 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 402 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 431 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Amendment 444 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point f
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point f
(f) where the third-country national fails to comply with the conditions of mobility under this Chapter or intentionally or repetitively makes use of the mobility provisions of this Chapter in an abusive manner.
Amendment 459 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Where a Member State only issues residence permits on its territory and the third-country national fulfils all the admreceived a positive decission conditions laid down in this Directiveto award a Blue Card, the Member State concerned shall issue him or her the requisite visa.
Amendment 501 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The simplified procedures shall include processing of applications as provided for in the second subparagraph of Article 10(1). Applicants shallmay be exempt from presenting the evidence referred to in points (c) and (e) of Article 5(1) and in Article 5(8).
Amendment 508 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
EU Blue Card holders shall have full access to highly skilled employment in the Member State concerned. Member States may require that a change of employer and changes affecting the fulfilment of the criteria for admission as set out in Article 5 are communicated in accordance with procedures laid down by national law, provided that the criteria for admission as set out in Article 5 are met and third country national does not fall within the grounds set out in art. 6 paragraph 2.
Amendment 510 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a (new)
(a) subject to prior authorisation in writing of the competent authorities in the Member State concerned in accordance with procedure laid down by national law to be granted or denied within 60 days of the date of the request made by the applicant.
Amendment 511 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b (new)
(b) communicated by the applicant in accordance with procedures laid down by national law.
Amendment 513 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
During the first two years of legal employment in the Member State concerned as an EU Blue Card holder, Member State may require that a change of employer and changes which may affect the criteria for admission set out in Article 5 are:
Amendment 514 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
After these first two years, the Member State may only require such changes to be communicated in accordance with the procedures laid down by national law. The communication procedure shall not suspend the right of the EU Blue Card holder to pursue the employment.
Amendment 538 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 540 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 543 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 546 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) five years of legal and continuous residence within the territory of the Member States; and two years of legal and continuous residence as an EU Blue Card holder immediately prior to the submission of the relevant application within the territory of the Member State where the application for the EU long- term resident status is submitted.
Amendment 555 #
2016/0176(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 2
Article 19 – paragraph 2
2. A third-country national who holds a valid EU Blue Card issued by a Member State not applying the Schengen acquis in full shall be entitled to enter and stay for the purpose of carrying out a business activity in one or several second Member States for up to 90 days in any 180-day period on the basis of the EU Blue Card issued by the first Member State and a valid travel document. The second Member State shall not require any authorisation for exercising the business activity other than the EU Blue Card issued by the first Member State.
Amendment 5 #
2015/2344(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that the crisis enhanced the need for improvement in EU economic governance and that national parliaments must play an important role to ensure legitimacy, and accountability in the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) must be progressively completed;
Amendment 42 #
2015/2344(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that such capacityany stabilization mechanism should be part of the EU budget as laid down in Article 310 (1) TFEU and should comply with the provisions of Articles 310(4) and 312(1) TFEU;
Amendment 48 #
2015/2344(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that, pursuant to Article 311 TFEU, it is possible to raise the own resources ceilings, to establish new categories of own resources (even if only from a limited number of Member States) and to assign certain revenue to finance specific items of expenditure, as provided for in Article 21 of the Financial Rules1 ; The decision shall not enter into force until it is approved by the Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements; __________________ 1 Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002.
Amendment 53 #
2015/2344(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 63 #
2015/2344(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Reiterates the need for democratic legitimacy and accountability, implying the adoption of the community method, namely with the involvement ofprinciples of subsidiarity and proportionality with the involvement of national parliaments and the European Parliament in the shaping, implementation and oversight of athe EU budgetary capacity;
Amendment 71 #
2015/2344(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. RecallInsists that the protocols on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality and on the role of national parliaments offer ample opportunities foempower national parliaments’ to be involvement in this respectd in coordination and scrutinising of the EU economic policy;
Amendment 81 #
2015/2344(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 9 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Emphasises that EU Member States' economies are linked and believes that all Member States should be involved, to ensure the long-term economic sustainability of the eurozone.
Amendment 71 #
2015/2343(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas actions must be taken to increase the operability and effectiveness of European security policy so that it can bring about a real improvement in Europe's security;
Amendment 221 #
2015/2343(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Feels that the CSDP should be adapted to deal with new cyber, hybrid and terrorist threats and should not lead to the dispersal of Europe's defence capabilities;
Amendment 259 #
2015/2343(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Believes that, in view of the importance of Member State defence spending for the security of Europe as a whole, all financial and budgetary policy assessments (European Semester) should take account of how much each Member State spends in this area;
Amendment 400 #
2015/2343(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32a. Takes the view that EU defence cooperation must not result in unwarranted duplication of NATO tasks and structures;
Amendment 402 #
2015/2343(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 b (new)
Paragraph 32 b (new)
32b. Stresses that a European Defence Union must not exclude any Member State or weaken Member States' NATO commitments and that it must operate on the basis of cooperation with all Member States;
Amendment 403 #
2015/2343(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 c (new)
Paragraph 32 c (new)
32c. Points out that Article 42(7) TEU requires Member States to provide aid and assistance to any Member State that is the victim of armed aggression on its territory, on a basis of reciprocity, and stipulates that Member State commitments and cooperation in this field of security and defence 'shall be consistent with commitments under the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, which, for those States which are members of it, remains the foundation of their collective defence and the forum for its implementation';
Amendment 417 #
2015/2343(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)
Paragraph 35 a (new)
35a. Takes the view that Member States should seek to spend 2% of GDP on defence, in order to provide a basis for joint efforts to make Europe more secure;
Amendment 418 #
2015/2343(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 b (new)
Paragraph 35 b (new)
35b. Calls on all Member States to step up cooperation with and within NATO, in order to revitalise the Alliance as the primary instrument for their international security and defence;
Amendment 11 #
2015/2283(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the package of better regulation measures adopted on 19 May 2015; believes however that material criteria for establishing the existence of a violation of the subsidiarity and proportionality principles should be proposed; calls the Commission acting together with Member States to propose a package of improvement to make reasoned opinion procedure more effective by including a principle of proportionality in the procedure;
Amendment 21 #
2015/2283(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Regrets the decrease in the number of reasoned opinions received from national parliaments in 2014; takes note of the Commission’s view that, far from reflecting a decrease in interest on their part, this might be the result of the declining number of legislative proposals from the Commission; calls the Commission to improve the quality of the Commission's explanatory statement memorandums on subsidiarity and its engagement with reasoned opinion;
Amendment 3 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Heading 1
Heading 1
Amendment 5 #
2015/2254(INL)
Draft opinion
Indent 1 – paragraph 1
Indent 1 – paragraph 1
1. Expresses the view that the Member States of the European Union should move, by consensus, towards a shared culture of the meaning ofin which the rule of law in the 28 Member States to be applied by all concerned even- handedlys promoted and implemented;
Amendment 14 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4
Citation 4
— having regard to Article 4(31) TEU, Article 295and (3) TFEU and Protocol No 1 on the role of national parliaments in the European Union,
Amendment 17 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 5
Citation 5
— having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union of 7 December 2000 (‘the Charter’), proclaimed on 12 December 2007 in Strasbourg, which entered into force with the Treaty of Lisbon in December 2009, with particular reference to Article 51 thereof, under which the Charter does not extend the scope of Union law outside the areas of Union competence and does not establish any new power or task for the Union or modify powers and tasks defined by the Treaties,
Amendment 19 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 a (new)
Citation 5 a (new)
– having regard to Declaration 1 concerning the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union annexed to the Final Act of the Intergovernmental Conference which adopted the Treaty of Lisbon, in particular the second paragraph thereof, under which the Charter does not extend the field of application of Union law beyond the powers of the Union or establish any new power or task for the Union, or modify powers and tasks as defined by the Treaties,
Amendment 21 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 b (new)
Citation 5 b (new)
– having regard to Declaration 53 by the Czech Republic on the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular paragraph 3 thereof, under which, in so far as the Charter recognises fundamental rights and principles as they result from constitutional traditions common to the Member States, those rights and principles are to be interpreted in harmony with those traditions,
Amendment 22 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 c (new)
Citation 5 c (new)
– having regard to Article 51 TEU, under which the protocols and annexes to the Treaties form an integral part thereof,
Amendment 32 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 11
Citation 11
– having regard to the publications of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), including the proposed European Fundamental Rights Information System (EFRIS) in the FRA paper 'Fundamental rights in the future of the European Union's Justice and Home Affairs', 31 December 20131 , __________________ 1 http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_s ubmission_on_the_future_of_eu_justice.pd f
Amendment 37 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 12
Citation 12
Amendment 37 #
2015/2254(INL)
Draft opinion
Indent 1 – paragraph 4
Indent 1 – paragraph 4
4. Considers it important to work towards a new consensus between the EU and its Member States with the aim of promoting democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights, proceeding from the basis that unless extreme care is taken, there will always be a danger of politicising legality;
Amendment 38 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 a (new)
Citation 12 a (new)
– having regard to Council Legal Service opinion 10296/14 of 27 May 2014, in particular paragraph 17 thereof, according to which respect for the rule of law by the Member States cannot be, under the Treaties, the subject matter of an action by the institutions of the Union irrespective of the existence of a specific material competence to frame this action, with the sole exception of the procedure described in Article 7 TEU; only this legal basis provides for a Union competence to supervise the application of the rule of law, as a value of the Union, and, according to paragraph 18 of the opinion, it does not set a basis to further develop or amend that procedure,
Amendment 40 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 13
Citation 13
Amendment 40 #
2015/2254(INL)
Draft opinion
Indent 1 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Indent 1 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Believes that creating a new EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights in an inappropriate form may lead to a situation in which small and medium-sized countries will feel dominated by larger, more powerful countries;
Amendment 42 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 15
Citation 15
Amendment 46 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 a (new)
Citation 17 a (new)
– having regard to Council Legal Service opinion 10296/14 of 27 May 2014, according to which the new EU Framework for the Rule of Law as set out in the Commission's communication is not compatible with the principle of conferral which governs the competences of the institutions of the Union,
Amendment 48 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 19
Citation 19
Amendment 54 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 20
Citation 20
Amendment 54 #
2015/2254(INL)
Draft opinion
Indent 2 – paragraph 6
Indent 2 – paragraph 6
6. RecommendsNotes that the establishment onf an EU mechanism for Don democracy, the Rrule of Llaw and Ffundamental Rrights which would include all relevant stakeholders; considers that this would, however, requires a Treaty change;
Amendment 56 #
2015/2254(INL)
Draft opinion
Indent 2 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Indent 2 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Believes that one of the fundamental values of the European Union is a culture of compromise and consensus, with the result that the existing integration process continues to develop; believes that introducing a new EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights may lead to a situation in which that culture of compromise and consensus is replaced by unbalanced and inadequate resources, exposing the EU institutions to accusations of bias;
Amendment 60 #
2015/2254(INL)
Draft opinion
Indent 2 – paragraph 6 b (new)
Indent 2 – paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Warns that introducing a new EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights may generate rhetoric which is unhelpful to EU integration and leads to bigger, more powerful countries imposing themselves on small and medium-sized countries at the cost of their identity in terms of constitutional and political structures;
Amendment 61 #
2015/2254(INL)
Draft opinion
Indent 2 – paragraph 6 c (new)
Indent 2 – paragraph 6 c (new)
6c. Warns that introducing a new EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights could disturb the fine line separating matters which remain the responsibility of the individual Member States;
Amendment 63 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 21
Citation 21
Amendment 67 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 22
Citation 22
Amendment 74 #
2015/2254(INL)
Draft opinion
Indent 2 – paragraph 10
Indent 2 – paragraph 10
Amendment 87 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas, in accordance with Article 2, Article 3(1) and Article 7 TEU, the Union avails itself of the possibility to act in order to protect its "constitutional core", reflected by the common values it shares with its Member States, though it must do so on the basis of unanimity;
Amendment 104 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas respect for the rule of law within the Union is a precondition forn important part of mutual recognition and trust, key factors forwhich are relevant to policy areas such as the internal market, police and justice cooperation, the Schengen area, and asylum and migration policies, and as a consequence, the erosion of the rule of law, democratic governance and fundamental rights are a serious threat to the stability, security and prosperity of the Unionis a threat to which the response should be to initiate the procedure provided for in Article 7 TEU;
Amendment 109 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the definition of core values and principles is a living and permanent process, and while those values and principles may evolve over time, they must be protected against short termism and ad hoc changes as a result of different political majoritiesshould be permanent and immutable;
Amendment 125 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas respect for cultural diversity and national traditions may not impedein accordance with Article 4(2) TEU, a uniform and high level of protection of democracy, rule of law and fundamental rights (DRF)should respect the Member States’ constitutional identity;
Amendment 142 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
Amendment 150 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
Amendment 167 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas the obligations incumbent on candidate countries under the Copenhagen criteria continue to apply to the Member States after joining the Union by virtue of Article 2 TEU and the principle of sincere cooperation, and whereas all Member States should therefore be assessed on a regular basis in order to verify their continued compliancecomply with the Union’s common values;
Amendment 184 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M a (new)
Recital M a (new)
Ma. whereas the Court of Justice of the European Union is competent to interpret EU law, while assessment of the compatibility of national law with EU law is a matter for national courts;
Amendment 188 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
O. whereas the need for more effective and binding mechanisms to ensure full application of Treaty principles and values has been recognised by both Commission and Council, and put into practice by the creation of the European Commission Rule of Law Framework and the Council Rule of Law DialogueCommission’s creation of a Rule of Law Framework and the start of the Council’s Rule of Law Dialogue from the very beginning gave rise to doubts about compatibility with the Treaties, in particular with the principle of conferral;
Amendment 190 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital P
Recital P
P. whereas the Union has at its disposal a multitude of instruments and processes for ensuring full and proper application of Treaty principles and values but in practice they appear limited in scope, inadequate and ineffective, or they are unlikely to be used; while their uneven application is perceived by many as politically motivated, arbitrary and unfairly targeting certain countries;
Amendment 204 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital S
Recital S
Amendment 216 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital T
Recital T
T. whereas in situations where a Member State no longer guarantees respect for DRF, the Union and its Member States have a duty toalthough mechanisms exist under international law which can be applied with regard to the protection of the rights of the residents of that Member State, new international agreements in this area can broaden the protection of fundamental rights;
Amendment 226 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital U
Recital U
Amendment 235 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital V
Recital V
Amendment 246 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital W
Recital W
Amendment 256 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital X
Recital X
X. whereas the establishment of an EU Pact forcooperation and dialogue between Member States on DRF is without prejudice to the direct application of Article 7(1) and (2) TEU;
Amendment 260 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 268 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls on the Member States to conclude a new international agreement establishing permanent cooperation and dialogue on promoting DRF;
Amendment 272 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 285 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Takes the view that the first, pilot phase of this promotion could be a Europe-wide debate with the participation of Member State governments, national parliaments and European institutions, as well as other institutions that are responsible for promoting fundamental rights;
Amendment 293 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to present, by Junesubmit, by December 20176 at the latest, a new draft agreement forreport on the state of play in the negotiations on the accession of the Union to the ECHR, taking into account the Opinion 2/13 of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) of 18 December 2014;
Amendment 310 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls for the creation of a Union Fund, on the basis of a pilot project, for legal assistance to individuals and organisations litigating cases relating to DRF violations by national governments or the institutions of the Union;
Amendment 318 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to develop and implement an awareness raising campaign, providing information about citizens’ rights to judicial redress and litigation routes in cases relating to DRF violations by national governments or institutions of the Unionfundamental rights at EU level;
Amendment 326 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Invites the CJEU to make proposals in order to speed up its procedures, with a view to improving access to justice at EU level for individuals challenging violations of DRF by the EU institutions;
Amendment 337 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recommends that the DRF expert panel, as per the proposed interinstitutional agreement, alsoCommission assess access to justice at the European level, applying the same benchmarks to the CJEU and ECtHR, including aspects such as independence and impartiality of courts and judges, length and cost of litigation, implementation of court rulings, scope of judicial control and redress available to citizens, and options for cross border collective redress;
Amendment 349 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – introductory part
Paragraph 9 – introductory part
9. Considers, furthermore, that any future Treaty revision should include the following changes:develop the promotion of DRF;
Amendment 350 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – indent 1
Paragraph 9 – indent 1
Amendment 359 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – indent 2
Paragraph 9 – indent 2
Amendment 363 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – indent 3
Paragraph 9 – indent 3
Amendment 374 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – indent 4
Paragraph 9 – indent 4
Amendment 377 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – indent 5
Paragraph 9 – indent 5
Amendment 387 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 394 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Emphasises that any action in the field of promoting DRF should be in keeping with the principle of subsidiarity;
Amendment 395 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 403 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Instructs its President to forward this resolution and the accompanying detailed recommendations to the Commission and the Council, and to the parliaments and governments of the Member States.
Amendment 1 #
2015/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2
Citation 2
– having regard to Articles 7, 8, 24, 47, 48 and 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
Amendment 12 #
2015/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas Directive 2011/93/EU is a comprehensive legal instrument containing provisions on substantive criminal law and on criminal procedures, measures for assistance and protection of victims and for prevention, including administrative measures, and its implementation requires the close involvement of actors from different sectors such as the law- enforcement authorities, the judiciary, parents’ and family associations active on the protection of minors, non- governmental organisations, internet service providers and others;
Amendment 21 #
2015/2129(INI)
D. whereas law enforcement authorities face new challenges posed by peer-to-peer and Darknet networks exchanging child sexual abuse materialpornography; whereas there is a need to raise awareness at an early stage among girls and boys about the risks and the importance of respecting the dignity and privacy of others in the digital era;
Amendment 22 #
2015/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas prevention of child abuse must include both a just prosecution of all perpetrators as well as the opportunity for offenders to be treated for their addiction;
Amendment 30 #
2015/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Amendment 32 #
2015/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)
Recital F b (new)
Fb. whereas perpetrators are both men and women, a social taboo which leaves a lack of treatment programmes for female offenders;
Amendment 34 #
2015/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F c (new)
Recital F c (new)
Fc. whereas pornography is any media designed to sexually excite the user; and child pornography features anyone under 18, and is in its very essence child abuse;
Amendment 43 #
2015/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Recognises that pornography use has a, scientifically proven, highly addictive drug-like effect which stimulates dopamine release, giving pleasurable sensations; and that more frequent exposure often leads to craving for more intense and novel expressions and frequency, including the viewing of child pornography;
Amendment 44 #
2015/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes the responsibility borne by the media whereby sexualised images of ever younger beautiful people distorts relational and neurological development and destroys healthy family relationships;
Amendment 71 #
2015/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3 a (new)
Subheading 3 a (new)
Welcomes the bilateral agreements between the USA and Slovakia, and the UK on intelligence sharing on convicted sex offenders;
Amendment 93 #
2015/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Encourages Member States to dedicate plentiful resources to breaking the businesses of child abusers both within the EU and in third countries;
Amendment 108 #
2015/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Encourages Member States to fulfil their prevention obligations by providing effective, academically peer- reviewed, intervention programmes for potential child sex abusers;
Amendment 130 #
2015/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Acknowledges that the Member States have put in place legislation and administrative measures to remove webpages containing child pornography hosted on their territory; regrets the fact that only half of the Member States have incorporated provisions into their legislation making it possible to block access to such webpages for users within their territory; calls on the Member States to fully implement Article 25, including blocking child sexual abuse material pornography where possible, and with the relevant safeguards in place;
Amendment 138 #
2015/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls on the Member States to speed up, in cooperation with the Internet industry, the notice and take-down procedures and to establish partnerships with the online industry to prevent networks and systems from being hacked and misused to distribute child sexual abuse materialpornography;
Amendment 147 #
2015/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Urges the Member States to make it mandatory for internet service providers (ISP) to report child sexual abuse materialpornography detected in their infrastructure proactively to law enforcement authorities, as well as to national hotlines;
Amendment 154 #
2015/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Recognises the active and supportive role in combating child sexual abuse materialpornography on the Internet played by civil society organisations, as is the case with the Internet Watch Foundation in the UK; urges the Member States which have not yet done so to set up such hotlines and takes the view that they should be allowed to search for child sexual abuse materialpornography online proactively;
Amendment 67 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the influx of refugees from war-threatened Ukraine to EU countries, in particular to Poland and the Czech Republic, is constantly increasing;
Amendment 206 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital V
Recital V
Amendment 347 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 356 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 365 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 381 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 406 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 455 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
Amendment 465 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
Amendment 511 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
Amendment 563 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
Amendment 589 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
Amendment 613 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
Amendment 629 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
Amendment 736 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
Amendment 258 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Believes that for Members of the Commission the ‘cooling-off period’ to work in lobbying should be extended to three years; and that a two-year cooling-off period should also apply to all Commission staff involved in the drafting or implementation of EU legislation or treaties, including contract staff;
Amendment 336 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 32 – point 1 (new)
(1) Reminds that the European Court of Justice ruled in October 2013, Case C- 280/11 P, that the Council must release documents publicly disclosing Member States’ negotiating positions in Council from an early stage;
Amendment 366 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 8 a (new)
Subheading 8 a (new)
Transparency in the election of the President of the European Parliament and of the President of the Commission
Amendment 367 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)
Paragraph 35 a (new)
35a. Takes the view that in order to increase the transparency of the European Parliament’s business, its President should be elected by open ballot; calls on the relevant parliamentary committee to amend the Rules of Procedure accordingly;
Amendment 368 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 b (new)
Paragraph 35 b (new)
35b. Takes the view that the election of the President of the Commission, which is rightly treated as an expression of the European Parliament’s political prerogatives, should be an open ballot, thereby increasing the transparency of Parliament’s business and sending a strong signal to the public as regards accountability in decision-making; calls on the relevant parliamentary committee to amend the Rules of Procedure accordingly;
Amendment 407 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41 a (new)
Paragraph 41 a (new)
41a. Calls for transparency in the conclusion of interinstitutional agreements to be enhanced and guaranteed by subjecting Commission proposals to examination by a Parliament committee and through Parliament’s effective inclusion in the negotiation of such agreements;
Amendment 26 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the reform of Parliament’s electoral procedure should aim at enhancing the democratic dimension of the European elections, reinforce the concept of citizenship of the Union, improve the functioning of the European Parliament and the governance of the Union, make the work of the European Parliament more legitimate and efficient, enhance the effectiveness of the system for conducting European elections, and provide for greater electoral equality for citizens of the Union;
Amendment 27 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the reform of Parliament’s electoral procedure should aim at enhancing the democratic dimension of the European elections, reinforce the concept of citizenship of the Union in a way that does not contradict the obvious primacy of national consciousness and citizenship, improve the functioning of the European Parliament and the governance of the Union, make the work of the European Parliament more legitimate and efficient, enhance the effectiveness of the system for conducting European elections, and provide for greater electoral equality for citizens of the Union;
Amendment 38 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas, despite of the wording of Article 14(2) of the Treaty on European Union, ‘the European Parliament is not a representative body of a sovereign European people’, as clearly recalled by the German Constitutional Court in paragraph 280 of its judgment of 30 June 2009, in which it stressed that ‘this is reflected in the fact that it is designed as a representation of peoples in the respective national contingents of Members, not as a representation of Union citizens in unity without differentiation, according to the principle of electoral equality’;
Amendment 43 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas a comprehensive agreement on a truly uniform electoral procedure has not yet been achieved, though some convergence of electoral systems has gradually taken place, inter alia through secondary legislation, such as Council Directive 93/109/EC on the right to vote and stand as candidate in elections to the Parliament for Union citizens residing in another Member State;
Amendment 46 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas despite these reforms, European elections are still governed for the most part by national laws, electoral campaigning remains national, and European political parties cannot sufficiently fulfil their constitutional mandate and ‘contribute to forming European political awareness and to expressing the will of citizens of the Union’ as required by Article 10(4) TEU;
Amendment 49 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas European political parties are best placearely recognisable to the electorate and therefore not sufficiently understood to ‘contribute to forming European political awareness’13 and should therefore cannot legitimately play a stronger role in the campaigns for Parliament elections, so as to improve their visibility and to show the link between a vote for a particular national party and the impact it has on the size of a European political group in the European Parliament; __________________ 13; __________________ 13 Article 10(4) TEU. Article 10(4) TEU.
Amendment 63 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
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 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;
Amendment 68 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
O. whereas the Lisbon Treaty established a new constitutional order by granting the European Parliament the right to elect the President of the European Commission14 instead of merely giving its consent; whereas the 2014 elections set an important precedent in this respect; whereas the procedure for the nomination and selection of lead candidates for this position should furthermore be an integral part of the election campaigns; and whereas the deadline for the nomination of candidates by European political parties should be codified in the Electoral Act; __________________ 14, in assuming its right to elect the President of the European Commission14, the European Parliament misapplied the Lisbon Treaty, even though this was not the intention of Member States when the Treaty was ratified; whereas the turnout for the 2014 elections was the lowest on record and highlights the lack of legitimacy in the procedure for the nomination and selection of the Commission President; __________________ 14 Article 17(7) TEU. Article 17(7) TEU.
Amendment 73 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital P
Recital P
Amendment 85 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Recital Q
Q. whereas the minimum age for eligibility to stand as a candidate across the 28 Member States varies between 18 and 25, and the minimum age for eligibility to vote ranges from 16 to 18, due to the divergent constitutional and electoral traditions in the Member States; whereas harmonisation of the voting age, and of the minimum age for candidates, would be highly desirable as a means of providing Union citizens with real voting equality, and would enable discrimination to be avoided in the most fundamental area of citizenship: the right to participate in the democratic process;
Amendment 111 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Decides to reform its electoral procedure in good time before the 2019 elections, with the aim of enhancing the democratic dimension of the European elections, reinforcing the concept of citizenship of the Union, improving the functioning of the European Parliament and the governance of the Union, making the work of the European Parliament more legitimate and efficient, enhancing the effectiveness of the system for conducting European elections, and providing for greater electoral equality for citizens of the Union;
Amendment 115 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Decides to reform its electoral procedure in good time before the 2019 elections, with the aim of enhancing the democratic dimension of the European elections, reinforcing the concept of citizenship of the Union in a way that does not contradict the obvious primacy of national consciousness and citizenship, improving the functioning of the European Parliament and the governance of the Union in accordance with national democracies, making the work of the European Parliament more legitimate and efficient, enhancing the effectiveness of the system for conducting European elections, and providing for greater electoral equality for citizens of the Union;
Amendment 121 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 128 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Proposes that the visibility of EuropeanRecognises the right of national political parties be enhanced byto placing e their names and logos 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 Parliamentf European political parties on posters and other material used in European election campaigns;
Amendment 131 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Proposes that the names and logos of the national political parties or alliances of parties should appear on the ballot papers, and that those ballot papers may also mention, secondarily, any affiliations that such national political parties or alliances of parties may have with European political parties;
Amendment 150 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 165 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 174 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 187 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
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;
Amendment 198 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 204 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 215 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls for the standards intended to ensure free and unfettered competition between political parties to be tightened up and, in particular, for media pluralism and the neutrality of all levels of public administration with regard to the electoral process to be enhanced;
Amendment 68 #
2015/0125(NLE)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 17 a (new)
Recital 17 a (new)
(17a) Relocating countries should define their own criteria for selecting people for relocation. Countries from which refugees will be resettled, should allow hosting countries practical assistance in the selection and relocation of displaced persons (complying with recital 25) and in preparing for their relocation.
Amendment 76 #
2015/0125(NLE)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) The provisional measures are intended to relieve the significant asylum pressure from Italy and Greece, in particular by relocating an important number of applicants in clear need of international protection who have arrived in the territory of Italy and Greece following the date on which this Decision becomes applicable. Based on the overall number of third- country nationals who have entered irregularly Italy and Greece in 2014 and the number of those who are in clear need of international protection, a total of 420 000 applicants in clear need of international protection should be relocated from Italy and Greece. This number corresponds to approximately 40% of the total number of third country nationals in clear need of international protection who have entered irregularly in Italy and Greece in 2014. Thus, the relocation measure proposed in this Decision constitutes fair burden sharing between Italy and Greece on the one hand and the other Member States on the other hand. Based on the same overall available figures in 2014 and in the first four months of 2015 in Italy compared to Greece, 60% of these applicants should be relocated from Italy and 40% from Greece.
Amendment 4 #
2014/2257(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the European Citizens’ Initiative is a new political right for citizens and is an extraordinary and innovative tool of participatory democracy in the European Union, whose potential must be exploited fully and significantly enhanced in order to achieve the best results;
Amendment 82 #
2014/2257(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Acknowledges the delicate problem of organisers’ personal liability with regard to data protection when collecting signatories’ personal data, and proposes that the range of data required be reduced, or liability extended to volunteer campaigners, and that the wording of Article 13 of Regulation 211/2011, on liability, be changed to make it clear that personal liability is not unlimited; proposes, to this end, that inspiration be drawn from Article 3 of Directive 2008/99/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on the protection of the environment through criminal law, with a view to establishing that organisers are responsible for acts which are ‘unlawful and committed intentionally or with at least serious negligence’;
Amendment 95 #
2014/2257(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Commission to revise the wording of Article 10(c) of Regulation 211/2011 to allow proper follow-up to a successful ECI, including a parliamentary debate in plenary followed by a vote on the ECI; urges the Commission to start preparingeliminate the practice of arbitrarily deciding not to accept ECIs and make it possible for successful ECIs to be followed through; emphasises that preparations for a legal act on successful ECIs must necessarily be underway within 12 months of their acceptance;
Amendment 115 #
2014/2257(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Invites the Commission to explore the possibility of funding ECIs through the EU budget, via European programmes such as the Europe for Citizens programme and the Rights, Equality and Citizenship programme, including the possibility of financing promotional radio and television programmes, given that there is a real need for financial support for the organisation of ECIs and that numerous amendments to the EU budget have been submitted to this end;
Amendment 123 #
2014/2257(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Welcomes the Commission’s report of 1 April 2015 on the ECI and calls on it to ensure, in cooperation with the citizens’ committee which proposed the initiative, that, in its revision of this instrument, all the appropriate legal measures are implemented when an ECI is deemed to have been completed successfully;
Amendment 167 #
2014/2254(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that it is essential to guarantee that the common European values listed in Article 2 TEU are upheld in full in both European and national legislation, in particular by guaranteeing that the dignity of every human being is respected from conception until natural death;
Amendment 179 #
2014/2254(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes that even where the life of unborn persons is not sufficiently protected, everyone should be guaranteed the right not to take any action to harm the life of such persons;
Amendment 298 #
2014/2254(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Deplores recent instances of anti- Semitic and, anti-Islamic and anti-Christian discrimination and violence; calls on Member States to protect freedom of religion or belief and to promote tolerance, in particular in the form of freedom to express moral convictions;
Amendment 401 #
2014/2254(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Deplores the fact that even today people belonging to minoritiesdisabled people, who are a permanent minority, and unborn children are still victims of discrimination;
Amendment 413 #
2014/2254(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls on the Member States to fully respect the rights of national minorities, particularly on issues of language, education and culture;
Amendment 439 #
2014/2254(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Strongly deplores the fact that negotiations within the Council on the proposal for an anti-discrimination directive have stalled, and reiterates its call to the Council to adopt the proposal as soon as possiblExpresses concern at the stubborn attempts, ignoring broad public opposition, to introduce a directive on ‘non-discrimination’, in a form which runs counter to its stated intent, by, among other things, undermining both the right of some people to protect their lives and freedom of expression in defending the ethics of marital and family life;
Amendment 459 #
2014/2254(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Urges the EU and the Member States to ban all discrimination on grounds of gender identity and moral convictions, and to combat and prosecute all forms of violence and discrimination against women;
Amendment 26 #
2014/2253(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for the creation within the relevant Directorates-General (DG IPOL, DG EXPO and DG Research) of an autonomous system for ex-post assessment of the impact of the main EU laws adopted by the European Parliament under codecision and in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, including via cooperation with the national parliaments; points out that in order to establish an efficient system to assess the implementation of directives, effective cooperation between the EU institutions needs to be set up.
Amendment 28 #
2014/2253(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Emphasises that the European Parliament and other EU institutions should be in possession of detailed information on the implementation of directives by individual Member States, including information on delays in transposing them into national legislation.
Amendment 6 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)
Citation 6 a (new)
Amendment 52 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
Amendment 84 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
Amendment 103 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
Amendment 121 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Recital Q
Amendment 130 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital R
Recital R
R. whereas the growth potential of the Single Market should be further exploited in the areas of services, the Digital Single Market, and the Energy Union, the Banking Union and the Capital Markets Union;
Amendment 143 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital T
Recital T
Amendment 151 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital V
Recital V
Amendment 177 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers, also, that a new debate on reforming the EU institutions to strengthen the Member States’ influence on the EU decision-making process could be a response to the threats;
Amendment 215 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recalls that the European Parliament is the parliament of the whole Union; considers that its working methods should be reformed so as to strengthen its control over the Commission in the implementation of the acquis, and to ensure proper democratic accountability even in the areas in which not all Member States participate; notes that, for these purposes too, the European Parliament intends to change its Rules of Procedure so that the President of the European Commission is elected by open ballot;
Amendment 221 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Considers that, in view of the need to enhance the prestige and impartiality of office of President of the European Parliament, he or she should be elected by a 2/3 majority of votes;
Amendment 226 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Believes there is a need to create conditions for cooperation between countries inside and outside the eurozone which do not discriminate against the latter, and also to strengthen competitiveness and the internal market, reduce the regulatory burden, safeguard national sovereignty and increase the role of national parliaments;
Amendment 237 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Considers it necessary for the European Parliament to reform its working methods in order to cope with the challenges ahead, by using its control over the Commission, including in relation to the implementation and application of the acquis in the Member States, by limiting first-reading agreements to exceptional cases of urgency, and by improving its own electoral procedure through the revision of the 1976 Electoral Act in line with Parliament’s proposals contained in its resolution of 11 November 2015 on the reform of the electoral law of the European Union5 or as a future step through the adoption of implementing measures in application of Article 14 of the Electoral Act; __________________ 5 Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0395.
Amendment 258 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Encourages meaningful political dialogue with national parliaments on the contents of legislative proposals; insists, however, on a clear delineation of the respective decision-making competences of the national parliaments and the European Parliament, where the former should exercise their European function on the basis of their national constitutions, in particular via the control of their national governments as members of the European Council and the Council, which is the level where they are best placed to directly influence the content of and exercise scrutiny over the European legislative process; is therefore against the creation of joint parliamentary decision-making bodies for reasons of transparency, accountability and ability to act, but supports the idea of creating a ‘green card’ procedure under which national parliaments will be able to submit proposals for EU laws;
Amendment 264 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Stresses equally strongly the need to strengthen the role of national parliaments through effective use of the ‘yellow and orange card’ procedure, whereby a group of national parliaments, acting together, could block a particular legislative proposal;
Amendment 371 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Believes that a mechanism should be introduced to ensure transparency in the election of the European Commission President;
Amendment 375 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Calls on the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission to organise better co-operation modalities with the Committee of the Regions (CoR) and the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) in order to be able to take their opinions into account at an earlier stage in the legislative procedure; given that local and regional authorities are impacted by approximately 70 % of EU legislation;
Amendment 387 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Stresses the importance of the subsidiarity principle, as laid down in Article 5 TEU, which is binding on all institutions and bodies, notably the CoR and the EESC, and of the instruments contained in Protocol (No 2) on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality; supports a flexible interpretation of the deadlines enshrined in the Protocolapproach to extending the deadlines enshrined in the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, under which national parliaments issue reasoned opinions on non-compliance with the principle of proportionality, and calls on the Commission to improve the quality of its responses to reasoned opinions;
Amendment 393 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29a. Believes that national parliaments applying the yellow card procedure referred to in Article 7 of the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality should be sufficient reason to stop a legislative procedure;
Amendment 395 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 b (new)
Paragraph 29 b (new)
29b. Is of the opinion that the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament should, on the basis of an inter-institutional agreement, suspend work on a draft law to which the national parliaments have issued a yellow card;
Amendment 405 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30a. Stresses the importance of the European Citizens' Initiative (ECI) as a first instrument of participatory democracy, giving citizens direct contact with EU institutions and allowing active participation in the development of EU policy and legislation; recognises, at the same time, that there are significant shortcomings which need to be addressed and resolved in order to make the ECI more effective;
Amendment 407 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 b (new)
Paragraph 30 b (new)
30b. Considers it particularly important to address the issue of a possible conflict of interests in view of the fact that the Commission itself is solely responsible for checking the legal admissibility of an initiative; stresses that the wording of Article 10(c) of Regulation 211/2011 should be revised to allow proper follow- up to a successful ECI, including a parliamentary debate in plenary followed by a vote on the ECI;
Amendment 408 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 c (new)
Paragraph 30 c (new)
30c. Believes that the Commission should adopt the practice of preparing a legal act on successful ECIs within 12 months of their acceptance;
Amendment 490 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42 a (new)
Paragraph 42 a (new)
42a. Considers that in Alert Mechanism Reports (AMR), detailed assessments of macroeconomic imbalances and country- specific recommendations (CSR) carried out as part of the European Semester, the Commission and the Council should take into account the level of defence spending in a given Member State and advocate a defence spending ceiling of approximately 2% of the country's GDP;
Amendment 751 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83
Paragraph 83
Amendment 761 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 84
Paragraph 84
Amendment 764 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 84 a (new)
Paragraph 84 a (new)
84a. Believes that NATO remains the foundation of Europe's security and stability; calls on Member States to coordinate their cooperation in the field of security and defence within NATO, "which, for those States which are members of it, remains the foundation of their collective defence and the forum for its implementation" as it is said in point 42.7 of TEU;
Amendment 768 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 85
Paragraph 85
85. Insists on complementing the provisions for PESCO with an EU white book on security and defence on the basis of the EU global strategy for foreign and security policy currently under preparation by the VP/HR, as such a document would further define efforts by NATO withe EU’s strategic objective efforts in the field of security and defence, and identify the existing and required capabilities;
Amendment 772 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86
Paragraph 86
86. Underlines the need to define common European capabilities and armaments policy (Article 42(3) TEU), which would encompass the joint planning, development and procurement of military capabilities and which should also include proposals to react to cyber, hybrid and asymmetrical threats; encourages the Commission to work on an ambitious European Defence Action Plan, as announced in the 2016 Work Programmeshould also include proposals to react to cyber, hybrid and asymmetrical threats;
Amendment 775 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 87
Paragraph 87
Amendment 780 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 87 a (new)
Paragraph 87 a (new)
87a. Calls on all Member States to strengthen cooperation within and with NATO, in order to revitalise the Alliance as the primary instrument for their international security and defence engagement;
Amendment 782 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88
Paragraph 88
88. Recalls the existence of Article 44 TEU, which provides additional flexibility provisions and introduces the possibility of entrusting the implementation of crisis management tasks to a group of Member States, which would carry out such tasks in the name of the EU and under the political control and strategic guidance of the Political and Security Committee (PSC) and the EEAS;
Amendment 790 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 91
Paragraph 91
91. Calls for the creation of a permanent military operational headquarters that would cooperate closely with the existing Civilian Planning and Conduct Capability (CPCC); calls for the institutionalisation of the various European military structures (among others the different ‘Battle Groups’, Euroforces, France-United Kingdom defence cooperation, Benelux air defence cooperation) into the EU framework, and for an increase in the usability of EU battlegroups, inter alia by extending common financing and by considering, by default, their deployment as an initial entry force in future crisis management scenarios; insists that chartering planes from the Russian company SALIS to provide strategic airlift for EU Battle Groups lowers chances that Battle groups will be successfully deployed to the crisis zone in the East or South; calls for chartering strategic airlift planes directly from Ukraine;
Amendment 795 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 92
Paragraph 92
92. Notes that this permanent headquarters could engage in permanent contingency planning and play a major coordinating role in future applications of Article 42(7) TEUArticle 42(7) TEU obliges Member States to offer aid and assistance to another which has been the victim of armed aggression on its territory on the bilateral basis and stipulates that the commitments and cooperation of Member States in the area of security and defence "shall be consistent with commitments under the NATO, which, for those States which are members of it, remains the foundation of their collective defence and the forum for its implementation"; is of the view that the ‘mutual defence clause’, as laid down in this Article and requested by France during the Foreign Affairs Council on 17 November 2015, will constitute a catalyst for further development of the EU’s security and defence policystronger cooperation between EU and NATO, leading to stronger commitment by all Member States;
Amendment 804 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 93 a (new)
Paragraph 93 a (new)
93a. Takes the view that, because Member States’ defence expenditure is important for the security of Europe as a whole, any assessments of financial and budgetary policy (the European Semester) must take account of the scale of that expenditure in each Member State;
Amendment 830 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 96 a (new)
Paragraph 96 a (new)
96a. Takes the view that the European Union urgently needs an effective external border control instrument, which is a pre-condition for the survival of the Schengen area;
Amendment 831 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 96 b (new)
Paragraph 96 b (new)
96b. Takes the view that EU solutions can play a supporting role in national solutions, given that because the borders belong to the Member States, it is they who are responsible for controlling them; draws attention to the fact that any instruments that result in Member State sovereignty being eroded will be ineffective;
Amendment 33 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the ‘polycrisis’ currently faced by the Union, including its financial, economic, social, democratic, cultural, identity, safety and migratory consequences, have all led to the rejection by a growing part of the population of the current European Union;
Amendment 41 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas progress towards a Union that can really deliver on and achieve its goals are impaired by a failure of governance owing to a continuous and systematic search for unanimity in the Council (which is still based on the so- called Luxembourg Compromise) and the lack of a credible single executive authority enjoying full democratic legitimacy and competence to take effective action across a wide spectrum of policies; whereas recent examples such as the uncontrolled migration flow, the slow clean-up of our banks after the outbreak of the financial crisis and the lack of an immediate common response to the internal and external threat of terrorism have aptly demonstrated the Union’s incapacity to respond effectively and quickly;
Amendment 66 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the culture of compromise and consensus is a fundamental value of the European Union;
Amendment 138 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
Amendment 157 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas the European Union is a constitutional system based on the rule of law; whereas the Treaties must be rooted in the sovereignty of its Member States as authors of the EU Treaties and noting that if the exercise of certain competences changed to give the European C obviously be delegated, sovereignty by itself cannot be divided, shared, limited or transferred ourt 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)people’s control without de facto dissipating and undermining the rule of law ; whereas ultra vires ECJ teleological interpretations lead to unilateral judicial amendment to the Treaties against the very will of its signatory representative governments ; whereas in case of risk of conflict of laws, nobody else than relevant national parliament(s), the competent national high Court or/and the people itself deciding by referendum shall now decide which legal provision, national or European shall have the primacy over the other;
Amendment 269 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
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 address the shortcomings of the governance of the European Union by undertaking a comprehensive, in-depth reform of the Lisbon Treatyprinciple of mutual trust and loyal cooperation between the Member States and the institutions of the European Union should be the basis of all planned institutional changes; sovereignty and constitutional identity of the states should be respected for the sake of the Union; in turn, states are jointly responsible for the Union;
Amendment 282 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the direction of the Union’s reform should lead towards its modernisation by establishing new effective European capacities and instruments, rather than its renationalisation by means of greater intergovernmentalismprinciple of subsidiarity, which precludes centralism and requires competences to be vested at such levels of government that are best placed due to proximity with a given case, should be the basic criterion for reviewing and distributing competences;
Amendment 298 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that recent Eurobarometer polling demonstrates that, contrary to popular belief, EU citizens are still fully aware of the importance of, and in support of, genuine European solutions19; __________________ 19 Standard EurobarBelieves that all reform efforts should be based on the protection of freedoms underlying the common market that are currently being unlawfully limited at the expense of its openness and competer 84 - Autumn 2015 & Special Eurobarometer EP - June 2016.itiveness;
Amendment 310 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Observes with great concern the proliferation of subsets of Member States undermining the unity of the Union by causing a lack of transparency, as well as diminishing the trust of the peoplePoints to the need to fully implement the principle of openness expressed in Article 15 TFEU;
Amendment 319 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. StressBelieves that a comprehensive democratic reflection on the reform of the Treaties can and must only be achieved through a Convention, which guarantees inclusiveness through its composition of representatives of national parliaments, governments of all the Member States, the Commission and the European Parliament, and also provides the proper platform for such reflection and engagement with European citizensthe application of Article 48 TEU should be preceded by a reform improving the Union within the current Treaty framework; the reform should be implemented until the end of 2018;
Amendment 413 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
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 ofbe a good basis for a mutually beneficial cooperation between 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 Treatiesnd the EU that would promote Europe’s security;
Amendment 432 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Underlines the fact that, until the Treaties cease to apply to the United Kingdom, it will continue to participate in all decision-making of the Union throughout its institutions, with the exception of the negotiations and the agreement concerning its own withdrawal; considers that intermediate arrangements will need to be made concerning the UK’s participation in European decision- making, as it will be politically difficult to allow a Member State in the process of leaving to influence decisions affecting the Union of which it will soon cease to be a member, which is fully in line with the Treaties;
Amendment 638 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
Amendment 736 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Notes that the Treaties provide ample means to set up a humane, well- functioning migration management system including a European Border and Coast Guard; believes, however, that the Treaties, particularly Article 79(5) TFEU, are too restrictive regarding other aspects of migration, especially on the establishment of a genuine European legal migration system; insists that democrat that forms of solidarity in this field require mutual trust between the Union and the Member States, which scrutiny by Parliament is needed on the implementation of border control,hould remain competent in the issues of asylum and immigration policies, and that the safeguarding of national security cannot be used as a pretext to circumvent European action;
Amendment 747 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29a. Takes the view that the European Union urgently needs an effective external border control instrument, which is a pre-condition for the survival of the Schengen area;
Amendment 760 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Considers it necessary, in view of the intensity of the terrorist threat, to upgrade the EU’s capacities in the fight against terrorism and international organised crime; stresses that, beyond strengthening it is necessary to enhance coordination between the competent authorities and agencies in the Member States, Europol and Eurojust must receive genuine investigation and prosecution competences and capabilit through the activities within Europol and Eurojust agencies;
Amendment 763 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30a. Draws attention to the fact that any instruments that result in Member State sovereignty being eroded will be ineffective;
Amendment 842 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
Amendment 852 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)
Paragraph 35 a (new)
35a. Considers that a new debate on reforming the EU institutions to strengthen the Member States’ influence on the EU decision-making process could be a response to the threats;
Amendment 855 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
Amendment 875 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. WBelcomieves 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 ofat a mechanism should be introduced to ensure transparency in the electoral lawion 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 dCommission President; further notes that it is necessary to increase representativeness of the European Parliament and thereby to refrawin from at least one third of the Member Stateestablishing compulsory electoral thresholds;
Amendment 890 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38 a (new)
Paragraph 38 a (new)
38a. Believes that any given Member of the European Parliament should be nominated as the President for a maximum of two terms of office, either consecutive ones or with an interval between the first and the second term of office;
Amendment 895 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Reiterates its call for a single seat for the European Parliament; proposes that Parliament and the Council each decide the location of their own seat after having obtained the consent of the other; further proposes that the seats of all the other EU institutions, agencies and bodies be determined by Parliament and the Council on a proposal by the European executive, acting in accordance with a special legislative procedure;
Amendment 967 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
Paragraph 46
46. Recognises the significant role played by national parliaments in the constitutional order of the European Union, and in particular their role in transposing EU legislation into national law and the role they would play in both ex-ante and ex-post control of legislative decisions and policy choices made by their members of the new Council of States, including its specialised configurations; suggests therefore complementing and enhancing the powers of national parliaments by introducing a ‘green card’ procedure whereby national parliaments could submit legislative proposals to the Council for its consideration; also stresses the need to strengthen the role of national parliaments through effective use of the ‘yellow and orange card’ procedure, whereby a group of national parliaments, acting together, could block a particular legislative proposal;
Amendment 976 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46 a (new)
Paragraph 46 a (new)
46a. Further suggests that the application by national parliaments of the yellow card procedure referred to in Article 7 of the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality was a sufficient reason to stop a legislative procedure;
Amendment 995 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
Paragraph 49
49. Recalls its conviction that the financing of the EU budget should respect the letter and the spirit of the Treaty and return to a system of genuine, clear, simple and fair own resources regarding corrective taxation of negative externalities arising from economic activity, as with taxes on financial transactions and Carbon tax; stresses that the reintroduction of such resources would put an end to the share of GNI-based contributions and thus lessen the burden on national treasuries; awaits with interest the proposals from the high-level group on own resources in this respect;
Amendment 999 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50
Amendment 1015 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
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 that respect for the Treaties, legitimacy and continuity of the Union require strict compliance with the Treaties revision procedure, as set oput for an associate statusin Article 48 TEU;
Amendment 1029 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
Paragraph 53
53. Commits itself to playing a leading part in these important constitutional developments, and is determined to make its own proposals forRequests the Council and the European Commission to hold an interinstitutional debate that will initiate a process for enhancing the Union within the applicable Treaty framendment in a timely fashionwork and evaluate the execution of tasks and competences in the context of Union legitimacy, efficiency and accountability;
Amendment 45 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1.- Point (e) -subpoint (v.)
Paragraph 1.- Point (e) -subpoint (v.)
v) to fully involve national parliaments in the debate on the specifics of TTIP and keep them regularly informed at least each month on the course of negotiations, especially since this agreement should be considered a ‘mixed- type’ agreement and would thus require a ratification at national level;
Amendment 96 #
2013/0409(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a In respect of minor offences, and provided this is in conformity with the right to a fair trial, this Directive shall not apply: a. where the law of a Member State provides for the imposition of a sanction by an authority other than a court having jurisdiction in criminal matters, and the imposition of such a sanction may be appealed or referred to such a court; or b. where deprivation of liberty cannot be imposed as a sanction.
Amendment 62 #
2013/0407(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) This Directive should apply only to criminal proceedings. Proceedings for minor offences are not covered by this Directive, unless they are conducted before a court having jurisdiction in criminal matters. Administrative proceedings leading to sanctions such as competition, trade, tax, financial services proceedings and other investigations by administrative authorities in relation to these proceedings, and also civil proceedings are not covered by this Directive.
Amendment 130 #
2013/0407(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2
Article 2
This Directive applies to natural persons suspected or accused in criminal proceedings, from the time they become suspects or accused persons until the final conclusion of those proceedings.
Amendment 142 #
2013/0407(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Amendment 211 #
2013/0407(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Amendment 212 #
2013/0407(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point a
Amendment 213 #
2013/0407(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point b
b) does not request a retrial or appeal within a reasonable time frame under the provisions of national laws.