BETA

18 Amendments of Oldřich VLASÁK related to 2013/0181(COD)

Oldřich VLASÁK

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

(6) It is essential that the statistical production necessary for the performance of the activities of the Union should only be based on reliable data. In the production of MIP relevant data, which is an essential input for the detection of macroeconomic imbalances as well as the prevention and correction of excessive macroeconomic imbalances within the Union, unreliable data can have a significant impact on the interest of the Union. Additional measures to make the enforcement of the production, provision and quality monitoring of MIP relevant data more effective are necessary for the performance of the macroeconomic imbalances procedure. Those measures should enhance the credibility of the underlying statistical information as well as of the provision and quality monitoring of the MIP relevant data. In order to deter against misrepresentation, whether intentional or due to serious negligence, of MIP relevant data, a mechanism of financial sanctions should be established, which will also serve the purpose of ensuring due diligence in the production of MIP relevant data.

2013/12/10
Committee: REGI

Oldřich VLASÁK

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

(6) It is essential that the statistical production necessary for the performance of the activities of the Union should only be based on reliable data. In the production of MIP relevant data, which is an essential input for the detection of macroeconomic imbalances as well as the prevention and correction of excessive macroeconomic imbalances within the Union, unreliable data can have a significant impact on the interest of the Union. Additional measures to make the enforcement of the production, provision and quality monitoring of MIP relevant data more effective are necessary for the performance of the macroeconomic imbalances procedure. Those measures should enhance the credibility of the underlying statistical information as well as of the provision and quality monitoring of the MIP relevant data. In order to deter against misrepresentation, whether intentional or due to serious negligence, of MIP relevant data, a mechanism of financial sanctions applied to the Eurozone Member States should be established, which will also serve the purpose of ensuring due diligence in the production of MIP relevant data.

2013/12/10
Committee: REGI

Oldřich VLASÁK

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7

(7) To supplement the rules on calculating the fines for manipulation of statistics as well as the rules on the procedure to be followed by the Commission for the investigation of such actions, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘the Treaty’) should be delegated to the Commission in respect of detailed criteria for establishing the amount of the fine and for conducting the Commission's investigations. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. When preparing and drawing up delegated acts, the Commission should ensure the simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and the Council.deleted

2013/12/10
Committee: REGI

Oldřich VLASÁK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1

~~1. The Council, acting on a proposal by the Commission, may decide to impose a fine on a Member State that intentionally or by serious negligence misrepresents the MIP relevant data.~~deleted

2013/12/10
Committee: REGI

Oldřich VLASÁK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1

1. The Council, acting on a proposal by the Commission, may decide to impose a fine on a Eurozone Member State that intentionally or by serious negligence misrepresents the MIP relevant data.

2013/12/10
Committee: REGI

Oldřich VLASÁK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2

2. The fine referred to in paragraph 1 shall be effective, dissuasive and proportionate to the nature, seriousness and duration of the misrepresentation. The amount of the fine shall not exceed 0.05% of the GDP of the Member State concerndeleted.

2013/12/10
Committee: REGI

Oldřich VLASÁK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2

2. The fine referred to in paragraph 1 shall be effective, dissuasive and proportionate to the nature, seriousness and duration of the misrepresentation. The amount of the fine shall not exceed 0.025% of the GDP of the Member State concerned.

2013/12/10
Committee: REGI

Oldřich VLASÁK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3

3. The Commission may conduct all investigations necessary to establish the existence of the misrepresentations referred to in paragraph 1. It may decide to initiate an investigation when it finds that there are serious indications of the existence of facts liable to constitute such a misrepresentation. In investigating the putative misrepresentations, the Commission shall take into account any comments submitted by the Member State concerned. In order to carry out its tasks, the Commission may request the Member State to provide information, and may conduct on-site inspections and access the underlying statistical information and documents related to the MIP relevant data. If the law of the Member State concerned requires prior judicial authorisation for on-site inspections, the Commission shall make the necessary applications. Upon completion of its investigation, and before submitting any proposal to the Council, the Commission shall give the Member State concerned the opportunity of being heard in relation to the matters under investigation. The Commission shall base any proposal to the Council only on facts on which the Member State concerned has had the opportunity to comment. The Commission shall fully respect the rights of defence of the Member State concerned during the investigations.deleted

2013/12/10
Committee: REGI

Oldřich VLASÁK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4

~~4. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt~~ delegated acts in accordance with Article 12 concerning: (a) detailed criteria establishing the amount of the fine referred to in paragraph 1; (b) detailed rules concerning the procedures for the investigations referred to in paragraph 3, the associated measures and the reporting on the investigations; (c) detailed rules of procedure aimed at guaranteeing the rights of the defence, access to the file, legal representation, confidentiality and provisions as to timing and the collection of the fines referred to in paragraph 1.

2013/12/10
Committee: REGI

Oldřich VLASÁK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 5

5. The Court of Justice of the European Union shall have unlimited jurisdiction to review the decisions of the Council imposing fines under paragraph 1. It may annul, reduce or increase the fine so imposed.deleted

2013/12/10
Committee: REGI

Oldřich VLASÁK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10

~~The sanctions imposed pursuant to Article 11 shall be of an administrative nature.~~Article 10 deleted

2013/12/10
Committee: REGI

Oldřich VLASÁK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11

~~The fines collected in accordance with Article 9 shall constitute other revenue, as referred to in Article 311 of the Treaty, and shall be assigned to the Union budget.~~Article 11 deleted

2013/12/10
Committee: REGI

Oldřich VLASÁK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1

~~1. The power to adopt~~ delegated ~~acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the conditions laid down in this Article.~~

2013/12/10
Committee: REGI

Oldřich VLASÁK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2

~~2. The power to adopt~~ delegated acts referred to in Article 9(4) shall be conferred on the Commission for a period of three years starting after one month following the adoption of this Regulation. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of that 3-year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.

2013/12/10
Committee: REGI

Oldřich VLASÁK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3

3. The delegation of power referred to in Article 9(4) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.deleted

2013/12/10
Committee: REGI

Oldřich VLASÁK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4

~~4. As soon as it adopts a~~ delegated ~~act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council.~~

2013/12/10
Committee: REGI

Oldřich VLASÁK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 5

~~5. A~~ delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 9(4) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of two months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.

2013/12/10
Committee: REGI

Oldřich VLASÁK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13

~~For the measures referred to in Article 9 the Council shall act without taking into account the vote of the member of the Council representing the Member State concern~~Article 13 deleted.

2013/12/10
Committee: REGI