11 Amendments of Willy MEYER related to 2014/2008(INI)
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. considering that even though such a figure remains modest by comparison with the population of the European Union, it nevertheless denotes a marked increase in the awareness of the right of petition and the usefulness of the petitions process as a means of securing the attention of the European Institutions and the Member States for the concerns of individual citizens, local communities, NGOs and voluntary associations, private businesses;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. bearing in mind that the right of petition enhances the responsiveness of the European Parliament towards the citizens and residents of the union, while at the same time might provides people with an open, democratic and transparent mechanism for obtaining, where legitimate and justified, a non-judicial remedy for their complaints, notably when this relates to problems with the implementation of European legislation;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
C. a whereas further irreparable losses in biodiversity must be averted, especially inside Natura 2000 designated sites; whereas Member States have undertaken to ensure the protection of special conservation areas under the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) and the Birds Directive (79/409 EEC); whereas, although the Commission can fully check compliance with EU law only when a final decision has been taken by national authorities, it is important – particularly in relation to environmental matters – to verify at an early stage that local, regional and national authorities correctly apply all relevant procedural requirements under EU law, including implementation of the principle of precaution;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas it is necessary to increase citizen participation in the EU decision- making process, with a view to reinforcing its legitimacy and accountability; whereas the petitions process also constitutes a means to establish a reality check regarding the tensions which exist within European societies, particularly during times of economic crisis and social unrest, such as have resulted from the impact of the collapse of the world financial markets and banking systems on the people of Europe; recalling that the Committee on Petitions organised a public hearing involving petitioners on this subject in September 2013;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital V
Recital V
V. whereas the Committee on Petitions has become , over the years,intends to be a useful and transparent tool at the service of European citizens and residents, which exercises democratic control and scrutiny over many aspects of European Union activity, especially regarding the implementation of EU laws by the national authorities; and whereas it can contribute further, on the basis of petitions received, to the improvement of future EU legislation by drawing attention to the lessons that should be learned from the substance of petitions received;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Deplores the fact that the austerity policies the EU has imposed on Member States are curtailing the exercise of European citizens’ fundamental rights – especially the right to food, healthcare, education and housing – as never before; considers it is urgent to increase citizen participation in the EU decision- making process, with a view to reinforcing its legitimacy and accountability;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that the Committee on Petitions, along with other institutions and bodies, such as the committees of inquiry, the European Citizens’ Initiative and the European Ombudsman, might play an independent and clearly defined role as points of contact for each individual citizens;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Highlights the very constructive work undertaken by the entire Committee as regards the petitions received which concern the Spanish law on coastal management (Ley de Costas) both as regards the results and conclusions of the fact-finding visit and as regards the cooperation with both petitioners and the responsible national authorities; recalls that a special ad hoc working group was established by the Committee to look at this complex issue in more detail and to ensure liaison with the very large number petitioners concerned; recognises that although some advances were obtained for petitioners stresses the need to regulate coastal protection effectively, but notes that the Costal Law is not consistent with the objectives sought, since it is affecting historic heritage and traditional communities, punishing the new legislation adopted by the Spanish Parliameninhabitants of coastal villages who have always coexisted sustainably with the sea and its ecosystems; recalls that there are some unresolved concerns, both in the field of property rights and environmental protection some of which have now been addressed to the Spanish Constitutional Court; requests the Commission to continue to actively monitor the issue;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the fact that the fact-finding visit to Galicia, which took place in February 2013, was able to hold extensive discussions with petitioners and the regional authorities on issues related to the lack of proper waste-water treatment facilities in the region which has had an impact on the health of local people and on economic activity in certain areas which are contaminated by sludge and residues which contain substances which endanger the environment and potentially the on- going production of sea-food in certain areas; recognises that the authorities have committed themselves to act more diligently to resolve these issues and that a new waste water treatment facility is being constructed in Vigo;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Acknowledges that environmental issues remain a priority for petitioners, thus highlighting the fact that Member States continue to fall short in this area; observes that many of the petitions focus on public health e.g. waste management, water safety, nuclear energy, and protected animals; points out that many petitions are concerned with new and upcoming projects on shale gas extraction or oil prospections which increase the dangers of effecting the aforementioned areas;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Deplores that European citizens continue to experience frequent problems caused by the misapplication of Internal MarketEU law by public authorities while exercising their freedom of movement; deplores the fact that nationals from some EU Member States do not enjoy of full rights in terms of freedom of movements; draws the attention to the fact that hundreds of Spanish, Romanian and Bulgarian citizens have been deported from Belgium as this Member State has decided to revoke their status as legal residents;