48 Amendments of Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER related to 2012/2308(INI)
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph A
Paragraph A
A. whereas certain petitions have been deposited requesting that the establishment of the European Parliament in more than one place be discontinuedEuropean Parliament should no longer have three places of work;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph A a (new)
Paragraph A a (new)
Aa. whereas the European Parliament has had its seat in Strasbourg since 1952, a situation confirmed by the Edinburgh European Council in 1992 and by the Treaty of Amsterdam in 1997, and not altered by the Lisbon Treaty;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph A b (new)
Paragraph A b (new)
Ab. whereas the real annual cost of retaining the Strasbourg seat in 2010 was EUR 51.5 million, i.e. 0.04 % of the annual budget of the European Union or 10 cents per citizen per year;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph A c (new)
Paragraph A c (new)
Ac. whereas the gross cost of holding plenary sessions in Strasbourg is EUR 7 445 000 per part-session, and whereas 80 % of these costs are fixed and would be incurred irrespective of where a given part-session is held (equipment, publications, translation, etc.);
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph A d (new)
Paragraph A d (new)
Ad. whereas mobility is an intrinsic aspect of the work of an MEP, requiring at least a large number of journeys between the European Parliament, the MEP’s Member State of origin and the constituency in which the MEP was elected;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph B a (new)
Paragraph B a (new)
Ba. whereas there were historical reasons for the decision to hold part-sessions in Strasbourg, in particular the symbolic significance of that city and the need to have a multi-centre European Union;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph B b (new)
Paragraph B b (new)
Bb. whereas, under the Treaties, the European Parliament has its seat in Strasbourg where the 12 periods of monthly plenary sessions are held;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph C
Paragraph C
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph C
Paragraph C
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph C
Paragraph C
C. whereas since 2006 attempts by the Petitions Committee to consider this issue on a parliamentary level have repeatedly been obstructnot yet succeeded despite the widespread interest in the issue amongst MEPs;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph C a (new)
Paragraph C a (new)
Ca. whereas two judgments given by the Court of Justice of the European Union in 1997 and 2012 recalled that the TFEU locates the seat of the European Parliament in Strasbourg and whereas the conditions for the application of Protocol No 6 have been clarified;
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph C b (new)
Paragraph C b (new)
Cb. whereas all the countries which have joined the European Union have ratified Protocol No 6;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph C c (new)
Paragraph C c (new)
Cc. whereas Strasbourg has been the meeting place of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe since 1949 and then, from 1952, played host to the Parliamentary Assembly of the European Coal and Steel Community;
Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph C d (new)
Paragraph C d (new)
Cd. whereas the seat of the European Parliament in Strasbourg was confirmed by the Edinburgh European Council in 1992 and the Amsterdam Treaty in 1997 and then incorporated in the Lisbon Treaty in 2009;
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph C e (new)
Paragraph C e (new)
Ce. whereas the distribution of the seats of the European Institutions is based on the principle of polycentrism;
Amendment 59 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph C f (new)
Paragraph C f (new)
Cf. whereas, if a debate is initiated concerning the seat of the European Parliament, it will inevitably lead to discussion of the distribution of the seats of the European Institutions, which is laid down in the Treaty;
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomNotes the decision by the Committee on Constitutional Affairs to draw up a report on the location of the seats of the European Union’s institutions;
Amendment 68 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomNotes the decision by the Committee on Constitutional Affairs to draw up a report on the location of the seats of the European Union’s institutions;
Amendment 70 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recalls that only the Member States have the power to amend the Treaties, the substance of which is binding on the Institutions and their members, and that a vote on this subject can only be carried unanimously;
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Recalls that, on this basis, twelve monthly plenary part-sessions, including the budgetary part-session, must be held at the Strasbourg seat, while additional part-sessions are held in Brussels;
Amendment 74 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Stresses that the additional part- sessions entail a substantial additional cost, which could be reduced by extending ordinary part-sessions in Strasbourg;
Amendment 79 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 86 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Agrees with the principle that the European Parliament would be more effective, cost-efficient and respectful of the environment if it were located in a singlTakes note of the petitions submitted requesting that the European Parliament no longer meet in more than one place;, and notes that the continuation of the monthly migration between Brussels and Strasbourg has become a symbolic negative issue amongst most EU citizens which is detrimental to Parliament’s reputationof the arguments put forward in that respect;
Amendment 87 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Agrees with the principle that the European Parliament would be more effective, cost-efficient and respectful of the environment if it were located in a single place; and notes that the continuation of the monthly migration between Brussels and Strasbourg has become a symbolic negative issue amongst most EU citizens which is detrimental to Parliament’s reputationNotes that the continuation of the monthly migration between Brussels and Strasbourg remains a positive symbol of European polycentrism;
Amendment 92 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Emphasises the environmental example set by the European Parliament’s seat in Strasbourg, which reduced its CO2 emissions by 57% between 2006 and 2010 by taking special measures, meaning that these now represent 3.6% of all Parliament’s CO2 emissions;
Amendment 96 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Points to the economic and social importance of the European Parliament for the Strasbourg region;
Amendment 97 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Points to the tradition of geographical diversity in the siting of EU institutions;
Amendment 99 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Stresses that concentrating EU powers in the city of Brussels would adversely effect the way the European public views the EU;
Amendment 101 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 e (new)
Paragraph 2 e (new)
2e. Emphasises that Strasbourg has come to be viewed by the public as the European capital of democracy and human rights owing to the institutions that are based there, among them the European Parliament;
Amendment 103 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 f (new)
Paragraph 2 f (new)
2f. Emphasises that the public associates the city of Brussels with the European Commission, while the city of Strasbourg continues to be associated with the European Parliament;
Amendment 105 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 g (new)
Paragraph 2 g (new)
2g. Expresses concern at the steady increase (+23.8% between 2006 and 2010) in the number of committee, political group and delegation meetings held outside the European Parliament’s places of work;
Amendment 107 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 h (new)
Paragraph 2 h (new)
2h. Notes that the carbon footprint for travel in connection with these meetings was 6 350 tonnes of CO2 en 2010, while for the seat in Strasbourg it was 4 199 tonnes that year;
Amendment 108 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 i (new)
Paragraph 2 i (new)
2i. Notes that economic and environmental costs could be rationalised by limiting the number of meetings held outside the European Parliament’s official places of work;
Amendment 120 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Respects the historic reasons for the location of its plenary sessions in Strasbourg and the Treaty requirements that necessitate the two-seat system; nevertheless insists that such an arrangement cannot continue in perpetuity and that Parliament itself must be able to state a preference for its future;
Amendment 121 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Respects the historic reasons for the location of its plenary sessions in Strasbourg and the Treaty requirements that necessitate the two-seat system; nevertheless insists that such an arrangement cannot continue in perpetuity and that Parliament itself must be able to state a preference for its futuresystem of a single seat and three places of work;
Amendment 123 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Respects the historic reasons for the location of its plenary sessions in Strasbourg and the Treaty requirements that necessitate the two-seat system; nevertheless insists that such an arrangement cannot continue in perpetuity and that Parliament itself must be able to state a preference for its futureNotes that travel is an inherent part of the duties of Members of the European Parliament, and that the continuation of the monthly journeys between Brussels and Strasbourg is not a significant factor in terms of the European Parliament’s reputation among EU citizens;
Amendment 125 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Points out, too, that Parliament’s Strasbourg seat, which achieved a 57% reduction in CO2 emissions between 2006 and 2010, is leading the way on respect for the environment and that, as data compiled by Parliament’s Secretariat shows, its detractors have substantially overestimated its annual costs;
Amendment 129 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Draws attention to the emblematic nature of the city of Strasbourg, symbolising as it does reconciliation between Germany and the other nations of Europe;
Amendment 130 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Underscores the symbolic and historical importance of the European Parliament’s location in Strasbourg as part of the process of European reconciliation;
Amendment 134 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Recognises the educational and civic value of Parliament’s Strasbourg seat, which attracts 100 000 visitors a year outside part-session periods, as well as 10 000 students on the Euroscola programme;
Amendment 135 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Emphasises that European integration necessarily entails mobility and that this applies to all national and European political representatives and officials, and that mobility is an intrinsic aspect of the work of MEPs, as representatives of the European Union;
Amendment 138 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Recognises that efforts are needed to improve working conditions during ordinary part-sessions in Strasbourg;
Amendment 139 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Considers that decentralisation of the legislative authority away from Brussels strengthens its independence;
Amendment 141 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Considers that choice of the EU institutions’ seats has always been guided by a desire to bring the Union as close to ordinary people as possible and not to concentrate it in one place;
Amendment 145 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 152 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for Parliament to express its view as to whetherEmphasises that only the cEurrent arrangement should continue; and if an appropriate majority vote is recorded, recommends that Parliament propose Treaty changes under Article 48opean Council has a remit to determine Parliament’s seat; sees the location of Parliament’s seat as part of the broader question of determining the seats of all the EU institutions.
Amendment 153 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for Parliament to express its view as to whether the current arrangement should continue; and if an appropriate majority vote is Emphasises that the Committee’s report was prepared under the ordinary own- initiative procedure and there is thus no obligation to implement the proposals, and further that the matter of the EU institutions’ seats is governed directly by the Treaties and is therecforded, recommends that Parliament propose Treaty changes under Article 48.e subject to the political will of the Member States acting unanimously;
Amendment 157 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Points out that the own-initiative report cannot be used as means of circumventing the EU Treaties, which provide that the seat of the European Parliament shall be in Strasbourg and that 12 part-sessions per year shall be held there.