8 Amendments of Bart STAES related to 2017/0035(COD)
Amendment 29 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) While the Commission is currently empowered to decide in such cases, due to the particular sensitivity of the issues at stake, Member States should also fully assume theissume greater responsibility in the decision- making process. This, however, is not the case whenWhere the act concerns the protection of the health or safety of humans, animals or plants, greater weight should be given to political accountability. When in such cases Member States are not able to reach a qualified majority, due to, amongst others, a significant number of absten in favour of proposals to grant authorisations for non-appearances at the moment of the votea product or substance, that authorisation should be deemed to have been refused.
Amendment 40 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) The voting rules for the appeal committee should be changed in order to reduce the risk of no opinion being delivered and to provide an incentive for Member State representatives to take a clear position. To this end only Member States which are present or represented, and which do not abstain, should be considered as participating Member States for the calculation of the qualified majority. In order to ensure that the voting outcome is representative a vote should only be considered valid if a simple majority of the Member States are participating members of the appeal committee. If the quorum is not reached before expiry of the time-limit for the committee to take a decision, it will be considered that the committee delivered no opinion, as is the case today.
Amendment 51 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 a (new)
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a) Where it appears difficult to obtain positive opinions from the Member States in relation to similar draft implementing acts, consideration should be given to reviewing the implementing powers conferred on the Commission in the relevant basic acts.
Amendment 60 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Regulation (EU) No 182/2011
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a
However, only members of the appeal committee who are present or represented at the time of the vote, and do not abstain from voting, shall be considered as participating members of the appeal committee. The majority referred to in Article 5(1) shall be the qualified majority referred to in Article 238(3) (a) TFEU. A vote shall only be considered to be valid if a simple majority of the Member States are participating members.
Amendment 63 #
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
Amendment 71 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 182/2011
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
(ba) the following paragraph is inserted: “4a. By way of derogation from paragraph 3, where the basic act concerns the protection of the health or safety of humans, animals or plants and the draft implementing act for which the basic act provides involves proposing to grant authorisation for a product or substance, in the absence of a positive opinion voted by the majority provided for in Article 5(1), the Commission shall not adopt that draft implementing act and the authorisation shall be deemed to have been refused.”.
Amendment 78 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 182/2011
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
(3a) in Article 11, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: "Where a basic act is adopted under the ordinary legislative procedure, either the European Parliament or the Council may at any time indicate to the Commission that, in its view, a draft implementing act exceeds the implementing powers provided for in the basic act, or is not consistent with Union law in other respects. In such a case, the Commission shall review the draft implementing act, taking account of the positions expressed, and shall inform the European Parliament and the Council whether it intends to maintain, amend or withdraw the draft implementing act. ” Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/?qid=1516208034834&uri=CELEX:32011R0182)
Amendment 79 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 b (new)
Regulation (EU) No 182/2011
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
(3b) In Article 11, the following paragraph is added: “In addition, where either the European Parliament or the Council considers that the conferral of implementing powers on the Commission in the basic act needs to be reviewed, it may, at any time, call on the Commission to submit a proposal to amend that basic act.”