7 Amendments of Charles GOERENS related to 2015/2283(INI)
Amendment 1 #
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;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. RegretObserves 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;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes, however, that a majority of opinions by national parliaments are submitted by only a few national chambers; encourages the other chambers to become more involved in the European debate;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes, neverthelesstherefore, that it is important to raise the awareness of national parliaments on subsidiarity issues and to support them with tools permitting information exchange; stresses that, especially sinceregarding their specific role in European decision making and to promote further the use of IPEX which facilitates information exchange; recalls that the public consultations regularly organized by the Commission could be a source of information, but remain largely unused by members of national parliaments; notes that the volume of reasoned opinions received from national parliaments in 2014 remained unchanged in proportion to the number of Commission proposals, a mechanism should be developed for the participation of national parliaments in the EU legislative process;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. BelieveConsiders that if the period of eight weeks given to national parliaments to issue a reasoned opinion under Article 6 of the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality should be extended significantly this would imply Treaty change;
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Recalls that the so-called yellow and orange card procedures concerning the principle of subsidiarity exist since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty and that the yellow card procedure has already been used multiple times; believes that an equivalent so-called yellow and red card system should be created for the European Parliament to allow it to react when Member States legislate in domains which are within the competencies of the Single Market, or alternatively if Member States do not correctly implement European directives, which fragments the Single Market and results in a lack of level playing field;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. ConsiderBelieves that the Commission should provideidea of a 'green card' should be considered ans adequate response to the request by a number of national chambers for a stronger subsidiarity control procedure; supports the request made by some national chambers to play a more crucial role, by proposing that the Commission should be bound to withdraw or amend its proposal when a yellow card is triggered; believes, at the same time, that the idea of a ‘green card’ should be considered as one means of raising the participation and activity of national parliaments in the EU legislative process. positive and constructive means of raising the participation and activity of national parliaments in the EU legislative process; considers that as part of the same package, the two co-legislators should be granted the right of initiative;