Activities of Konstantinos POUPAKIS related to 2010/2053(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Implementation of the Services Directive (debate)
Amendments (12)
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Recalls that the implementation of the Services Directive must not be viewed by most Member States simply as a matter of processing, whereby rules and special provisions will be abolished mechanically and horizontally, but rather as an opportunity to update and simplify legislation and substantively to restructure the services economy, taking into account the objectives of safeguarding the public interest, as also set out in the directive itself;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Stresses that there have been long delays in transposing the Services Directive into the national law of Member States, which has made it difficult to assess its results in all sectors; calls on the Commission, in cooperation with Member States, to draw up a study on the results of the directive in the employment sector both in each Member State separately and in the EU as a whole;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that the Member States can maintain their authorisation schemes and certain requirements if the latter are non- discriminatory, necessary and proportionate; emphasises that in this connection the Member States have maintained a number of authorisation schemes by making them more accessible and more transparent to service providers; Regrets that some Member States have not fully used the potential of the Services Directive in terms of administrative and regulatory simplification;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Notes the Member States’ efforts to implement the mutual evaluation process; considers that the state of progress with the process does not yet allow its effectiveness to be evaluatedevaluation process is an important tool in determining how implementation of the directive is progressing in Member States, considers that the state of progress with the process does not yet allow its effectiveness to be evaluated; stresses that the process in question must examine whether the rules in force in Member States correspond to the specifications of the internal market and do not create new obstacles; wishes the Commission to carry out a thorough investigation of the potential of this new method in the context of the Single Market Act; regrets that the European Parliament and the national parliaments are not more closely involved in the mutual evaluation process;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Regrets the fact that the European Parliament and national parliaments are not more involved in the mutual evaluation process;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Member States to continue improving the accessibility of PSCs and the quality and relevance of the information and the practical guidance given to service providers; calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that the information given by PSCs is available in several languages and in electronic form;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Stresses that in order to provide cross-border linguistic/services, the points of single contact must provide information in several languages different from those of the Member State in question, which is expected to lead to an increase in cross-border investments and cross-border mobility in the EU in general;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11 b. Recognizes the problems encountered with the functioning of the PSC related to proving of the identity, use of e-signatures, submission of original documents or certified copies, especially in the cross - border context; asks the Commission to propose measures to resolve these issues in order to enable SMEs to benefit from the single market and avoid any legal and technical uncertainties;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Believes that a dialogue and an exchange of best practices between Member States are very important if the PSCs are to improve and develop; stresses the need for urgent action in those countries in which ‘Points of Single Contact’ either do not yet exist or are not operating properly; urges most Member States to redouble their efforts to allow the completion of all procedures and formalities through the ‘Points of Single Contact’;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Member States to provide the statistical and comparable data required to evaluate the workfunctioning of the PSCs and their impact at national and European level;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Takes the view, since it is a logical approach, that Points of Single Contact could additionally provide information, under the directive, on the employment law in force, insurance rights and workers' rights and financial information (for instance the VAT regulatory framework);
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Underlines the need to develop training schemes for the officials of national and regional administrations responsible for monitoring services; recognises the efforts Member States have already taken to that effect and calls on Member States to further consolidate the national IMI networks by continuously monitoring its practical working and ensuring adequate training; recalls that the sustainable success of IMI depends on adequate investment at Community level; therefore calls on the Commission to set up a multiannual programme for that purpose;