Activities of Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT related to 2015/2089(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Towards improved single market regulation (short presentation)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on Towards improved single market regulation PDF (175 KB) DOC (111 KB)
Amendments (24)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
Citation 1 a (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 7 February 2013 with recommendations to the Commission on the governance of the Single Market1, and to the Commission's follow-up thereon adopted on 8 May 2013, __________________ 1 Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0054.
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
D a. whereas digital innovation is faster than politics and entrepreneurs are driving the digital agenda; whereas it is of key importance to provide future proof rules that are digital by default;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that the deadlines involved in the subsidiarity mechanism are too short to ensure that parliaments must always have adequate time to consider in detail aspects of implementation or other practical matters; considers, therefore, that parliaments should be afforded more time to respond; considers, as well, that a stronger ‘red card' procedure should be introduced, allowing proposals to be rejected on grounds of lack of conformity with subsidiarityhighlights the need to strengthen dialogue with national parliaments in the legislative process ex-ante and ex-post;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that, where the need for European regulation can be demonstrated, the institutions should jointly undertake to ensure that the principle of proportionality, as well as the principles of is reflected in the drafting of the relevant legislation; furthermore believes that the process should aim at simplicity, transparency, coherence and respect for fundamental rights, are reflected in the drafting of the relevant legislation; ;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Believes that single market legislation should be to the benefit ofnefit citizens, competitiveness, innovation and growth, and views effective impact assessments as an important tool for informing policymakers on how best to design regulation to achieve these aims and their single market objectives;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers that in order to be effective as tools, impact assessments should be prepared on the basis of strong evidence; believes that careful consideration of scientific advice should form part of the impact assessment process and, in particular, substantiate how or why policy choices have been made in preparatory phases, which will assist the political process; furthermore considers that impact assessments must take into account the digital revolution and the need for future proof legislation;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Points out that the impact assessment accompanying a proposal should be seen as a ‘'living document' that is kept up to date and that corresponds to the choices made by the co-legislators at the various stages of negotiations before the final political decision is taken; points out however that it is important that this does not lead to a lengthier and more complex legislative processes;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Believes that wide and proper balanced consultation is essential, particularly with regard to informal groupings, such as expert groups involved in standardisation activities; considers the proper balancing of these groups, in the legislative process; considers the publication of documents and evidence, and the invitation to all stakeholders to contribute effectively to the development of policy in this area, to be an important driver for innovation and the strengthening of the single market, particularly with regard to the Digital Single Market agenda;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Considers consultation to be an ongoing process rather than an occasional exercise; reiterates, in this regard, its calls on the Commission to consider the establishment of a European Stakeholder Forum on better regulation and less bureaucracy;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Believes that full and proper implementation of single market legislation to be fundamental if the benefits of the single market are to be fully feltand that clear indicators should be used; expresses concern over the fact that targets for implementation are not always met;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Believes that the analysis should also undertakestronger measures are needed to identify and correct instances of gold- plating, which present similaroses challenges for peoplecitizens and businesses seeking to understand and apply law originating at EU level;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19 a. Considers the alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and online dispute resolution (ODR) to be key tools for improving the single market for goods and services; highlights that they will allow consumers and traders to solve their disputes without going to court in a cost- effective and simple way; encourages the Commission and Member States to raise the awareness of these important tools;
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Considers that services such as SOLVIT and SOLVIT plus represent a useful, low-cost alternatives to legal action; notes that the present take-up of these services is very low, in particular by the business community; calls on the Commission, in order to resolve this problem, to improve further awareness about these tools, while examining whether the outcomes and responses from those tools are adequate for users;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Highlights the important role of the Commission's "EU Sweeps" monitoring tool specially with regards to a well- functioning digital single market;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)
Paragraph 20 b (new)
20b. Considers digital platforms such as Points of Single Contact, IMI and ISA2 important to improve the functioning of the Single Market by facilitating cross- border information exchange between authorities in Member States;
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Urges the Commission to undertake infringement proceedings where evidence exists to demonstrate a failure of implementation and where reasonable efforts to solve problems through tools such as ADR, ODR, EU Pilot or SOLVIT have failed; considers that while action should be taken in all applicable cases, the Commission could further prioritise action to tackle those infringements that are most significant in economic terms;
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Notes that legislation, once adopted, remains largely static and that incentives to respond to, and repeal, outdated legislation are often lacking, while consumer issues and market problems rise and fall as conditions change; cConsiders, therefore, that sunset clauses shouldmay be used more often, whereby the institutions could commit to keep legislation up to date and in place only where necessary; views safeguards as a necessary means of ensuring that essential legislation does not lapse;
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Considers also that improving single market regulation does not mean removing all regulation, but rather or diminishing consumers or workers' rights, but rather diminishing bureaucracy and delivering a competitive regulatory environment that supports employment and enterprise within Europe;
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that, where the need for European single market regulation can be demonstrated, the institutions should jointly undertake to ensure that the principle of proportionality, ais well as the principles ofreflected in the drafting of the relevant legislation; believes, furthermore, that the process should aim at simplicity, transparency, coherence and respect for fundamental rights, are reflected in the drafting of the relevant legislation;
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. CRegrets that around 40% of draft impact assessments examined by the EC Impact Assessment Board 2010-2014 were considered to be of insufficient quality and were sent back for improvements; considers that in order to be effective as tools, impact assessments should be prepared on the basis of strong evidence; believes that careful consideration of scientific advice should form part of the impact assessment process and, in particular, substantiate how or why policy choices have been made in preparatory phases, which will assist the political process; furthermore considers that impact assessments must take into account the digital revolution and the need for future proof legislation;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Points out that no clear guidance is given whether potential impacts from REFIT proposals should be quantified or not; highlights the need for REFIT proposals to become more targeted by quantifying the potential benefits and cost savings in each proposal;
Amendment 159 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Reiterates the need to introduce the single market as a separate pillar in the European Semester process; calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure that the European Parliament plays an active role through scrutinising the process;
Amendment 181 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Considers that services such as SOLVIT and SOLVIT plus represent as useful, low-cost alternatives to legal action; notes that only 4 % of consumers and companies are aware of the tools and that the present take-up of these services is very low, in particular by the business community; calls on the Commission, and Member States in order to resolve this problem, to improve further awareness about these tools, while examining whether the outcomes and responses from those tools are adequate for users;