16 Amendments of Sandrine BÉLIER related to 2012/2308(INI)
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph A e (new)
Paragraph A e (new)
Ae. having regard to Parliament’s Environmental Statement for 2010, issued in May 2011, and in particular pages 68 to 70;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph A f (new)
Paragraph A f (new)
Af. having regard to the document drawn up by Parliament’s Secretariat entitled ‘Replies and follow-up to the discharge for 2010’;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas each of the six founding countries wanted to host the seat of one of the institutions; whereas, accordingly, the location of Parliament’s seat is the product of compromise; whereas Strasbourg - a French city on the border with Germany - was chosen as the seat, symbolising the reunification of Europe and the building of a new, shared history;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas Article 232 TFEU allows Parliament to adopt its own rules of procedure and to determine the length of plenary sessions, as laid down in the Treaties;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the ECJ has stated that the location of the seat is not to hinder the well-functioning of Parliament; whereas it has further stated that, while there are disadvantages and costs engendered by the plurality of working locations, but also that any improvement ofany change to the current situation would requires a Treaty change and, thus, the consent of the Member States;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the structure of Parliament’s calendar (fixed during the Edinburgh Summit in 1992) predates all changes to its role arising from the adoption of the Treaties of Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice and Lisbon;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Recital Q
Q. whereas citizens of the EU – including the 1.27 million citizens who signed a petition asking for a single seat – have repeatedly expressed their discontent with the current arrangements;
Amendment 89 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Agrees with the principle that the European Parliament would be more effective, cost-efficient andConsiders efficiency, cost-effectiveness and the principle of respectful of for the environment if it were located in a single place; and notes that the continuation of the monthly migration between Brussels andnot to be connected with the place in which Parliament sits, but with its needs; points out that according to figures from the European Parliament’s services, the annual cost of Parliament’s seat in Strasbourg hwas become a symbolic negative issue amongst most EU citizens which is detrimental to Parliament’s reputationEUR 51.5 million in 2010, or 0.04% of the annual EU budget, which represents a cost of 10 cents per EU citizen per year, and hence considers the arguments on Parliament’s cost to be exaggerated;
Amendment 90 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
emphasises that the gross cost of holding part-sessions in Strasbourg is EUR 7 445 000 per part-session, and that 80% of these costs are fixed and would be incurred irrespective of where the part-session is held, be they for equipment, publications or translation, etc.;
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that Parliament should have the right to determine its own working arrangements, including the right to decide where and when it holds its meetings, without prejudice to the Treaties;
Amendment 100 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Points to the environmental example set by the European Parliament’s seat in Strasbourg, which reduced its own CO2 emissions by 57% between 2006 and 2010, meaning that these now represent 3.6% of all Parliament’s CO2 emissions;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Commits itself, therefore, to initiate an ordinary treaty revision procedure under Article 48 TEU with a view to propose the changes to Article 341 TFEU and to Protocol 6 necessary to allow Parliament to decide fully over its internal organisation, including the setting of its calendar and the location of its seaing a revision of the Treaties to increase the powers and remit of the European Parliament;
Amendment 102 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 e (new)
Paragraph 2 e (new)
2e. Adds that the carbon footprint for travel for committee, political group and delegation meetings, which increased by 23.8% between 2006 and 2010, is significantly larger (6 350 tonnes of CO2 in 2010) than that for Parliament’s seat in Strasbourg (4 199 tonnes of CO2 en 2010);
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3