Activities of Cristian Dan PREDA related to 2018/2093(INI)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on differentiated integration PDF (403 KB) DOC (69 KB)
Amendments (10)
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas, if differentiated integration can be a pragmatic solution to push forward European integration, it should be used with parsimony and within narrowly defined limits because of the risk of fragmentation of the Union and of its institutional framework; whereas the end goal of differentiated integration should be to promote inclusion of Member States and not exclusion;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that differentiated integration should reflect the idea that Europe does not work on a one-size fits all approach and should adapt to the needs and wishes of its citizens; Believes that differentiation should be used as a constitutional tool to ensure flexibility without undermining the general interest of the Union and the equality of rights and opportunities between citizens; reiterates that differentiation should be conceived only as a temporary step on the way towards more effective and integrated policy making;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that Parliament believes that differentiated integration must remain open to all Member States and continue to act as an example of deeper European integration, not as a way to facilitate ‘à la carte’ solutions’ that threaten to undermine the Union method and EU's institutional system;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Underlines that, if the intergovernmental approach may be needed sometimes to start new European projects, it has to remain an exception;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Demands that opt-outs from the Treaty provisions should not be permissibleRecalls its proposal 1a that the next revision of the Treaties rationalises differentiation by ending, or at least drastically reducing, the practice of opt- outs and exceptions for individual Member States at Union primary-law level, as they lead to negative differentiation in Union primary law and distort the homogeneity of Union law; _________________ 1a P8_TA-PROV(2017)0048, §10
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. SuggeInsists that full membership wof the EU should require full compliance with Union primary law and all the policy areas whereas associated membership would entail the participation in certain policies only and would not be fully integrated into the EU decision-making process; Believes that the associated membership should be accompanied by obligations corresponding to the associated rights, as for example a contribution to the EU budget and should be conditional to the respect of the Union’s fundamental values and to the four freedoms;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Acknowledges that some transitional periods can be necessary for fullnew members on an exceptional and temporary basis only; insists that some clear and enforceable legal provisions should be introduced in order to avoid their perpetuation in time;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Reminds its recommendation 1a to define a partnership in order to set up a ring of partners around the EU for states which cannot or will not join the Union, but want nonetheless a close relationship with the EU; _________________ 1a P8_TA(2017)0048, §11
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17