Activities of Evelyn REGNER related to 2014/2252(INI)
Legal basis opinions (0)
Amendments (9)
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the closer participationincreased interest and the stronger involvement of national parliaments in the European legislative process in the recent years, which has resulted in a positiven increase ind awareness of the basic principles ofupon which the EU is founded, such as subsidiarity and proportionality in the interinstitutional context as well as European politics and policy making in the national context;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes the importance of regional parliaments, especially those with legislative powers, and of their territorial impact and closeness to its citizens, and calls, where appropriate, for their greater involvement in the early warning system;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Recalls that, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, the EU will take action outside its areas of exclusive competence only and insofar as the objectives of a planned measure can better be achieved at Union level rather than at national, regional or local level; subsidiarity may, therefore, lead both to an extension of the activities of the Union within the framework of its powers when circumstances so require and, conversely, to the action concerned being restricted or curtailed where it is no longer justified; emphasises that subsidiarity, in this context, not only applies to the relationship between the EU and its Member States but encompasses as well the regional and local levels;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights the fact that 2012 saw national parliaments show their first ‘yellow card’ in the context of the subsidiarity control mechanism, in response to the proposal for a regulation on the exercise of the right to take collective action within the context of the freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services; points out however that according to the Commission the principle of subsidiarity had not been breached;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that the yellow card and the strong resistance of trade unions and other stakeholders which in the end led to the withdrawal of Monti II by the Commission, were largely based on the realisation that the proposal would not result in adequate safeguards for fundamental and social rights; criticises in this context, that the Commission has still not come forward with any new proposals to ensure fair competition, equal treatment and worker's rights;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Firmly believes thatCalls on the Commission to consider that, as stated in the opinion by the European Economic and Social Committee, the ‘Think Small First’ principle is a keynot intended to elxement in the policy process and can play an important role in job creation and growth by reducing the costs of regupt microenterprises and SMEs from the application of the legislation and must not be used for this purpose but rather to keep the fact that it will also apply to small enterprises should be kept in mind when drafting legislation; stresses that this approach should neither compromise the intended objective of the legislation fnor businesseany health, safety and employment high standards;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Stresses that cases of subsidiarity and proportionality must be thoroughly argued and should not be used as pre-text to prevent legislation at Union level or to undermine EU Social Dialogue;
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the increasing emphasis placed by the Commission on the policy cycles, and calls on the committee responsible to systematically review Commission impact assessments and to review Parliament’s ex-ante impact assessment analysis as early as possible in the legislative process; points out that proper impact assessments also need to cover social and environmental consequences as well as the consequences of non-legislation; underlines that impact assessments cannot substitute for political assessments and decisions.