Activites

• 2006/07/22 Final act published in Official Journal
  • Decision 2006/512
  • OJ L 200 22.07.2006, p. 0011-0013
• #2743
• 2006/07/17 Council Meeting
• 2006/07/17 End of procedure in Parliament
• 2006/07/17 Act adopted by Council after consultation of Parliament
• 2006/07/06 Results of vote in Parliament
  • Results of vote in Parliament
  • T6-0310/2006 summary

    The European Parliament adopted a resolution drafted by Richard CORBETT (PES, UK) and approved the draft Council Decision, following renewed consultation. This resolution is closely linked to the resolution on amending Decision 1999/468/EC laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission. (Please see procedure reference ACI/2006/2152.)

• 2006/07/05 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
• 2006/07/03 Committee report tabled for plenary, reconsultation
  • A6-0236/2006
• 2006/07/03 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
• 2006/06/14 Formal reconsultation of Parliament
• 2006/06/09 Amended legislative proposal for reconsultation published
  • 10126/1/2006 summary

    PURPOSE : to present an amended proposal for a Council Decision of amending Decision 1999/468/EC laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission.CONTENT : the Council adopted Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission; that Decision has provided for a limited number of procedures for the exercise of such powers. It is proposed to amend that Decision in order to introduce a new type of procedure for the exercise of those powers, the regulatory procedure with scrutiny, which allows the legislator to oppose the adoption of draft measures where it indicates that the draft exceeds the implementing powers provided for in the basic instrument, or that it is incompatible with the aim or the content of that instrument or fails to respect the principles of subsidiarity or proportionality.It is necessary to follow the regulatory procedure with scrutiny for measures of general scope designed to amend non-essential elements of a basic instrument adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 251 TEC, including by deleting some of those elements or by supplementing the instrument by the addition of new non-essential elements.In this same framework, it should be ensured that the European Parliament receives better information on the work of committees,This draft of the final compromise text for a new procedure results from the meeting of the Permanent Representatives Committee on 8 June 2006.

  • DG {'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/secretariat_general/index_en.htm', 'title': 'Secretariat General'}, BARROSO José Manuel
• 2004/04/22 Modified legislative proposal published
  • COM(2004)0324 summary

    The European Commission has agreed to accept the vast majority of the amendments, either in full or in part, proposed by the European Parliament, given that they clarify and consolidate the new regulatory procedure. Four have been accepted in full without any changes, four have been accepted in part and one has been rejected. The four accepted in full include: - The Commission's obligation to make public references to all documents sent to the European Parliament and to register them on-line over the internet. - Commitments specific to securities legislation. - The last two accepted in full have been done so for editorial reasons. The four accepted in part refer to: - The commitments entered into by the Commission concerning the forwarding of documents to the European Parliament. The reference document to be mentioned is the "bi-lateral agreement" on the procedures for implementing Council Decision 1999/468/EC laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission. - The assuming of executive responsibility by the Commission under the new regulatory procedure. Under the terms of the amendment, in the event of objections from Parliament and/or the Council to draft measures, the Commission has four options. Either, to modify its draft, or to present a legislative proposal or to adopt its draft without changes or to withdraw its draft measure. In the event of a draft being adopted without changes the draft measure would be accompanied with an "appropriate statement". This statement could not be regarded as the equivalent of an interpretive statement. In the event of withdrawing the daft measure, in certain exceptional cases, the Commission should be able to decide that certain measures are no longer the subject of a draft and, therefore, no longer appropriate. In the event of objections from one branch or both branches of the legislature, the Commission undertakes to inform the legislature of how it intends to follow them up and the reasons thereof. - Greater flexibility in the regulatory committee procedure on the ground of urgency. In other words, the legislature would be granted a one-month extension for the adoption of a position in cases where implementing acts are adopted and applied provisionally by the Commission once the opinion of the regulatory committee has been delivered. The Commission stresses, however, that the emergency procedure must not include withdrawal of the measure. Finally, the Commission cannot accept an amendment relating to safeguarding measures given that they are not consistent with that of the proposal.�

  • DG {'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/secretariat_general/index_en.htm', 'title': 'Secretariat General'}, BARROSO José Manuel
• 2003/09/02 Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
  • T5-0352/2003 summary

    The European Parliament adopted the resolution drafted by Richard CORBETT (PES, UK) and made some amendments to the Commission's proposal. (Please see the summary dated 08/07/03.) In addition, an amendment was inserted stating that the Council might act by qualified majority on the proposal, within a period to be laid down in each basic instrument but not exceeding three months from the date of referral to the Council.�

• 2003/07/08 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • A5-0266/2003
• 2003/05/13 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
  • T5-0204/2003 summary

    The European Parliament considered a number of amendments to the Commission's proposal. (Please refer to the summary dated 23/04/03.) Parliament decided to refer this proposal back to committee for further discussions pursuant to Rule 69(2), after Commissioner Margot Wallström said she could only accept a number of amendments. At issue, is the Commission's commitment to modify any changes to implementing measures to take account of Parliament's views, with the Commission at this stage only prepared to "possibly" agree to this.�

• 2003/04/23 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • A5-0128/2003
• 2003/01/13 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
• 2002/12/11 Legislative proposal published
  • COM(2002)0719 summary

    PURPOSE : to enhance the effectiveness of the decision-making process by clarifying the responsibilities and procedures and amend Decision 1999/468/EC. CONTENT : in accordance with Article 202 of the Treaty, responsibility for implementing rules laid down by the Council, possibly together with the European Parliament, lies, in principle, with the Commission. The Commission exercises its powers in accordance with the procedures established by the Council under Article 202 and in compliance with the arrangements made for this purpose in the legislative instruments adopted under the Treaty. Current developments in Community legislation show that it is increasingly common for legislative instruments to require additional measures to be adopted, whose technical principles and details must be established on the basis of sound analysis and expert opinion within suitable periods of time. Whenever this prompts the legislature to delegate wider powers to the Commission, it must have a say in the measures which the Commission plans to adopt. The procedures laid down in Decision 1999/468/EC do not provide a satisfactory means of dealing with this situation. Scrutiny by the European Parliament under Article 8 of Decision 1999/468/EC to determine whether the implementing powers are excessive has not proved effective enough and the authority that the Council can exercise may lead to confusion between executive and legislative powers or to an impasse in the decision-making process. The procedures laid down in Decision 1999/468/EC may also lead to the Commission having to adopt an instrument without an opinion from the Committee or reactions from the legislature. The problems presented by the procedure are as follows the imbalance between the two legislative arms in respect of executive acts relating to basic instruments adopted under the codecision procedure. The Parliament's part in the procedure is restricted to a control of legitimacy, whereas the council can alter the substance of the instrument. This is compounded by: - the absence of a clear distinction between the execution phase proper and the supervisory phase; - the risk of an impasse when adopting the measures in question where the council cannot put together a qualified majority, strong opposition to the Commission's proposal emerges and the Parliament has no say in the outcome. The amendments proposed are as follows: The European Parliament and the Council must, as co-legislators, have an effective means of supervising the exercise of executive powers with a genuine normative scope which substantially change the existing legal situation. To this end, the regulatory procedure must be applied to general measures intended to implement essential aspects or adapt certain other aspects of the basic instruments adopted under the procedure of Article 251 of the Treaty. In these cases, the regulatory procedure must allow the Commission to assume full responsibility for adopting executive measures, whilst enabling the European Parliament and the Council to oversee the executive role. This means that, in the event of a disagreement between the Commission and the legislature, the Commission must be able, depending on the case, to either present a proposal under Article 251 of the Treaty or adopt its draft of initial measures, possibly with amendments. If the deadlines set for the regulatory procedure are not met, provision is made for an urgent procedure to enable the Commission to adopt executive measures immediately without prejudice to subsequent supervision by the European Parliament and the Council. Executive powers in respect of the basic instruments in question which have a bearing only on procedural arrangements or individual decisions need not be subject to specific arrangements for supervision by the legislature, since they must comply with the relevant guidelines and principles in the basic instrument. This does not, however, mean that it is not useful for the Commission to consult committees made up of Member States' representatives who are experts on the matters in question. The advisory procedure should therefore be the standard procedure for executive measures such as those implementing financial support programmes. The management procedure is no longer applicable for implementing instruments adopted by the codecision procedure. Given the limited scope of the current exercise, there is no need to review the arrangements for exercising the powers conferred on the Commission in basic instruments other than those adopted by the procedure under Article 251 of the Treaty. These arrangements are therefore not affected by this Decision. �

  • DG {'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/secretariat_general/index_en.htm', 'title': 'Secretariat General'}, BARROSO José Manuel

Documents

• Legislative proposal published: COM(2002)0719
• Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A5-0128/2003
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T5-0204/2003
• Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A5-0266/2003
• Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T5-0352/2003
• Modified legislative proposal published: COM(2004)0324
• Amended legislative proposal for reconsultation published: 10126/1/2006
• Committee report tabled for plenary, reconsultation: A6-0236/2006
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T6-0310/2006
• : Decision 2006/512
• : OJ L 200 22.07.2006, p. 0011-0013

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)