BETA


2006/2101(INI) Services of general interest. White Paper

Progress: Procedure completed

RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Lead ECON RAPKAY Bernhard (icon: PSE PSE)
Committee Opinion DEVE
Committee Opinion INTA CASTEX Françoise (icon: PSE PSE)
Committee Opinion EMPL DE ROSSA Proinsias (icon: PSE PSE)
Committee Opinion ITRE LANGEN Werner (icon: PPE-DE PPE-DE)
Committee Opinion IMCO SZÁJER József (icon: PPE-DE PPE-DE)
Committee Opinion TRAN FERNANDES Emanuel Jardim (icon: PSE PSE)
Committee Opinion REGI PIEPER Markus (icon: PPE-DE PPE-DE)
Committee Opinion CULT
Committee Opinion JURI STAUNER Gabriele (icon: PPE-DE PPE-DE)
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54

Events

2006/12/13
   EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2006/10/19
   EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2006/09/27
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2006/09/27
   EP - Decision by Parliament
Details

The European Parliament adopted a resolution based on the own-initiative report drafted by Bernhard RAPKAY (PES, DE) on the Commission's White Paper on services of general interest. The report was adopted by 491 votes in favour to 128 against with 31 abstentions and represented a consensus reached between the largest political groups. Parliament asked for clarification on a number of topics and emphasised that the majority of SGIs could be provided under conditions of fair competition, according to the principle that private and public undertakings must receive equal treatment. It asked the Commission to submit to Parliament a comprehensive analysis of the effects of liberalisation to date, in particular on the situation of the consumers and employees concerned.

It also made the following points:

- the legitimate requirements of the general interest must not be used as a pretext for the improper closure of services markets as regards international providers who undertake to respect the legitimate requirements and are capable of so doing;

- the way in which SGEIs are organised can affect the internal market, for example by prohibiting establishment in the country in which the service is provided;

- sector-specific rules should not be called into question, since they have been successful. Parliament recommended that the sectoral approach be expanded into other sectors;

- outsourcing the supply of SGIs normally imposes on the authority in question the obligation to assign the service on the basis of a public service contract, following a public tender procedure. Local authorities should be able to assign service tasks directly to inter-communal companies or similar forms of joint arrangements, or to companies that they own or control, provided that such bodies carry out the essential part of their activities for the controlling authority or authorities, and do not compete on external markets. An arrangement must be found which does not categorically exclude private participation from the outset.

The Commission was asked for clarification and more legal certainty on several points, including the following:

- the distinction between SGIs and SGEIs through the development of operational criteria. The latter should take into account Member States’ national traditions, based on the nature of collective goods and public funding or by solidarity mechanisms of SGIs. Parliament underlined that for many SGIs making the distinction between economic and non-economic aspects was extremely difficult due to the dynamic character of these services and their rapid development;

- the consequences of the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice based on a sectoral approach and application of competition law to SGIs and SGEIs, especially with regard to the financing of these services;

- more legal certainty on the application of internal market and competition rules in the field of SGIs and SGEIs while ensuring democratic accountability for the application of rules to SGIs and SGEIs to the Member States, regional, and local authorities. There is a need to clarify how responsibilities are shared between the EU and Member States. The sectoral approach should be an important element in this respect. In this context, Parliament emphasised that after a due evaluation of the Treaty and the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice, SGIs remain to be defined by the Member States. Moreover, there is no legal basis for a proposal seeking the non-application of the relevant EC Treaty provisions to particular services;

- more legal certainty in the area of social and health-care SGIs. The Commission was asked to formulate a proposal for a sector-specific directive of the Council and the Parliament in those fields in which it is appropriate to do so;

- more legal certainty as regards the different forms of inter-authority organisations (cooperation between local authorities, public-private partnership, awarding concessions) and the clarification of European law on competition the award of contracts and State aid and of the general criteria applicable throughout Europe. Parliament stressed that there should be legal clarification concerning the outsourcing of public services, which was distinct from the award of public contracts. It called on the Commission to spell out the rules for awarding such outsourced services and to make a clear distinction between those rules and the rules governing public contracts.

Parliament also made some recommendations about the criteria which should be applied in considering when compensation for supply of public services for funding an SGI should be considered constituting State aid in the meaning of Article 87 of the EC Treaty.

It asked the Commission to propose appropriate legal initiatives, as referred to in its resolution, and recalled that codecision rights, where foreseen by the Treaty, should be fully exercised by all parties involved in the field of SGIs and SGEIs. International agreements concluded by the Community must be compatible with internal Community policies and rules.

Documents
2006/09/27
   EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2006/09/26
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2006/09/14
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
Documents
2006/09/14
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary
Documents
2006/09/12
   EP - Vote in committee
Details

The committee adopted the own-initiative report drawn up by Bernhard RAPKAY (PES, DE) in response to the Commission's White Paper on services of general interest published at Parliament's request in May 2004. The report, which called for greater legal certainty on how EU rules will affect the way in which public services are provided in the Member States, set out a consensus position reached between the different political groups.

MEPs in the committee were concerned that individual rulings of the Court of Justice and existing guidelines from the Commission left uncertainty for all those involved in providing public services on the extent to which EU competition and internal market law applies to different sectors, and they wanted the Commission to clarify this. They also wanted a clearer distinction to be made between the concepts of ‘services of general interest’ and ‘services of general economic interest’, though they pointed out that too tight a definition at EU level would conflict with Member States' freedom to decide what to define as a public service.

The report opposed the idea of using this exercise to withdraw wholesale broad areas of services of general interest from competition and internal market rules. It emphasised the success of sector-specific EU regulations enacted so far, calling notably for a directive on social and health care services.

The committee emphasised that it should be for the competent authority to decide whether to supply services ‘in-house’ or contract them out, via a tendering process. It noted that local authorities, under certain conditions, should be able to provide services via joint inter-communal organisations without necessarily going through a tendering process.

The report also said that more legal clarification was needed when it comes to procedures for accessing existing networks needed for provision of services, defining the price for supply of services, securing competition and opportunities for new entrepreneurs, out-of-court settlements between service providers and users and referral to competition authorities. The committee concluded by inviting the Commission to propose appropriate legal initiatives - involving codecision rights where foreseen by the Treaty - to deal with all these issues.

2006/09/11
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2006/07/27
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2006/06/19
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2006/06/13
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2006/06/01
   CSL - Debate in Council
Documents
2006/06/01
   CSL - Council Meeting
2006/05/31
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2006/05/31
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2006/05/30
   EP - STAUNER Gabriele (PPE-DE) appointed as rapporteur in JURI
2006/05/18
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament
2006/05/18
   EP - Referral to associated committees announced in Parliament
2006/04/24
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2006/02/21
   EP - SZÁJER József (PPE-DE) appointed as rapporteur in IMCO
2005/09/02
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2005/06/21
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2005/03/17
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2005/03/15
   EP - CASTEX Françoise (PSE) appointed as rapporteur in INTA
2005/02/02
   EP - LANGEN Werner (PPE-DE) appointed as rapporteur in ITRE
2005/01/19
   EP - PIEPER Markus (PPE-DE) appointed as rapporteur in REGI
2004/11/23
   EP - FERNANDES Emanuel Jardim (PSE) appointed as rapporteur in TRAN
2004/10/11
   EP - DE ROSSA Proinsias (PSE) appointed as rapporteur in EMPL
2004/09/21
   EP - RAPKAY Bernhard (PSE) appointed as rapporteur in ECON
2004/05/12
   EC - Non-legislative basic document published
Details

PURPOSE : to present a White Paper setting out the Commission's approach in developing high-quality services of general interest.

CONTENT : this White Paper follows the public consultation and debate launched by the Green Paper, which invited comments on the overall role of the EU in defining the public service objectives pursued by services of general interest and on the way these services are organised, financed and evaluated. (Please see INI/2003/2052).

The debate has revealed considerable differences of views and perspectives. Nevertheless, a consensus seems to have emerged on the need to ensure the harmonious combination of market mechanisms and public service missions. The Commission's aim here is to make a contribution to the ongoing discussion and to take it further by defining the Union's role and a framework that allows these services to function properly.

The White Paper sets out the Commission's approach in developing a positive role for the EU in fostering the development of high-quality services of general interest and presents the main elements of a strategy aimed at ensuring that all citizens and enterprises in the Union have access to high-quality and affordable services. The document focuses on just some of the key issues of the debate as it would be impossible to address all the issues raised during the public consultation. More specific issues will be addressed in the context of the relevant policies.

The Green Paper consultation has shown a broad consensus on the need to ensure the provision of high-quality and affordable services of general interest to all citizens and enterprises in the EU. It has also confirmed the existence of a common concept of services of general interest in the Union. This concept reflects Community values and goals and is based on a set of common elements, including: universal service, continuity, quality of service, affordability, as well as user and consumer protection.

In the Union, services of general interest remain essential for ensuring social and territorial cohesion and for the competitiveness of the European economy. Citizens and businesses rightly expect to have access to affordable high-quality services of general interest throughout the EU.

This document defines a number of principles which are reflected in the Community's sectoral policies and can be clarified on the basis of the results of the debate on the Green Paper. These include: enabling public authorities to operate close to the citizens; achieving public service objectives within competitive open markets; ensuring cohesion and universal access; maintaining a high level of quality, security and safety; ensuring consumer and user rights; monitoring and evaluating performance; respecting diversity of services and situations; increasing transparency and providing legal certainty.

In the debate on the Green Paper there was broad agreement that it was not necessary to bestow the Community with additional powers in the area of services of general interest. In principle, the Commission agrees with this analysis. It is of the opinion that the powers currently conferred on the Community with regard to services of general interest are appropriate and sufficient in order to ensure that well-functioning services can be maintained and developed throughout the Union.

One of the key questions raised by the Green Paper concerned the need for a framework directive on services of general interest. The views expressed on the subject in the public consultation remained divided, a number of Member States and the European Parliament being sceptical on the issue. As a result, it remained doubtful whether a framework directive would be the most appropriate way forward at this stage. Furthermore, in the consultation, the added value of a horizontal framework as compared to the sector-specific approach followed so far has not been demonstrated. The Commission therefore considers appropriate not to proceed to submitting a proposal at this point in time but to re-examine the issue at a later stage. For the time being, the Commission will, as a general rule, pursue and develop its sectoral approach by proposing sector-specific rules that allow account to be taken of the specific requirements and situations in each sector. However, without prejudice to existing sector-specific Community rules, a horizontal approach will be considered with regard to a number of specific issues, such as consumers' interests, the monitoring and evaluation of services of general interest, the application of state aid rules to financial compensation or the use of structural funds for the support of services of general interest.

The Commission goes on to look at the areas of financing and awarding of contracts, where Member States' discretion to define and design the missions of services of general interest usually interact with Community law. The public consultation has confirmed the demand for greater legal certainty and predictability when it comes to the application of the state aid rules to public service compensation and the Commission outlines the initiatives it proposes.

In addition, the Commission looks at providing a clear and transparent framework for the selection of undertakings entrusted with a service of general interest. In practice, Member States increasingly use public-private schemes, including design-build-finance-operate contracts, concessions and the creation of mixed-economy companies to ensure the delivery of infrastructure projects or services of general interest. In the public consultation, calls were made for clarity on a number of questions relating to the Community rules applicable to such schemes, and in particular on the scope and substance of the Community rules that public authorities may have to respect when they entrust a public service mission to another entity. The Commission has adopted a Green Paper on public-private partnerships in the EU (COM(2004)0327), which launches a broad consultation on the procurement aspects of public-private partnerships. Finally, the Green Paper raised a considerable interest from interested parties in the area of social services, including health services, long term care, social security, employment services, and social housing. Social services of general interest have a specific role to play as an integral part of the European model of society. The Commission is of the view that it is useful to develop a systematic approach in order to identify and recognise the specific characteristics of social and health services of general interest and to clarify the framework in which they operate and can be modernised. This approach will be set out in a Communication on social services of general interest, including health services, to be adopted in the course of 2005.

Documents

  • Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2006)5317
  • Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2006)4772
  • Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
  • Decision by Parliament: T6-0380/2006
  • Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
  • Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A6-0275/2006
  • Committee report tabled for plenary: A6-0275/2006
  • Committee opinion: PE376.642
  • Committee draft report: PE372.142
  • Amendments tabled in committee: PE374.429
  • Committee opinion: PE372.055
  • Debate in Council: 2733
  • Committee opinion: PE355.778
  • Committee opinion: PE357.523
  • Committee opinion: PE369.867
  • Committee opinion: PE357.755
  • Committee opinion: PE355.557
  • Committee opinion: PE350.234
  • Non-legislative basic document published: COM(2004)0374
  • Non-legislative basic document published: EUR-Lex
  • Committee opinion: PE350.234
  • Committee opinion: PE355.557
  • Committee opinion: PE357.755
  • Committee opinion: PE369.867
  • Committee opinion: PE355.778
  • Committee opinion: PE357.523
  • Committee opinion: PE372.055
  • Amendments tabled in committee: PE374.429
  • Committee draft report: PE372.142
  • Committee opinion: PE376.642
  • Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A6-0275/2006
  • Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2006)4772
  • Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2006)5317

Activities

Votes

Rapport Rapkay A6-0275/2006 - am. 4 #

2006/09/27 Outcome: -: 290, 0: 233, +: 123
GB LT FI IE LV SI EE ?? CY LU DK SK CZ MT HU BE PL SE NL AT EL PT ES IT FR DE
Total
63
12
14
13
6
6
6
1
6
6
12
14
24
5
21
18
49
16
26
17
20
22
44
67
70
88
icon: ALDE ALDE
75

Ireland ALDE

Abstain (1)

1

Latvia ALDE

1

Slovenia ALDE

1

Estonia ALDE

2

Cyprus ALDE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1
2

Sweden ALDE

2

Austria ALDE

1
icon: PPE-DE PPE-DE
245

Lithuania PPE-DE

1
4

Latvia PPE-DE

2

Slovenia PPE-DE

4

Estonia PPE-DE

Abstain (1)

1

PPE-DE

Abstain (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE-DE

3

Denmark PPE-DE

Abstain (1)

1

Malta PPE-DE

Abstain (2)

2
icon: UEN UEN
24

Lithuania UEN

2

Latvia UEN

2

Denmark UEN

Abstain (1)

1
icon: NI NI
31

United Kingdom NI

For (1)

4

Slovakia NI

Abstain (2)

3

Czechia NI

Against (1)

1

Austria NI

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2
icon: IND/DEM IND/DEM
24

Ireland IND/DEM

Against (1)

1

Denmark IND/DEM

Against (1)

1

Czechia IND/DEM

Against (1)

1

Sweden IND/DEM

2

Netherlands IND/DEM

2

France IND/DEM

2
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
33

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Finland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Ireland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Denmark GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

2

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Greece GUE/NGL

2

Portugal GUE/NGL

2

France GUE/NGL

2
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
39

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5

Finland Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Sweden Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

3

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Italy Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1
icon: PSE PSE
175

Lithuania PSE

2

Finland PSE

3

Ireland PSE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia PSE

Against (1)

1

Estonia PSE

Abstain (1)

3

Luxembourg PSE

Against (1)

1

Denmark PSE

3

Slovakia PSE

3

Czechia PSE

2

Rapport Rapkay A6-0275/2006 - am. 13 #

2006/09/27 Outcome: -: 412, 0: 140, +: 101
FR MT ?? BE LU EE AT LV SI CY DK FI SK LT PT SE IE HU EL NL ES CZ IT DE GB PL
Total
72
5
1
20
6
6
17
6
5
6
13
13
14
12
22
16
13
22
20
26
45
24
68
89
64
48
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
40

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Sweden Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

3

Italy Verts/ALE

2

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5
icon: PSE PSE
176

Malta PSE

Abstain (2)

3

Luxembourg PSE

Abstain (1)

1

Finland PSE

3

Slovakia PSE

Against (1)

3

Lithuania PSE

2

Ireland PSE

Abstain (1)

1

Czechia PSE

2
icon: NI NI
33

Belgium NI

2

Austria NI

Against (1)

2

Slovakia NI

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

3

Czechia NI

Against (1)

1

United Kingdom NI

Abstain (1)

4
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
33

France GUE/NGL

2

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Denmark GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Finland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

2

Sweden GUE/NGL

2

Ireland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Greece GUE/NGL

2

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Germany GUE/NGL

5

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
icon: UEN UEN
23

Latvia UEN

2

Denmark UEN

Against (1)

1

Lithuania UEN

2
icon: IND/DEM IND/DEM
25

France IND/DEM

2

Denmark IND/DEM

Against (1)

1

Sweden IND/DEM

2

Ireland IND/DEM

Against (1)

1

Netherlands IND/DEM

2

Czechia IND/DEM

Against (1)

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
77

Luxembourg ALDE

Against (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

Against (2)

2

Austria ALDE

Against (1)

1

Latvia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Cyprus ALDE

Against (1)

1

Sweden ALDE

3

Ireland ALDE

Against (1)

1

Hungary ALDE

2
2
icon: PPE-DE PPE-DE
246

Malta PPE-DE

Against (2)

2

PPE-DE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE-DE

3

Estonia PPE-DE

Against (1)

1

Latvia PPE-DE

2

Slovenia PPE-DE

4

Denmark PPE-DE

Against (1)

1

Finland PPE-DE

3

Lithuania PPE-DE

1

Rapport Rapkay A6-0275/2006 - am. 22 #

2006/09/27 Outcome: -: 403, 0: 136, +: 117
FR MT ?? CY BE LU EE AT LV SI DK FI LT SK CZ EL PT IE SE HU NL ES IT DE GB PL
Total
71
5
1
6
20
6
6
17
6
6
13
13
12
14
24
20
22
13
17
22
26
46
69
89
64
48
icon: PSE PSE
179

Malta PSE

Abstain (2)

3

Luxembourg PSE

Abstain (1)

1

Slovenia PSE

Abstain (1)

1

Finland PSE

3

Lithuania PSE

2

Slovakia PSE

3

Czechia PSE

2

Ireland PSE

Abstain (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
39

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Sweden Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

3

Italy Verts/ALE

2

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
33

France GUE/NGL

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Denmark GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Finland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Greece GUE/NGL

2

Portugal GUE/NGL

2

Ireland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

2

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
icon: UEN UEN
23

Latvia UEN

2

Denmark UEN

Against (1)

1

Lithuania UEN

2
icon: NI NI
32

Belgium NI

2

Austria NI

Against (1)

2

Slovakia NI

Against (1)

Abstain (2)

3

Czechia NI

Against (1)

1

United Kingdom NI

Against (2)

4
icon: IND/DEM IND/DEM
25

France IND/DEM

2

Denmark IND/DEM

Against (1)

1

Czechia IND/DEM

Against (1)

1

Ireland IND/DEM

Against (1)

1

Sweden IND/DEM

2

Netherlands IND/DEM

2
icon: ALDE ALDE
77

Cyprus ALDE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

Against (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

Against (2)

2

Austria ALDE

Against (1)

1

Latvia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Ireland ALDE

Against (1)

1

Sweden ALDE

3

Hungary ALDE

2
2
icon: PPE-DE PPE-DE
248

Malta PPE-DE

Against (2)

2

PPE-DE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE-DE

3

Estonia PPE-DE

Against (1)

1

Latvia PPE-DE

2

Slovenia PPE-DE

4

Denmark PPE-DE

Against (1)

1

Finland PPE-DE

3

Lithuania PPE-DE

1

Rapport Rapkay A6-0275/2006 - am. 6 #

2006/09/27 Outcome: -: 378, 0: 144, +: 128
FR BE ?? AT MT LU EE LV DK SI CY FI SK PT SE LT IE EL CZ NL HU ES IT GB PL DE
Total
71
20
1
17
5
6
6
6
13
6
6
13
14
22
17
12
13
20
23
25
22
45
68
63
48
88
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
40

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Sweden Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

3

Italy Verts/ALE

2

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5
icon: PSE PSE
177

Luxembourg PSE

Abstain (1)

1

Slovenia PSE

Abstain (1)

1

Finland PSE

3

Slovakia PSE

3

Lithuania PSE

2

Ireland PSE

Abstain (1)

1

Czechia PSE

2
icon: NI NI
31

Belgium NI

2

Austria NI

2

Slovakia NI

3

United Kingdom NI

Against (2)

4
icon: IND/DEM IND/DEM
25

France IND/DEM

2

Denmark IND/DEM

Abstain (1)

1

Sweden IND/DEM

2

Ireland IND/DEM

Against (1)

1

Czechia IND/DEM

Against (1)

1

Netherlands IND/DEM

2
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
33

France GUE/NGL

2

Denmark GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Finland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

2

Sweden GUE/NGL

2

Ireland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Greece GUE/NGL

2

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
icon: UEN UEN
23

Latvia UEN

2

Denmark UEN

Against (1)

1

Lithuania UEN

2
icon: ALDE ALDE
76

Austria ALDE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

Against (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

Against (2)

2

Latvia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Cyprus ALDE

Against (1)

1

Sweden ALDE

Abstain (1)

3

Ireland ALDE

Against (1)

1

Hungary ALDE

2
2
icon: PPE-DE PPE-DE
245

PPE-DE

Against (1)

1

Malta PPE-DE

Against (2)

2

Luxembourg PPE-DE

3

Estonia PPE-DE

Against (1)

1

Latvia PPE-DE

2

Denmark PPE-DE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia PPE-DE

4

Finland PPE-DE

3

Lithuania PPE-DE

1

Rapport Rapkay A6-0275/2006 - am. 9 #

2006/09/27 Outcome: -: 397, 0: 141, +: 107
FR ?? MT AT BE LU EE LV DK SI CY SE FI SK PT LT NL IE EL HU CZ ES IT DE GB PL
Total
71
1
5
16
19
6
6
6
12
6
6
16
12
14
21
12
26
13
20
22
24
45
67
88
63
48
icon: PSE PSE
175

Luxembourg PSE

Abstain (1)

1

Slovenia PSE

Abstain (1)

1

Finland PSE

3

Slovakia PSE

3

Lithuania PSE

2

Ireland PSE

Abstain (1)

1

Czechia PSE

2
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
40

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Sweden Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

3

Italy Verts/ALE

2

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5
icon: IND/DEM IND/DEM
25

France IND/DEM

2

Denmark IND/DEM

Abstain (1)

1

Sweden IND/DEM

2

Netherlands IND/DEM

2

Ireland IND/DEM

For (1)

1

Czechia IND/DEM

Against (1)

1
icon: NI NI
31

Austria NI

1

Belgium NI

Against (1)

1

Slovakia NI

3

Czechia NI

Against (1)

1

United Kingdom NI

Against (2)

4
icon: UEN UEN
24

Latvia UEN

2

Denmark UEN

Against (1)

1

Lithuania UEN

2
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
33

France GUE/NGL

2

Denmark GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Sweden GUE/NGL

2

Finland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

2

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Ireland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Greece GUE/NGL

2

Germany GUE/NGL

5

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
75

Austria ALDE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

Against (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

Against (2)

2

Latvia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Denmark ALDE

3

Slovenia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Cyprus ALDE

Against (1)

1

Sweden ALDE

Abstain (1)

3

Ireland ALDE

Against (1)

1

Hungary ALDE

2
2
icon: PPE-DE PPE-DE
242

PPE-DE

Against (1)

1

Malta PPE-DE

Against (2)

2

Luxembourg PPE-DE

3

Estonia PPE-DE

Against (1)

1

Latvia PPE-DE

2

Denmark PPE-DE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia PPE-DE

4

Finland PPE-DE

2

Lithuania PPE-DE

1

Rapport Rapkay A6-0275/2006 - am. 10 #

2006/09/27 Outcome: -: 419, 0: 130, +: 106
FR ?? MT LU EE DK AT BE LV SI CY SK PT FI LT IE SE EL NL HU ES CZ IT DE PL GB
Total
72
1
5
6
6
13
17
20
6
6
6
14
21
14
12
13
17
20
25
22
46
24
69
89
48
63
icon: PSE PSE
176

Luxembourg PSE

Abstain (1)

1

Slovenia PSE

Abstain (1)

1

Slovakia PSE

3

Finland PSE

3

Lithuania PSE

2

Ireland PSE

Abstain (1)

1

Czechia PSE

2
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
40

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Sweden Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

3

Italy Verts/ALE

2

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

Abstain (2)

5
icon: NI NI
33

Austria NI

Against (1)

2

Belgium NI

2

Slovakia NI

3

Czechia NI

Against (1)

1

United Kingdom NI

Abstain (1)

4
icon: IND/DEM IND/DEM
25

France IND/DEM

2

Denmark IND/DEM

1

Ireland IND/DEM

Against (1)

1

Sweden IND/DEM

2

Netherlands IND/DEM

2

Czechia IND/DEM

Against (1)

1
icon: UEN UEN
24

Denmark UEN

Against (1)

1

Latvia UEN

2

Lithuania UEN

2