Progress: Procedure completed
| Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lead | CONT |
MARTIN Hans-Peter ( NA)
|
|
| Committee Opinion | ENVI |
HAUG Jutta ( PSE)
|
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 100
Legal Basis:
RoP 100Subjects
Events
PURPOSE: to grant discharge to the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2006.
LEGISLATIVE ACT: Decision 2009/213/EC of the European Parliament on the discharge for the implementation of the budget of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2006.
CONTENT: with the present decision, the European Parliament grants discharge to the Executive Director of the European Environment Agency for the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2006.
This decision is in line with the European Parliament’s resolution adopted on 22 April 2008 and comprises a series of observations that form an integral part of the discharge decision (please refer to the summary of the opinion of 22/04/2008).
The European Parliament adopted, by 633 votes in favour, 18 against and 40 abstentions, a Decision to grant the Executive Director of the European Environment Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of its budget for the financial year 2006. The decision to grant discharge also constitutes closure of the accounts of this EU agency.
At the same time, the Parliament adopted by 629 votes in favour, 16 against and 39 abstentions, a Resolution containing the comments which form part of the decision giving discharge. The report had been tabled for plenary by Hans-Peter MARTIN (NI, AT) on behalf of the Committee on Budgetary Control.
As is the case for all EU agencies, Parliament's Resolution is divided into two parts: part one contains general comments on EU agencies, while part two focuses on the specific case of the Agency.
1) General comments on the majority of EU agencies : the Parliament notes that the budgets of the 24 agencies and other satellite bodies audited by the Court of Auditors totalled more than EUR 1 billion and that the number of agencies is constantly increasing. The number of agencies subject to the discharge procedure evolved from 8 in 2000 to 20 in 2006. It concludes therefore that the auditing/discharge process has become cumbersome and disproportionate compared to the relative size of the agencies and that, in the future, this type of procedure should be simplified and rationalised for decentralised agencies.
On the basis of the financial analysis, the Parliament is of the following opinion:
Fundamental considerations : given the constantly increasing number of agencies, the Parliament requests that, before the creation of a new agency, the Commission provide clear explanations regarding agency type, objectives of the agency, internal governance structure, products, services, clients and stakeholders of the agency, formal relationship with external actors, budget responsibility, financial planning, and personnel and staffing policy. It also requests that each agency be governed by a yearly performance agreement which should contain the main objectives for the coming year and that the performance of the agencies be regularly audited by the Court of Auditors (and extend the financial analysis of expenditure to also cover administrative efficiency and effectiveness). More generally, the Parliament takes the view that, in the case of agencies, which are continually overestimating their respective budget needs, technical abatement should be made on the basis of vacant posts in order to reduce the assigned revenue for the agencies and therefore also lower administrative costs of the EU. It recalls that it is a serious problem that a number of agencies is criticised for not following rules on public procurement, the Financial Regulation, the Staff Regulations etc., and considers that the principal reason for this is that most regulations and the Financial Regulation are designed for bigger institutions rather than for small agencies. Therefore, it is necessary to seek a rapid solution in order to enhance the effectiveness of the legislation by grouping the administrative functions of various agencies together or by establishing implementing rules which are better adapted to the agencies. The Parliament also insists that the Commission, when drafting the Preliminary Draft Budget, take into consideration the results of budget implementation by the individual agencies in former years and revise the budget requested by the particular agency accordingly. If the Commission does not undertake this revision, the Parliament invites the competent committee to revise, itself, the budget in question to a realistic level . At the same time, the Parliament recalls that it expects the Commission to present every five years a study on the added value of every existing agency and to not hesitate to close an agency if it is deemed useless by the analysis. Such an assessment is expected as soon as possible given that this type of assessment has yet to be presented. Furthermore, the Parliament insists that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements. Presentation of reporting data : noting that there is no standard approach among the agencies with regard to the presentation of information, the Parliament recalls that it already invited the directors of the agencies to accompany their annual activity report with a declaration of assurance concerning the legality and regularity of operations, similar to the declarations signed by the Directors General of the Commission. It therefore asks the Commission to amend its standing instructions to the agencies and to produce a harmonised model for presenting information, including: i) an annual report intended for a general readership on the body's operations, work and achievements; ii) financial statements and a report on implementation of the agency’s budget; iii) an activity report of the Directors of the agency (as requested by the Parliament since 2005); iv) a declaration of assurance signed by the body's director. General findings by the Court of Auditors : the Parliament refers to certain recurring findings by the Court, including the disbursement of subsidies paid by the Commission (not sufficiently justified estimates of the agencies' cash requirements), the non implementation of the ABAC accounting system by some agencies or the accrued charges for untaken leave which are accounted for by some agencies. It calls for rapid measures in these areas as well as improvements to the internal audit procedures of the agencies. The Parliament also calls on the agencies to consider an inter-agency disciplinary board, as some individual agencies have difficulty in setting up their own disciplinary boards due to their size.
Draft inter-institutional agreement : the Parliament recalls the Commission's draft Interinstitutional agreement on the operating framework for the European regulatory agencies (see ACI/2005/2035 ), which was intended to create a framework for the creation, structure, operation, evaluation and control of the European regulatory agencies and awaits its adoption as soon as possible. It particularly welcomes the Commission's commitment to bring forward a Communication on the future of the regulatory agencies during the course of 2008.
2) Specific points concerning the European Environment Agency : while, on the whole, the Parliament commends the Agency’s activities, it notes, however, that a considerable amount of budget appropriations for operating activities was carried over to the financial year 2007, due in part to the late receipt of funding for the Corine programme (Global Monitoring for the Environment and Security – GMES). It, therefore, criticises the Agency’s non-respect of the budgetary principle of annuality. Similarly, the Parliament regrets certain malfunctions in the Agency’s control system, which did not clearly segregate the duties of the authorising officer and the accountant.
On the budgetary front, the Parliament points out that the Agency had an accumulated surplus of EUR 4 241 797 at 31 December 2006 and that, furthermore, according to its report on budgetary and financial management, the Agency is entitled to receive EUR 3.3 million from the Commission corresponding to an underpayment of subsidies for the financial years 1994 to 2005.
Regarding recruitment, the Parliament notes that one-third of the staff is of a single nationality. It, therefore, expects the Agency to improve the balance in and diversity of staffing.
Lastly, the Parliament commends the Agency for the publication of its “balanced scorecard” annexed to its annual report, and believes that other agencies should follow suit.
The Committee on Budgetary Control adopted the report by Hans-Peter MARTIN (NI, AT) recommending that the Parliament grant the Executive Director of the European Environment Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency's budget for the financial year 2006.
The parliamentary committee notes that the final annual accounts of the Agency are as annexed to the Court of Auditors report.
MEPs make a series of general comments on the EU agencies before focusing on the individual case of the Agency.
1) General comments on the majority of EU agencies : MEPs note that the budgets of the 24 agencies and other satellite bodies audited by the Court of Auditors totalled more than EUR 1 billion and that the number of agencies is constantly increasing. The number of agencies subject to the discharge procedure evolved from 8 in 2000 to 20 in 2006. They conclude therefore that the auditing/discharge process has become cumbersome and disproportionate compared to the relative size of the agencies and that, in the future, this type of procedure should be simplified and rationalised for decentralised agencies.
On the basis of the financial analysis, MEPs are of the following opinion:
Fundamental considerations : given the constantly increasing number of agencies, MEPs request that, before the creation of a new agency, the Commission provide clear explanations regarding agency type, objectives of the agency, internal governance structure, products, services, clients and stakeholders of the agency, formal relationship with external actors, budget responsibility, financial planning, and personnel and staffing policy. They also request that each agency be governed by a yearly performance agreement which should contain the main objectives for the coming year and that the performance of the agencies be regularly audited by the Court of Auditors (and extend the financial analysis of expenditure to also cover administrative efficiency and effectiveness). More generally, MEPs take the view that, in the case of agencies, which are continually overestimating their respective budget needs, technical abatement should be made on the basis of vacant posts in order to reduce the assigned revenue for the agencies and therefore also lower administrative costs of the EU. They recall that it is a serious problem that a number of agencies is criticised for not following rules on public procurement, the Financial Regulation, the Staff Regulations etc., and consider that the principal reason for this is that most regulations and the Financial Regulation are designed for bigger institutions rather than for small agencies. Therefore, it is necessary to seek a rapid solution in order to enhance the effectiveness of the legislation by grouping the administrative functions of various agencies together or by establishing implementing rules which are better adapted to the agencies. MEPs also insist that the Commission, when drafting the Preliminary Draft Budget, take into consideration the results of budget implementation by the individual agencies in former years and revise the budget requested by the particular agency accordingly. If the Commission does not undertake this revision, MEPs invite the competent committee to revise, itself, the budget in question to a realistic level. At the same time, MEPs recall that they expect the Commission to present every five years a study on the added value of every existing agency and to not hesitate to close an agency if it is deemed useless by the analysis. Such an assessment is expected as soon as possible given that this type of assessment has yet to be presented. Furthermore, MEPs insist that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements. Presentation of reporting data : noting that there is no standard approach among the agencies with regard to the presentation of information, MEPs recall that they already invited the directors of the agencies to accompany their annual activity report with a declaration of assurance concerning the legality and regularity of operations, similar to the declarations signed by the Directors General of the Commission. They therefore ask the Commission to amend its standing instructions to the agencies and to produce a harmonised model for presenting information, including: i) an annual report intended for a general readership on the body's operations, work and achievements; ii) financial statements and a report on implementation of the agency’s budget; iii) an activity report of the Directors of the agency (as requested by the Parliament since 2005); iv) a declaration of assurance signed by the body's director. General findings by the Court of Auditors : MEPs refer to certain recurring findings by the Court, including the disbursement of subsidies paid by the Commission (not sufficiently justified estimates of the agencies' cash requirements), the non implementation of the ABAC accounting system by some agencies or the accrued charges for untaken leave which are accounted for by some agencies. They call for rapid measures in these areas as well as improvements to the internal audit procedures of the agencies. MEPs also calls on the agencies to consider an inter-agency disciplinary board, as some individual agencies have difficulty in setting up their own disciplinary boards due to their size. Draft inter-institutional agreement : MEPs recall the Commission's draft Interinstitutional agreement on the operating framework for the European regulatory agencies (see ACI/2005/2035 ), which intended to create a framework for the creation, structure, operation, evaluation and control of the European regulatory agencies and insist that it be completed as soon as possible. They particularly welcome the Commission's commitment to bring forward a Communication on the future of the regulatory agencies during the course of 2008.
2) Specific points concerning the European Environment Agency : while, on the whole, MEPs commend the Agency’s activities, they note, however, that a considerable amount of budget appropriations for operating activities was carried over to the financial year 2007, due in part to the late receipt of funding for the Corine programme (Global Monitoring for the Environment and Security – GMES). They, therefore, criticise the Agency’s non-respect of the budgetary principle of annuality. Similarly, MEPs regret certain malfunctions in the Agency’s control system, which did not clearly segregate the duties of the authorising officer and the accountant.
On the budgetary front, MEPs point out that the Agency had an accumulated surplus of EUR 4 241 797 at 31 December 2006 and that, furthermore, according to its report on budgetary and financial management, the Agency is entitled to receive EUR 3.3 million from the Commission corresponding to an underpayment of subsidies for the financial years 1994 to 2005.
Regarding recruitment, MEPs note that one third of staff are of a single nationality. They, therefore, expect the Agency to improve the balance in and diversity of staffing.
Lastly, MEPs commend the Agency for the publication of its “balanced scorecard” annexed to its annual report, and believe that other agencies should follow suit.
Based on the observations contained in the expenditure account and balance sheet of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2006, as well as on the Court of Auditor’s report and the Agency’s replies to the Court’s observations, the Council recommends the Parliament to supply the Executive Director of the Agency with the discharge on the implementation of its 2006 budget.
In doing so, the Council confirms that EUR 5.8 million (76%) of the appropriations carried over from 2005 to 2006 (EUR 7.6 million) were used, that the appropriations carried over from 2006 to 2007 amount to EUR 9.7 million and that EUR 40 000 was cancelled.
Recalling that the Court of Auditors was able to obtain reasonable assurance that the Agency's annual accounts were reliable in all material respects, the Council considers that the implementation of the 2006 budget calls for a certain number of comments to be taken into account when providing the discharge, particularly on the following points:
Carry-overs : the Council states that there are still problems related to carry-overs for the Agency’s operational activities. As a result, it calls on the Agency to take appropriate measures to improve the implementation of the budget with strict compliance with the principle of annuality. It recalls that carry-overs of payment appropriations are only justified for activities taking place during the current financial year;
Segregation of duties in terms of finance: the Council notes the Court’s insufficiencies in terms of the internal delegation of financial authorisations. It calls on the Agency to strictly observe the principle of segregation of duties by giving different staff members the role of ensuring ex ante controls and managing the rights of access to its computerised budgetary accounting system.
PURPOSE: to present the report of the Court of Auditors on the 2006 accounts of the European Environment Agency.
CONTENT: the report notes that the appropriations entered in the Agency’s budget for the financial year in question amount to EUR 37.114 million , of which EUR 33.677 million was committed and EUR 27.352 million was paid. Out of this general amount, EUR 9.725 million was carried over to 2007 and EUR 36 000 was cancelled.
The Court notes that the accounts for the financial year are reliable in all material aspects and that the underlying transactions of the Agency’s accounts are, on the whole, legal and regular.
Analysis of the accounts by the Court : in terms of the implementation of the budget for the financial year 2006, the Court notes that the Agency carried over more than 30% of commitment appropriations. The figure was above 50% for operational costs (Title III of the Agency’s budget and assigned revenues). The Court considers that certain carry-overs were not justified: over the last two months of 2006, the Agency committed a total of EUR 1.3 million and the corresponding payment appropriations were carried over to 2007. The audit of a sample of these carry-overs (value = EUR 500 000) showed that they all related to activities to be undertaken in 2007. The budgetary principle of annuality was therefore not strictly applied. In addition, the Court notes that the authorising officer (subdelegated) of the Agency carried out ex ante controls and managed the rights of access to the computerised budgetary accounting system, contrary to the principle of the separation of duties .
The Agency’s response: the Agency considers the criticisms, point by point, and notes that the increase in the rate of carry-overs to the financial year 2007 is mainly the result of exceptional circumstances that occurred in 2006, delaying the interim payments to the Agency’s topic centres. The lateness of committed appropriations was due to the obligation to establish license agreements before 1 January and to ensure continuity while respecting the deadlines required to negotiate the costs and timetable of the new activities. In this context, the Agency notes that it will continue its efforts to reduce the rate of carry-overs.
Measures have also been taken to limit the risk linked to attributing certain tasks to the subdelegated authorising officer. The competences for sensitive posts were also amended in mid 2007.
PURPOSE: presentation of the final accounts of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2006.
CONTENT: this document sets out a detailed account of the implementation of the 2006 budget, including the revenue and expenditure and the balance sheet for the year concerned.
According to this document, the final budget amounted to EUR 37.1 million (compared to EUR 32.1 million in 2005) representing a 75% Community subsidy.
As regards the staffing policy, the Agency, whose head office is in Copenhagen (Denmark), officially set out 115 posts in its establishment plan. 110 of these posts are currently occupied with + 47 other posts (auxiliary contracts, seconded national experts, local and employment-agency staff) assigned to operational, administrative and mixed tasks. In 2006, staff expenditure amounted to EUR 15.692 million.
The Agency’s main activities concentrated on the following :
launch of Prelude (PRospective Environmental analysis of Land Use Development in Europe); update of the European Pollutant Emission Register (EPER); publication of reports on, inter alia, transport and the environment, agriculture and the environment, energy and the environment, bioenergy, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, the state of Europe’s coasts, urban spread and the management of natural resources; seminars organised under the Presidency of the Council; assistance with data harmonisation; management of the Eionet (European Environment Information and Observation Network).
The complete version of the final accounts may be found at the following address: http://www.eea.europa.eu/documents
PURPOSE: presentation of the final accounts of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2006.
CONTENT: this document sets out a detailed account of the implementation of the 2006 budget, including the revenue and expenditure and the balance sheet for the year concerned.
According to this document, the final budget amounted to EUR 37.1 million (compared to EUR 32.1 million in 2005) representing a 75% Community subsidy.
As regards the staffing policy, the Agency, whose head office is in Copenhagen (Denmark), officially set out 115 posts in its establishment plan. 110 of these posts are currently occupied with + 47 other posts (auxiliary contracts, seconded national experts, local and employment-agency staff) assigned to operational, administrative and mixed tasks. In 2006, staff expenditure amounted to EUR 15.692 million.
The Agency’s main activities concentrated on the following :
launch of Prelude (PRospective Environmental analysis of Land Use Development in Europe); update of the European Pollutant Emission Register (EPER); publication of reports on, inter alia, transport and the environment, agriculture and the environment, energy and the environment, bioenergy, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, the state of Europe’s coasts, urban spread and the management of natural resources; seminars organised under the Presidency of the Council; assistance with data harmonisation; management of the Eionet (European Environment Information and Observation Network).
The complete version of the final accounts may be found at the following address: http://www.eea.europa.eu/documents
Documents
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2008)3169
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament: T6-0150/2008
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A6-0122/2008
- Committee report tabled for plenary: A6-0122/2008
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE402.806
- Committee opinion: PE400.454
- Committee draft report: PE396.693
- Supplementary non-legislative basic document: 05843/2008
- Court of Auditors: opinion, report: N6-0004/2008
- Court of Auditors: opinion, report: OJ C 309 19.12.2007, p. 0001
- Non-legislative basic document: EUR-Lex
- Non-legislative basic document: SEC(2007)1055
- Non-legislative basic document published: EUR-Lex
- Non-legislative basic document published: SEC(2007)1055
- Non-legislative basic document: EUR-Lex SEC(2007)1055
- Court of Auditors: opinion, report: N6-0004/2008 OJ C 309 19.12.2007, p. 0001
- Supplementary non-legislative basic document: 05843/2008
- Committee draft report: PE396.693
- Committee opinion: PE400.454
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE402.806
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A6-0122/2008
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2008)3169
Votes
Rapport Martin H.P. A6-0122/2008 - décision #
PPE-DE
ALDE
Verts/ALE
GUE/NGL
UEN
IND/DEMRapport Martin H.P. A6-0122/2008 - résolution #
| Amendments | Dossier |
| 52 |
2007/2051(DEC)
2008/03/06
CONT
52 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Proposal for a decision on discharge Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 Amendment 2 #
Proposal for a decision on the closure of accounts Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Recital O O. calling on the Director of the agency to propose, by 1 June 2008 at the latest, practical measures to achieve savings, above all in the area of administrative costs; to explain in detail why administrative costs are unacceptably high; to explain in detail why staff expenditure per post increased by 15% between the financial year 2006 and the 2008 preliminary draft budget; to explain in detail why the subsidy from the Community budget has continued to increase enormously over the period between 2000 and 2008; to explain in detail why the cost of staff privileges
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31 Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 36. Requests that the performance of the agencies be regularly (and on an ad hoc basis) audited by the Court of Auditors or another independent auditor; considers that this should not be limited to traditional elements of financial management and the proper use of public money, but should also cover administrative efficiency and effectiveness and should include a rating of the financial management of each agency;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 a (new) 36a. Takes the view that in the case of agencies which are continually overestimating their respective budget needs, technical abatement should be made on the basis of vacant posts; is of the opinion that this will lead in the long run to less assigned revenue for the agencies and therefore also to lower administrative costs;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 b (new) 36b. Notes that it is a serious problem that a number of agencies is criticised for not following rules on public procurement, the Financial Regulation, the Staff Regulations etc.; considers that the principal reason for this is that most regulations and the Financial Regulation are designed for bigger institutions and that most of the small agencies do not have the critical mass to be able to cope with these regulatory requirements; therefore asks the Commission to look for a rapid solution in order to enhance the effectiveness by grouping the administrative functions of various agencies together, in order to achieve this critical mass (taking into consideration the necessary changes in the basic regulations governing the agencies and their budgetary independence), or urgently to draft specific rules for the agencies (in particular implementing rules for the agencies) which allow them to be in full compliance;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 c (new) 36c. Insists that the Commission, when drafting the Preliminary Draft Budget, take into consideration the results of budget implementation by the individual agencies in former years, in particular in year n-1, and, revise the budget requested by the particular agency accordingly; invites its competent committee to respect this revision and, if not undertaken by the Commission, to revise itself the budget in question to a realistic level matching the absorption and implementation capacity of the agency in question;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 d (new) 36d. Recalls its decision on discharge in respect of the financial year 2005, in which it invited the Commission to present every five years a study on the added value of every existing agency; invites all relevant institutions in the case of a negative evaluation of the added value of an agency to take the necessary steps by reformulating the mandate of that agency or by closing it; notes that there has not been one single evaluation undertaken by the Commission in 2007; insists that the Commission should present at least 5 such evaluations before the decision on discharge in respect of the financial year 2007, starting with the oldest agencies;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 e (new) 36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 f (new) 36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 38 Amendment 42 #
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 39 Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 39 39. Calls on the Commission to submit as quickly as possible a proposal to abolish or drastically cut back privileges
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 40 Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41 Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 61 Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 62 Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 63 Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 64 Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 65 Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 66 Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 source: PE-402.806
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/1 |
|
| docs/1/docs/1/url |
Old
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2007:309:SOM:EN:HTMLNew
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2007:309:TOC |
| docs/3 |
|
| docs/4 |
|
| docs/4/docs/0/url |
Old
http://nullEN&reference=PE400.454&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ENVI-AD-400454_EN.html |
| docs/6 |
|
| docs/7 |
|
| docs/7/docs/0/url |
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=14860&j=0&l=en
|
| events/0/date |
Old
2007-03-30T00:00:00New
2007-03-29T00:00:00 |
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE396.693New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=PE396.693 |
| docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE400.454&secondRef=02New
http://nullEN&reference=PE400.454&secondRef=02 |
| docs/4/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE402.806New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=PE402.806 |
| docs/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2008-0122_EN.htmlNew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2008-0122_EN.html |
| docs/6/docs/0/url |
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=14860&j=0&l=en
|
| events/1/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament |
| events/2/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee |
| events/3 |
|
| events/3 |
|
| events/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20080422&type=CRENew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=20080422&type=CRE |
| events/6 |
|
| events/6 |
|
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 100
|
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 94
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| docs/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2008-122&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2008-0122_EN.html |
| docs/6/body |
EC
|
| events/3/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2008-122&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2008-0122_EN.html |
| events/6/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P6-TA-2008-150New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-6-2008-0150_EN.html |
| activities |
|
| commission |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| council |
|
| docs |
|
| events |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
CONT/6/53865New
|
| procedure/final/title |
Old
OJ L 088 31.03.2009, p. 0159New
OJ L 088 31.03.2009, p. 0159 |
| procedure/final/url |
Old
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:2009:088:TOCNew
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:2009:088:TOC |
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 94
|
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 094
|
| procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
| activities/6/text |
|
| procedure/final |
|
| activities |
|
| committees |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure |
|