BETA


2013/0186(COD) Implementation of the Single European Sky. Recast

Progress: Awaiting Council 1st reading position / budgetary conciliation convocation

RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Lead TRAN MARINESCU Marian-Jean (icon: PPE PPE) LIBERADZKI Bogusław (icon: S&D S&D), OETJEN Jan-Christoph (icon: Renew Renew), VAN OVERTVELDT Johan (icon: ECR ECR), FERREIRA João (icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL)
Former Responsible Committee TRAN MARINESCU Marian-Jean (icon: PPE PPE)
Former Committee Opinion ITRE
Former Committee Opinion JURI SPERONI Francesco Enrico (icon: EFD EFD)
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
TFEU 100-p2

Events

2019/09/24
   EP - Committee decision to open interinstitutional negotiations after 1st reading in Parliament
2014/12/03
   CSL - Debate in Council
Documents
2014/12/03
   CSL - Council Meeting
2014/10/08
   CSL - Debate in Council
Documents
2014/10/08
   CSL - Council Meeting
2014/06/10
   Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2014/03/12
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2014/03/12
   EP - Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
Details

The European Parliament adopted by 489 votes to 154 with 34 abstentions, a legislative resolution on proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and Council on the implementation of the Single European Sky (SES) (recast).

Parliament’s position in first reading following the ordinary legislative procedure amended the Commission proposal as follows:

Implementation of the SES : Parliament stressed that the Regulation should be implemented as swiftly as possible In order to ensure that the expected increase in air traffic did not cause or exacerbate congestion in European airspace, with all the economic, environmental and security costs that that would entail, fragmentation of that airspace should be remedied.

The implementation of the Single European Sky should have a positive impact in terms of growth, employment and competitiveness in Europe , in particular by increasing demand for jobs requiring advanced qualifications.

Objectives: the regulation lays down rules for the creation and proper functioning of the Single European Sky in order to ensure current air traffic safety standards, to contribute to the sustainable development of the air transport system, such as reducing climate impact .

The Single European Sky should comprise a coherent pan-European and, subject to specific arrangements with the neighbouring countries, third-country network of routes, an integrated operating airspace, network management and air traffic management based only on safety, efficiency and interoperability, for the benefit of all airspace users.

The application of the regulation to Gibraltar airport shall be suspended until the arrangements set out in the Joint Declaration made by the Foreign Ministers of the Kingdom of Spain and the United Kingdom on 2 December 1987 are applied.

National aviation authority: the amended text provides for Member States’ designation of a national body to act as the national aviation authority.

The authorities should be legally distinct and independent , in particular in organisational, hierarchical and decision-making terms, including separate annual budget allocation, from any company, organisation, public or private entity or personnel falling within the scope of authority activity as provided for in this Regulation and in Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 or having an interest in the activities of such entities. The national aviation authorities shall ensure compliance with these provisions on the date of entry into force of this Regulation or at the latest by 1 January 2017.

Staff of the national aviation authorities shall be recruited under clear and transparent rules and criteria, which guarantee their independence. They should not be seconded from air navigation service providers (ANSPs) or companies under the control of ANSPs.

As regards persons who have been in charge of strategic decisions , for more than six months, they must have no professional position or responsibility with any of the air navigation service providers after their term in the national aviation authority, for a period of at least 12 months for staff in managerial positions and at least six months for staff in non-managerial positions.

The authority's top management shall be appointed for a fixed term of between three and seven years.

Definitions: Members added certain definitions, such as 'local performance plans' and 'industrial partnership' supporting one or more functional airspace blocks, in order to maximise performance.

The text also contained a definition of ‘human factor’ meaning the social, cultural and staffing conditions in the ATM sector.

Cooperation between national aviation authorities : the Commission and the European Agency for Aviation (EAA) should facilitate cooperation among the authorities them in order to enable the exchange of best practices and to develop a common approach, including through enhanced cooperation at regional level, by providing a platform for such exchanges . This cooperation should take place on a regular basis (at least once a year.)

The tasks and objectives of the network were more clearly defined : inter alia, they may provide opinions to the Commission and the EAA on rule-making and certification and provide opinions, guidelines and recommendations designed to facilitate the provision of cross-border services.

Certificates: the issue of certificates shall confer on air navigation service providers the possibility of offering their services to any Member State, other air navigation service providers, airspace users and airports within the Union and neighbouring third countries, if appropriate, within a functional airspace block, subject to mutual agreement between the relevant parties.

Provision of support services : ' support services' were defined as CNS (communication, navigation and surveillance), MET (meteorological) and AIS (aeronautical information) services as well as other services and activities, which are linked to, and support the provision of, air navigation services.

Parliament stated that there should be no statutory impediments to providers of support services that would prevent their ability to compete within the Union on the basis of equitable, non-discriminatory and transparent conditions for the purpose of providing these services.

Members proposed that air navigation service providers, when drawing up their business plans, should call for offers from different support services providers, with a view to choosing the financially and qualitatively most beneficial provider.

In the choice of an external provider of support services, the provisions of Directive 2004/18/EC shall be complied with, including cost and energy efficiency, overall service quality, interoperability and safety of services, as well as transparency of the procurement process

The Commission shall conduct a comprehensive study on the operational, economic, safety and social impacts of the introduction of market principles to the provision of support services, and shall submit that study to the European Parliament and the Council by 1 January 2016.

Performance criteria and system : Parliament proposed a ‘performance review body’ (PRB) be established as a European economic regulator under the supervision of the Commission, with effect from 1 July 2015. The PRB shall be functionally and legally separate from any service provider, whether at national or pan-European level.

The compliance of the local performance plans and local targets with the Union-wide performance targets shall be assessed by the Commission in cooperation with the PRB.

Union-wide performance targets shall be set with a view to ensuring that each functional airspace block retains sufficient flexibility to achieve the best results.

Compensation mechanism : in addition to the introduction of sanctions, an appropriate compensation mechanism must also be established in order to address the problem stemming from the lack of synchronisation in SESAR deployment and resulting lost investment. The Commission may propose financial mechanisms to improve the synchronisation of air-based and ground-based capital expenditure related to the deployment of SESAR technologies

Implementation of the ATM Master Plan : implementation of the ATM Master Plan shall be coordinated by the Commission. The Network Manager, the PRB and the Deployment Manager shall contribute to the implementation of the ATM Master Plan in accordance with the provisions of the regulation.

The Commission should adopt, by implementing acts, measures establishing the governance of implementation of the ATM Master Plan, including defining and selecting the body responsible at management level (Deployment Manager).

The Deployment Manager should recommend to the Commission binding deadlines for deployment and appropriate corrective actions concerning delayed implementation.

Industrial partnerships : Members stipulated that industrial partnerships should be separate from FABs, which were a state initiative. What is more, industrial partnerships need not overlap with FABs in terms of the Member States concerned and therefore should be classed as a separate type of cooperation.

Documents
2014/03/11
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2014/02/06
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
Details

The Committee on Transport and Tourism adopted the report by Marian-Jean MARINESCU (EPP, RO) on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and Council on the implementation of the Single European Sky (recast).

The parliamentary committee recommended that the position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading under the ordinary legislative procedure modify the Commission proposal as follows.

Purpose of the regulation : this regulation should lay down rules for the creation and proper functioning of the Single European Sky in order to ensure current air traffic safety standards, to contribute to the sustainable development of the air transport system, and in particular, reducing climate impact .

The Single European Sky shall comprise a coherent network at the pan-European level and, subject to specific arrangements with the neighbouring countries, in third-countries , an integrated operating airspace, network management and air traffic management for the benefit of all airspace users.

National aviation authorities : these shall be legally distinct and independent , in particular in organisational, hierarchical and decision-making terms – and with their annual budget - from any company, organisation, public or private entity or personnel falling within the scope of authority activity as provided for in Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 or having an interest in the activities of such entities.

Staff of the national aviation authorities shall be recruited under clear and transparent rules and criteria which guarantee their independence.

They shall not be seconded from air navigation service providers (ANSPs) or companies under the control of ANSPs.

Persons who have been in charge of strategic decisions for more than six months shall have no professional position or responsibility with any of the air navigation service providers after their term in the national aviation authority, for a period ofat least 12 months for staff in managerial positions (at least six months for staff in non-managerial positions).

Definitions : the Members added important definitions, namely that of a “local performance target” and “industrial partnership” which, according to the proposal, will now be a “driving force” within newly-structured functional airspace blocks (FABs).

The definition of the “human factor” was also introduced, meaning the social, cultural and staffing conditions in the air traffic management (ATM) sector

The human factor must be monitored and brought into the core of the Single European Sky framework.

Cooperation between national aviation authorities : The Commission and the European Aviation Agency (EAA) shallfacilitate active cooperation of these authorities to enable them to exchange their best practices and to develop common solutions, including stronger cooperation at the regional level, and placing at their disposal a platform for these exchanges .

This cooperation should take place in a network that convenes at regular intervals (at least once a year).

The purpose and tasks of the network was spelled out in more detail: it must, among others, provide opinions to the Commission and the EAA on rule-making and certification and provide recommendations designed to facilitate the provision of cross-border services.

Certification of air navigation service providers : the issue of certificates shall confer on air navigation service providers the possibility of offering their services to any Member State , and if appropriate, neighbouring third countries , within a functional airspace block, subject to mutual agreement between the relevant parties.

Provision of support services : “support services” means communication, navigation and surveillance (CNS), meteorological services (MET) and aeronautical information services (AIS) as well as other services and activities, which are linked to, and support the provision of, air navigation services.

According to the report, there should be no statutory impediments to providers of support services that would prevent their ability to compete within the Union on the basis of equitable, non-discriminatory and transparent conditions for the purpose of providing these services.

Members proposed that air navigation service providers, when drawing up their business plans, should call for offers from different support services providers, with a view to choosing the financially and qualitatively most beneficial provider.

Binding selection criteria for the entity procuring those services shall be, in particular, cost and energy efficiency, overall service quality, interoperability and safety of services, as well as transparency of the procurement process.

System and performance criteria : Members proposed that a “performance review body” (PRB) be established as a European economic regulatorunder the supervision of the Commission, with effect from 1 July 2015. The PRB shall be functionally and legally separate from any service provider, whether at national or pan-European level.

The compliance of the local performance plans and local targets with the Union-wide performance targets shall be assessed by the Commission in cooperation with the PRB.

In addition to the introduction of sanctions, an appropriate compensation mechanism must also be established in order to address the problem stemming from the lack of synchronisation in SESAR deployment and lost investment resulting thereof.

The Commission may propose financial mechanisms to improve the synchronisation of air-based and ground-based capital expenditure related to the deployment of SESAR technologies.

Implementation of the ATM Master Plan : implementation of the ATM Master Plan shall be coordinated by the Commission. The Network Manager, the PRB and the Deployment Manager shall contribute to the implementation of the ATM Master Plan in accordance with the provisions of this regulation.

The Commission shall adopt, by implementing acts, measures establishing the governance of implementation of the ATM Master Plan, including defining and selecting the body responsible at management level (Deployment Manager).

Industrial partnerships : Members stipulated that industrial partnerships should be separate from FABs, which are a state initiative. What is more, industrial partnerships need not overlap with FABs in terms of the Member States concerned and therefore should be classed as a separate type of cooperation.

Documents
2014/01/30
   EP - Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
2014/01/15
   IT_SENATE - Contribution
Documents
2013/12/31
   IT_CHAMBER - Contribution
Documents
2013/12/11
   ESC - Economic and Social Committee: opinion, report
Documents
2013/11/27
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2013/11/12
   EP - SPERONI Francesco Enrico (EFD) appointed as rapporteur in JURI
2013/11/06
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2013/09/15
   ES_PARLIAMENT - Contribution
Documents
2013/09/11
   PT_PARLIAMENT - Contribution
Documents
2013/07/11
   EP - MARINESCU Marian-Jean (PPE) appointed as rapporteur in TRAN
2013/07/11
   EP - MARINESCU Marian-Jean (PPE) appointed as rapporteur in TRAN
2013/07/01
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
2013/06/11
   EC - Document attached to the procedure
2013/06/11
   EC - Document attached to the procedure
2013/06/11
   EC - Legislative proposal published
Details

PURPOSE: to improve the competitiveness of the European air transport system with the further development of the “Single European Sky” (SES) initiative.

PROPOSED ACT: Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council.

ROLE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: the European Parliament decides in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure and on an equal footing with the Council.

BACKGROUND: the Single European Sky (SES) initiative aims to improve the overall efficiency of the way in which European airspace is organised and managed through a reform of the industry providing air navigation services (ANS).

The experience gained with SES I since 2004 and SES II since 2009 has shown that the principles and direction of the SES are valid and warrant a continuation of their implementation . However, the initiative is experiencing significant delays in its implementation, notably in the achievement of the performance goals and the deployment of its basic elements (such as functional airspace blocks (FABs) or National Supervisory Authorities (NSAs)).

This process of the recasting of the SES legal framework, known under the abbreviation of SES 2+ , is intended to accelerate the implementation of the reform of air navigation services without departing from its original objectives and principles. It is also part of the Single Market Act II initiative and aims hence to improve the general competitiveness and growth of the EU economy and not just that of the air traffic management system.

The SES2+ package essentially deals with two problems:

the insufficient efficiency of Air Navigation: ANS provision remains relatively inefficient in terms of cost- and flight efficiency as well as the capacity offered. In the US, for example, the en-route airspace is controlled by a single service provider as opposed to 38 en-route service providers in Europe. The US service provider controls almost 70% more flights with 38% fewer staff; fragmented ATM system : the European ATM system consists of 27 national authorities overseeing in total over a hundred Air Navigation Service Providers (ANSPs), with the associated variance in systems, rules and procedures.

The specific objectives of the initiative are: (i) to improve the performance of air traffic services in terms of efficiency and (ii) to improve the utilisation of air traffic management capacity.

IMPACT ASSESSMENT: the Commission undertook an impact assessment to support legislative proposals on improving efficiency, safety and competitiveness of the Single European Sky.

LEGAL BASE: Article 100(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).

CONTENT: the Commission proposes merging the four SES regulations into a single regulation, structured into chapters based on the actors concerned.

National authorities: the proposal strenghten the national authorities, as regards their independence, their expertise and their resources . For that purpose, it:

describes the level of independence required from the authorities vis-à-vis the service providers they are intended to oversee (a transitional period is foreseen until 2020); more explicit requirements are set on the competences and independence of the staff hired, as well as strengthening the independent funding of the authorities through the route charges; to improve expertise amongst the authorities, a network of national authorities is foreseen, including also the possibility of pooling experts so that States may benefit from experts coming from other Member States.

Performance and charging schemes: the amendments proposed seek to rationalise the process of target setting and to allow focusing of target setting more at the local level . This allows for more educated tailored setting of targets.

Small adjustments to support this have also been made to the provisions on charging and the text has also been updated so that the provision concerning funding of authority tasks covers also the extension of the European Aviation Safety Agency’s (EASA) tasks.

Functional Airspace Blocks: the aim of the revision is to undertake a strategic redirection of Functional Airspace Blocks (FABs) to give them more of a performance focus. The sector needs to be given more flexibility to develop the FABs, even to devise different types of FABs, depending on where they expect to find the most synergies. Therefore the focus of the proposal is now more on flexible " industrial partnerships " and the measure of success will be the level of performance improvements achieved.

Support services: according to the proposal, the core air traffic services, which are considered to be natural monopolies, would remain under the requirement to designate them, but support services should be allowed to develop freely, using the full potential of expertise also from other sectors . A safeguard clause has been included to ensure vital security and economic interests are not endangered. A transitional period is foreseen until 2020.

Network Management: the provisions have been reorganised, in particular as regards the services that the Network Manager provides. A reference to the aeronautical information portal has been added as this service is already to some extent integrated in the Network Manager.

Secondly, the terminology has been harmonised with that used ibn Regulation (EC) No 1108/2009 naming the "functions" as "services" and treating the Network Manager consistently in the same manner as other service providers insofar as certification, oversight and safety requirements are concerned.

Lastly, a provision has been included to cover the further development of the Network Manager in the direction of an industrial partnership by 2020.

Involvement of airspace users: the need to introduce more customer focus on the air navigation service providers has given rise to a new provision to ensure the airspace users are consulted and also involved in the approval of investment plans.

BUDGETARY IMPLICATION: the proposal has no implications for the EU’s budget.

DELEGATED ACTS: the proposal contains provisions empowering the Commission to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

Documents

Activities

Votes

A7-0095/2014 - Marian-Jean Marinescu - Am 22

2014/03/12 Outcome: +: 379, -: 265, 0: 34
ES FR HU DE PL SK IT RO AT PT EL LU HR SI FI BG ?? LV MT LT IE CY EE SE BE DK NL CZ GB
Total
51
61
20
92
41
13
57
28
18
21
17
6
12
7
10
17
2
8
4
10
12
6
6
19
19
8
25
18
70
icon: PPE PPE
236

Luxembourg PPE

3

Finland PPE

Against (1)

3
2

Malta PPE

For (1)

1
2

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Czechia PPE

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
55

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Portugal Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Greece Verts/ALE

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

2

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

Against (1)

4

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5
icon: NI NI
29

Spain NI

1

France NI

2

Hungary NI

For (1)

3

Italy NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Bulgaria NI

Against (1)

1

Ireland NI

Against (1)

1

Belgium NI

Against (1)

1
icon: EFD EFD
23

Poland EFD

2

Slovakia EFD

For (1)

1

Greece EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Finland EFD

For (1)

1

Bulgaria EFD

For (1)

1

Lithuania EFD

2

Belgium EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Netherlands EFD

Against (1)

1
icon: S&D S&D
176

Hungary S&D

Abstain (1)

3

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Croatia S&D

For (1)

5

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Finland S&D

Against (1)

1

Bulgaria S&D

For (1)

4

Latvia S&D

1

Lithuania S&D

2

Ireland S&D

2

Cyprus S&D

Abstain (1)

2

Estonia S&D

Against (1)

1

Netherlands S&D

3
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
33

Spain GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
4

Greece GUE/NGL

2

Croatia GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Latvia GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Ireland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
49

Hungary ECR

Against (1)

1

Italy ECR

Against (1)

1

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Latvia ECR

Against (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

Against (1)

1

Belgium ECR

Against (1)

1

Netherlands ECR

Against (1)

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
77

Spain ALDE

2

Slovakia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Italy ALDE

Against (1)

3

Austria ALDE

1

Greece ALDE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

Against (2)

2

Finland ALDE

For (1)

3

Latvia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Lithuania ALDE

2

Ireland ALDE

Abstain (1)

4

Denmark ALDE

Against (2)

2

A7-0095/2014 - Marian-Jean Marinescu - Am 23

2014/03/12 Outcome: +: 356, -: 264, 0: 49
ES FR DE PL HU PT RO SK IT LU EL MT AT CY HR ?? SI LV LT BG FI IE EE SE BE NL DK CZ GB
Total
51
61
89
39
20
21
28
12
57
6
16
4
18
6
12
2
7
9
10
17
10
12
6
19
18
25
7
18
69
icon: PPE PPE
236

Luxembourg PPE

3

Malta PPE

For (1)

1
2
2

Finland PPE

Against (1)

3

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Czechia PPE

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
53

Portugal Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Greece Verts/ALE

1

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Finland Verts/ALE

2

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

Against (1)

3

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5
icon: NI NI
29

Spain NI

1

France NI

2

Hungary NI

For (1)

3

Italy NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Bulgaria NI

Against (1)

1

Ireland NI

Against (1)

1

Belgium NI

Abstain (1)

1
icon: EFD EFD
24

Poland EFD

2

Slovakia EFD

Against (1)

1

Greece EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Lithuania EFD

2

Bulgaria EFD

Against (1)

1

Finland EFD

Against (1)

1

Belgium EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Netherlands EFD

Against (1)

1
icon: S&D S&D
172

Hungary S&D

Against (1)

3

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

Abstain (1)

2

Slovenia S&D

Abstain (1)

1

Latvia S&D

Abstain (1)

1

Lithuania S&D

2

Bulgaria S&D

For (1)

4

Finland S&D

Against (1)

1

Ireland S&D

Against (1)

2

Estonia S&D

Against (1)

1

Netherlands S&D

3
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
33

Spain GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
4

Greece GUE/NGL

2

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Croatia GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Latvia GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Ireland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Denmark GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
48

Hungary ECR

Against (1)

1

Italy ECR

Abstain (1)

1

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Latvia ECR

Against (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

Against (1)

1

Belgium ECR

Against (1)

1

Netherlands ECR

Against (1)

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
74

Spain ALDE

2

Italy ALDE

Against (1)

3

Luxembourg ALDE

Against (1)

1

Greece ALDE

Against (1)

1

Austria ALDE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

Against (2)

2

Latvia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Lithuania ALDE

2
3

Denmark ALDE

Against (2)

2

A7-0095/2014 - Marian-Jean Marinescu - Am 26

2014/03/12 Outcome: +: 388, -: 220, 0: 64
ES FR DE PL PT RO IT HU SK EL AT HR LU LV MT LT SI ?? IE NL BG BE FI EE CY SE DK CZ GB
Total
51
61
89
40
21
27
58
19
13
17
18
11
6
9
4
10
7
2
12
24
17
19
11
6
6
19
8
18
69
icon: PPE PPE
234

Luxembourg PPE

3

Malta PPE

For (1)

1
2

Finland PPE

Against (1)

3

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1
2

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Czechia PPE

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
55

Portugal Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Greece Verts/ALE

1

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Belgium Verts/ALE

Against (1)

4

Finland Verts/ALE

2

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5
icon: S&D S&D
176

Hungary S&D

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

3

Croatia S&D

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

5

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Latvia S&D

1

Lithuania S&D

2

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Ireland S&D

2

Netherlands S&D

Against (1)

3

Bulgaria S&D

For (1)

4

Finland S&D

2

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1
2
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
32

Spain GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1
4

Greece GUE/NGL

2

Croatia GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

Latvia GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

Ireland GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Sweden GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1
icon: NI NI
29

Spain NI

1

France NI

2

Italy NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Hungary NI

For (1)

3

Ireland NI

Against (1)

1

Bulgaria NI

Against (1)

1

Belgium NI

Abstain (1)

1
icon: EFD EFD
24

Poland EFD

2

Slovakia EFD

For (1)

1

Greece EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Lithuania EFD

2

Netherlands EFD

Against (1)

1

Bulgaria EFD

For (1)

1

Belgium EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Finland EFD

Against (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
47

Italy ECR

1

Hungary ECR

Against (1)

1

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Latvia ECR

Against (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

Against (1)

1

Netherlands ECR

Against (1)

1

Belgium ECR

Against (1)

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
75

Spain ALDE

2

Italy ALDE

Against (1)

3

Slovakia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Greece ALDE

Against (1)

1

Austria ALDE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

Against (1)

1

Latvia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Lithuania ALDE

2

Slovenia ALDE

Against (2)

2

Ireland ALDE

Abstain (1)

4
3

Denmark ALDE

Against (2)

2

A7-0095/2014 - Marian-Jean Marinescu - Am 27

2014/03/12 Outcome: +: 355, -: 260, 0: 44
ES FR HU PL PT SK RO DE IT AT LU EL MT ?? SI LV BG HR LT CY BE IE SE EE FI DK NL CZ GB
Total
48
59
20
41
21
13
27
91
55
17
5
16
4
2
7
9
17
12
9
6
17
11
19
5
9
8
24
18
69
icon: PPE PPE
232

Luxembourg PPE

3

Malta PPE

For (1)

1
2
2

Ireland PPE

3

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Finland PPE

3

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Czechia PPE

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
53

Spain Verts/ALE

1

Portugal Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Greece Verts/ALE

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

Against (1)

4

Finland Verts/ALE

2

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5
icon: NI NI
29

Spain NI

1

France NI

2

Hungary NI

For (1)

3

Italy NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Bulgaria NI

Against (1)

1

Belgium NI

Abstain (1)

1

Ireland NI

Against (1)

1
icon: EFD EFD
22

Poland EFD

2

Slovakia EFD

For (1)

1

Greece EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Bulgaria EFD

For (1)

1

Lithuania EFD

For (1)

1

Belgium EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Finland EFD

Against (1)

1

Netherlands EFD

Against (1)

1
icon: S&D S&D
170

Hungary S&D

Abstain (1)

3

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Slovenia S&D

Abstain (1)

1

Latvia S&D

Abstain (1)

1

Bulgaria S&D

For (1)

4

Lithuania S&D

2
2

Ireland S&D

Against (1)

2

Estonia S&D

Against (1)

1

Finland S&D

For (1)

1

Netherlands S&D

3
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
32

Spain GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

France GUE/NGL

3
4

Greece GUE/NGL

2

Latvia GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Croatia GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Ireland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
48

Hungary ECR

Against (1)

1

Italy ECR

Against (1)

1

Latvia ECR

Against (1)

1

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

Against (1)

1

Belgium ECR

Against (1)

1

Netherlands ECR

Against (1)

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
73

Spain ALDE

2

Slovakia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Italy ALDE

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2

Austria ALDE

Against (1)

1

Greece ALDE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

Against (2)

2

Latvia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Lithuania ALDE

2

Ireland ALDE

Abstain (1)

4

Finland ALDE

2

Denmark ALDE

Against (2)

2

A7-0095/2014 - Marian-Jean Marinescu - Am 144

2014/03/12 Outcome: -: 397, +: 217, 0: 59
GB IT CZ EE FI MT LT DK ?? LV LU BE SE CY HR AT SK EL SI NL PL IE BG RO HU PT FR ES DE
Total
68
57
18
6
11
4
10
8
2
9
6
17
19
6
12
18
13
17
7
25
41
12
17
27
20
21
60
51
91
icon: S&D S&D
177

Estonia S&D

Abstain (1)

1

Finland S&D

Against (1)

2

Lithuania S&D

2

Denmark S&D

Against (1)

3

Latvia S&D

Abstain (1)

1

Luxembourg S&D

Against (1)

1
2

Croatia S&D

For (1)

5

Slovenia S&D

Abstain (1)

1

Netherlands S&D

3

Ireland S&D

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2

Bulgaria S&D

Against (1)

4

Hungary S&D

For (1)

3
icon: ECR ECR
47

Italy ECR

1

Lithuania ECR

1

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1

Belgium ECR

For (1)

1

Croatia ECR

For (1)

1

Netherlands ECR

For (1)

1

Hungary ECR

For (1)

1
icon: EFD EFD
24

Finland EFD

For (1)

1

Lithuania EFD

2

Belgium EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Slovakia EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Greece EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Netherlands EFD

For (1)

1
2

Bulgaria EFD

For (1)

1
icon: NI NI
29

Italy NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Belgium NI

Abstain (1)

1

Austria NI

For (1)

Abstain (1)

4

Ireland NI

Against (1)

1

Bulgaria NI

Against (1)

1

Hungary NI

Against (1)

3

France NI

2

Spain NI

Against (1)

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
73

Italy ALDE

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2

Estonia ALDE

3

Finland ALDE

Abstain (1)

3

Lithuania ALDE

2

Denmark ALDE

Against (2)

2

Latvia ALDE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Belgium ALDE

Against (1)

2

Sweden ALDE

Abstain (1)

4

Austria ALDE

Abstain (1)

1

Slovakia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Greece ALDE

Abstain (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

Against (2)

2

Romania ALDE

Against (1)

3

Spain ALDE

2
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
32

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Latvia GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Croatia GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Greece GUE/NGL

2

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Ireland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
4

Spain GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
54

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

Against (2)

2

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

3

Sweden Verts/ALE

For (1)

4

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Greece Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Portugal Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1
icon: PPE PPE
237

Czechia PPE

Against (1)

1

Estonia PPE

Against (1)

1

Malta PPE

Against (1)

1

Denmark PPE

Against (1)

1

PPE

2

Luxembourg PPE

3

Cyprus PPE

2

Ireland PPE

For (1)

4

A7-0095/2014 - Marian-Jean Marinescu - Résolution législative

2014/03/12 Outcome: +: 489, -: 154, 0: 34
IT ES PL DE FR RO BE EL PT NL SK IE LT FI BG AT DK SI EE LV SE LU HR ?? CY MT CZ HU GB
Total
58
49
41
93
60
28
19
17
21
25
13
12
10
11
17
18
8
7
6
9
19
6
12
2
6
4
18
19
69
icon: PPE PPE
236

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

3
2
2

Malta PPE

Against (1)

1

Czechia PPE

1
icon: S&D S&D
176