2014/2008(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. considering that even though such a figure remains modest by comparison with the population of the European Union, it nevertheless denotes a marked increase in the awareness of the right of petition and the legitimate expectations on the usefulness of the petitions process as a means of securing the attention of the European Institutions and the Member States for the concerns of individual citizens, local communities, NGOs and voluntary associations, private businesses;

Amendment 10 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas each petition is assessed and treated on its merit, even when brought forth by only one EU citizen or resident, and each petitioner has a right to receive a reply in their own language, or the language they used to submit the petition, as long as it is an official language of the Union; whereas regarding the spirit of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, and more particularly the Council conclusions adopted on13th June 2005, bigger efforts should be made on fostering where necessary administrative agreements between concerned Member States and the European Parliament, in order to ensure that EU citizens are able to effectively submit petitions and receive a response in their mother tongue, even if not an official language of the Union;

Amendment 11 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. bearing in mind that, depending on the nature and complexity of a petition received, its processing and response time will vary, but that every effort is to be made to duly respond to the concerns of petitioners within a reasonable time-frame; and in an appropriate manner, not only in terms of procedure but also of substance;

Amendment 12 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. bearing in mind that the activities of the Committee on Petitions are based entirely on the input and contributions received from petitioners, along with the results of its own investigations into each case as supplemented where necessary with additional expertise from the European Commission, Member States or other bodies; ~~and that its agendas are prioritised and organised on the basis of decisions taken democratically by its members;~~

Amendment 13 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital Ja (new)

Ja. . whereas the petition right is a key tool for participation and democratic control by the citizens, and its proper implementation must be ensured from the beginning to the end of the process; whereas such right must remain fully guaranteed, independently of governmental interests; whereas this principle must be exemplary at the EU level in the handling of petitions within this Parliament and by the Commission;

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital L

L. whereas in addition to petitions received related to the impact of the crisis on European citizens and residents, other key issues of concern to petitioners relate to environmental law - notably issues concerning waste and water management, fundamental rights - notably regarding the rights of the child, the rights of the disabled and health-related issues, right to personal and real property, matters concerning free movement of persons, visas, immigration and employment, and petitions on the application of justice, alleged corruption, delays in legal processes and many other areas of activity;

Amendment 15 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital L

L. whereas in addition to petitions received related to the impact of the crisis on European citizens and residents, other key issues of concern to petitioners relate to environmental law - notably issues concerning waste management, fundamental rights - notably regarding the rights of the child, the rights of the disabled and health- related issues, right to personal and real property, matters concerning free movement of persons, different forms of discrimination and in particular on ethnic, cultural or language grounds, visas, immigration and employment, and petitions on the application of justice, alleged corruption, delays in legal processes and many other areas of activity;

Amendment 16 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital M

M. bearing in mind that because many petitioners, especially among the younger sectors of the population, make great use of the social media as a channel for communication, the Committee on Petitions has developed its own network under the auspices of the European Parliament and is regularly followed by a growing number of persons on ~~Facebook and Twitter~~mainstream social media, which are especially active and found useful around the times of Committee meetings,; and ~~that~~whereas it has also developed a significant number of regular subscribers, currently 1,500, to the Committee's newsletter, the Péti Journal;

Amendment 17 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital N

N. whereas, in this same context, the Committee on Petitions has been working in conjunction with the relevant services of the European Parliament to develop a new multi-lingual web-portal which replaces the former, more limited, electronic facility for petition submission contained on the Europarl web-site; ~~and~~ whereas the new portal is designed to increase administrative efficiency while enhancing the transparency of the petitions process for the benefit of petitioners and members of the European Parliament as well as for the public at large; and whereas upon its launch in this legislative term is certainly a notable contribution to fostering European citizenship, in alignment with the institutional objectives of 2013 as 'the Year of the European Citizen';

Amendment 18 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital N

N. whereas in this same context, the Petitions Committee has been working in conjunction with the relevant services of the European Parliament to develop a new multi-lingual web-portal which replaces the former, more limited, electronic facility for petition submission contained on the Europarl web-site; and whereas the new portal is designed to increase administrative efficiency while enhancing the transparency and interactivity of the petitions process for the benefit of petitioners and members of the European Parliament as well as for the public at large;

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital O

O. recalls, in this context, the position it upheld on the basis of the 2012 Annual Report which resolved to make the petition procedure more efficient, transparent and impartial while preserving the participatory rights of the members of the Committee on Petitions so that the handling of petitions will stand up to judicial review even at the procedural level;deleted

Amendment 2 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. considering that even though such a figure remains modest by comparison with the population of the European Union, it nevertheless denotes a marked increase in the awareness of the right of petition and the usefulness of the petitions process as a means of securing the attention of the European Institutions and the Member States for the concerns of individual citizens, local communities, NGOs and voluntary associations~~, private businesses~~;

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital R

R. bearing in mind the valuable role of fact-finding visits regarding petitions under investigation, ~~which may be organised from time to time~~regularly organised by the Committee on issues to which it has given specific priority, and the need for reports of such visits to be of the highest level of quality, credibility and in faithful cooperation leading to a desirable consensus among participants; recalls the visits undertaken in 2013 to Spain - twice, to Poland, to Denmark, and to Greece; whereas more flexibility in the practical arrangements of these missions, mainly as regards the eligible weeks, would contribute to an even higher success of these visits particularly as regards the availability of members and reducing the risk of cancellation;

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V

V. whereas the Committee on Petitions ~~has become , over the years,~~intends to be a useful and transparent tool at the service of European citizens and residents, which exercises democratic control and scrutiny over many aspects of European Union activity, especially regarding the implementation of EU laws by the national authorities; and whereas it can contribute further, on the basis of petitions received, to the improvement of future EU legislation by drawing attention to the lessons that should be learned from the substance of petitions received;

Amendment 22 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V

V. ~~whereas~~ the Committee on Petitions has become, over the years, a useful and transparent tool at the service of European citizens and residents, which exercises democratic control and scrutiny over many aspects of European Union activity, especially regarding the implementation of EU laws by the national authorities; and whereas it can contribute further, on the basis of petitions received, on one hand to a more coherent and coordinated application of the EU legislation and on the other hand to the improvement of future EU legislation by drawing attention to the lessons that should be learned from the substance of petitions received.

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Acknowledges the substantial and fundamental role of the Petitions Committee in defending and promoting the rights of EU citizens and residents, ensuring that through the petitions process the concerns of petitioners are better recognised and their legitimate grievances resolved wherever possible, in a reasonable time-frame;

Amendment 24 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Deplores the fact that the austerity policies the EU has imposed on Member States are curtailing the exercise of European citizens’ fundamental rights – especially the right to food, healthcare, education and housing – as never before; considers it is urgent to increase citizen participation in the EU decision- making process, with a view to reinforcing its legitimacy and accountability;

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Is determined to make the petition procedure more efficient, transparent, and impartial, while preserving the participatory rights of the Members of the Committee on Petitions,; s~~o that the handling of petitions will stand up to jud~~tresses that in light of the significantly ever-increasing amount of petitions received yearly, more human and technicial re~~view even at a procedural level~~sources in the secretariat are urgently needed in order to ensure a smooth handling of petitions;

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Emphasises that the Committee on Petitions, along with other institutions and bodies, such as the committees of inquiry~~, the European Citizens’ Initiative~~ and the European Ombudsman, play an independent and clearly defined role as points of contact for each individual citizens; highlights that these bodies, together with the European Citizens’ Initiative are fundamental tools for a democratic EU and the creation of a European demos, and as such a proper access and their reliable functioning must be guaranteed;

Amendment 27 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Emphasises that the Committee on Petitions, along with other institutions and bodies, such as the committees of inquiry, the European Citizens’ Initiative and the European Ombudsman, might play an independent and clearly defined role as points of contact for each individual citizens;

Amendment 28 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Recalls the ultimate importance of the action by the European Commission in the effective handling of the relevant cases presented by petitions; is worried by the current trend of inhibition by the Commission in the inquiry of the substance of many petitions, based exclusively on procedural grounds; stresses the importance of transparency in these processes and of a proper public access to relevant documents and case- related information;

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Regrets the absence of a proactive monitoring and timely preventive corrective action by the Commission, even when there are well-founded evidences that certain planned and published projects may breach EU legislation; disagrees with the recurrent suggestions to close many files related to petitions without a proper outcome of the examinations and believes that this is not in line with the spirit of its ultimate role of guardian of the treaties; calls for an even more scrupulous attention and consequent action in those cases presented by the petitioners particularly involving possible breaches of EU legislation by the Commission itself, such as in the field of public access to documents as guaranteed by the Aarhus convention;

Amendment 3 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

B a. whereas European citizens are directly represented by the only EU institution elected by them - the European Parliament; bearing in mind that the right to petition offers them the chance to address, in a direct manner, their representatives.

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Observes the variety of thematic key areas concerned in the citizens’ petitions, such as fundamental rights, internal market, environmental law, public health issues, child welfare, transport and constructions, Spanish Coastal Law, new Regulation on good administration, persons with disabilities, public access to documents, European Schools, Fiscal Union, and the Steel Industry, animal rights and many more;

Amendment 31 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Observes the variety of thematic key areas concerned in the citizens’ petitions, such as fundamental rights, internal market, environmental law, public health issues, child welfare, transport and constructions, Spanish Coastal Law, new Regulation on good administration, persons with disabilities, age discrimination, public access to documents, European Schools, Fiscal Union, and the Steel Industry and many more;

Amendment 32 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Considers that petitions which fall under said thematic areas lends proof to the issue that the frequencies of widespread situations of ~~transposi~~unsatisfactory transposition of EU legislation or misapplication of the law are still occurring;

Amendment 33 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Considers it important to enhance cooperation with Member States' parliaments and governments, based on reciprocity, and, where necessary, to encourage Member States' authorities to transpose and apply EU legislation with full transparency; stresses the importance of the Commission's cooperation with the Member States and deplores the negligence of some Member States with regard to fully transposing and enforcing European environmental legislation;

Amendment 34 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Recalls that the Petitions Committee considers admissible petitions, related to the principles and the contents of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, its inherent part, and it pursues its investigations on the merits of each case, reminds that, the European Commission has frequently felt itself unable to act when requested by the Committee because of the existence of Article 51 of the Charter; stresses the fact that the expectations of citizens are much greater than the Charter’s strictly legal provisions allow for;

Amendment 35 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Notes the amount of attention which was given to some major petitions received regarding the proposed development of a new airport at Notre Dame-des-Landes, near Nantes; acknowledges that significant contributions were received from petitioners which opposed the scheme on environmental grounds and that a substantial petition was also received from those who favoured the project which gave rise to an intensive debate in Committee at which the French authorities and the Director General for Environment at the Commission participated alongside the main petitioners; considers that such serious discussions not only improve public awareness and allow citizens to become actively and legitimately involved, but they also permit several controversial features associated with the project presumably conflicting with the EU law to be clarified and remedies identified which allow for the proper respect of European legislation as it should apply in such circumstances;

Amendment 36 #

Angelika WERTHMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Acknowledges that in 2013, many petitioners voiced their alarm at the apparent injustices which occur in ~~certain European Member States~~Denmark regarding the administrative and judicial procedures related to parental separation and divorce and the subsequent custody of young children; noted in this context ~~a tendency~~that in the case of bi-national couples for there to be clear examples of discrimination on grounds of nationality in favour of the spouse from the member state concerned with the proceedings and against the non- national of that state, with severe and often very negative and dramatic repercussions on the rights of the child; noted in this context severe violations of Fundamental Rights of both the petitioner and the child; notes that the Petitions Committee undertook a fact- finding visit to Denmark to investigate such claims directly where the situation appears to be particularly acute~~, but that~~; notes that some cases were also recorded from other countries, notably Germany, France and the UK;

Amendment 37 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Acknowledges that in 2013, many petitioners voiced their alarm at the apparent injustices which occur in certain European Member States regarding the administrative and judicial procedures related to parental separation and divorce and the subsequent custody of young children; noted in this context a tendency in the case of bi-national couples for there to be clear examples of discrimination on grounds of nationality in favour of the spouse from the member state concerned with the proceedings and against the non- national of that state, with severe and often very negative and dramatic repercussions on the rights of the child; notes that the Petitions Committee undertook a fact- finding visit to Denmark to investigate such claims directly where the situation appears to be particularly acute, but that cases were also recorded from other countries, notably Germany (especially cases concerning activities of Jugendamt), France and the UK.;

Amendment 38 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Recalls the investigations conducted on the basis of petitions received concerning the consequences resulting from the lack of implementation of the Waste Framework Directive throughout the whole legislative period, and the report adopted on this subject; notes the conclusions and the recommendations adopted in 2013 resulting from visits to Italy - to Campania and Lazio where a number of proposals were made concerning the lack of proper decision-making as regards landfills and the effect of this on local populations,; stresses that the situation is far from being resolved in both regions, as petitions have been debated later notably concerning the persistence of toxic fires caused by heavily pollutant industrial waste in some areas of Campania, and in Lazio due to the lack of transparency on the plans and institutional management of the last months after the scheduled closure of Malagrotta landfill, which is nowadays subject to high-level judiciary inquiries; and also notes the intensive fact- finding visit to Greece conducted in the autumn of 2013 on this subject which has drawn attention to the shortcomings in the application of th~~is important Directive~~e relevant waste-related directives, the lack of progress in the waste management in what regards plans and systems lying upper in the waste hierarchy, as well as to the impact on the health of populations in certain areas of Greece;

Amendment 39 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

Amendment 4 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. bearing in mind that the right of petition enhances the responsiveness of the European Parliament towards the citizens and residents of the union, while at the same time might provides people with an open, democratic and transparent mechanism for obtaining, where legitimate and justified, a non-judicial remedy for their complaints, notably when this relates to problems with the implementation of European legislation;

Amendment 40 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Acknowledges the report of the fact- finding visit to Poland which investigated a proposed open-cast mine site in Lower Silesia following a refusal of polish authorities to accept a result of a legally binding referendum held in September 2009 opposing the project; related petitions raised concerns that the proposed way of exploration is contrary to EU principles on reducing CO2 emissions and preserving the natural environment; welcomed also the intensive discussions held ~~on this occasion~~, that took place for the very first time, with petitioners and national authorities regarding the possible exploration and exploitation of shale-gas reserves about which the Committee had already conducted a workshop in 2012;

Amendment 41 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Highlights the ~~very~~ constructive work undertaken by the entire Committee as regards the petitions received which concern the Spanish law on coastal management (Ley de Costas) both as regards the results and conclusions of the fact-finding visit and as regards the cooperation with both petitioners and the responsible national authorities; recalls that a special ad hoc working group was established by the Committee to look at this complex issue in more detail and to ensure liaison with the very large number petitioners concerned; ~~recognises that although some advances were obtained for petitioners~~ stresses the need to regulate coastal protection effectively, but notes that the Costal Law is not consistent with the objectives sought, since it is affecting historic heritage and traditional communities, punishing the ~~new legislation adopted by the Spanish Parliamen~~inhabitants of coastal villages who have always coexisted sustainably with the sea and its ecosystems; recalls that there are some unresolved concerns, both in the field of property rights and environmental protection some of which have now been addressed to the Spanish Constitutional Court; requests the Commission to continue to actively monitor the issue;

Amendment 42 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Welcomes the fact that the fact- finding visit to Galicia, which took place in February 2013, was able to hold extensive discussions with petitioners and the regional authorities on issues related to the lack of proper waste-water treatment facilities in the region which has had an impact on the health of local people and on economic activity in certain areas which are contaminated by sludge and residues which contain substances which endanger the public health, the environment and potentially the on- going production of sea- food in certain areas; ~~recognise~~expects that the authorities ~~have~~definitely commit~~ted~~ themselves to act more diligently to resolve these issues and that a ~~new~~n integrated plan for waste water treatment ~~facility is being constructed in Vigo~~and the necessary facilities for that purposeare effectively set into function all the concerned rías; regrets the lengthy and abnormal procedure in drafting the conclusions of the visit;

Amendment 43 #

Angelika WERTHMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Welcomes the fact that the fact-finding visit to Galicia, which took place in February 2013, was able to hold extensive discussions with petitioners and the regional authorities on issues related to the lack of proper waste-water treatment facilities in the region which has had an impact on the health of local people and on economic activity in certain areas which are contaminated by sludge and residues which contain substances which endanger the environment and potentially the on- going production of sea-food in certain areas; recognises that the authorities have committed themselves to act more diligently to resolve these issues and that a new waste water treatment facility is being constructed in Vigo; deplores the fact that the minority report of the two delegation members has not been annexed to the report itself;

Amendment 44 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Welcomes the fact that the fact-finding visit to Galicia, which took place in February 2013, was able to hold extensive discussions with petitioners and the regional authorities on issues related to the lack of proper waste-water treatment facilities in the region which has had an impact on the health of local people and on economic activity in certain areas which are contaminated by sludge and residues which contain substances which endanger the environment and potentially the on- going production of sea-food in certain areas; ~~recognises that the authorities have committed themselves to act more diligently to resolve these issues and that a new waste water treatment facility is being constructed in Vigo;~~

Amendment 45 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Reminds the faculty of the Petitions committee, under article 202(2), not only to submit non-legislative own-initiative reports to plenary on matters subject to several petitions, but also to submit short resolutions to be voted on plenary for urgent matters, as it has been recently the case with the ILVA steel plant in Taranto; alerts in the follow-up of this particular case on the severe deterioration of the situation in what regards environmental conditions and human health for the local population, and urges the Commission to use its available mechanisms to the last extent in order to ensure an immediate compliance with the EU environmental legislation by the Italian authorities;

Amendment 46 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Considers it essential to its work on particular subjects to use other forms of activity such as parliamentary questions for oral answer dealt with during plenary sittings; recalls they are a direct form of parliamentary scrutiny of other EU institutions and bodies; points out that it has used its right 9 times in 2013 tabling questions concerning, for instance, disabilities, animal welfare, waste management and European citizens' initiative; regrets deeply that some of the proposed initiatives from the committee, are kept in the pipeline for plenary debate after several months, therefore preventing giving voice and a direct answer from the Commission to recurrent concerns of EU citizens;

Amendment 47 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Acknowledges that environmental issues remain a priority for petitioners, thus highlighting the fact that Member States continue to fall short in this area; observes that many of the petitions focus on public health e.g. waste management, water safety, nuclear energy, and protected animals; points out that many petitions are concerned with new and upcoming projects which increase the dangers of effecting the aforementioned areas; ~~recalls that as~~stresses the importance of Member States implementing the Environmental Impact Assessment properly in all its provisions, both in letter and spirit and recalls that when Member States strive to address these situations it is clear that finding a the most sustainable solution is ~~still a hindranc~~imperative;

Amendment 48 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19 a. Calls on the Committee on Petitions to continue examining the effects of the ERT case law on the interpretation of Article 51 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and its consequences concerning petitions and to investigate the question of what actual obstacles lie in the way of EU citizens applying for a preliminary ruling from the European Court of Justice in order to obtain reliable interpretations of central issues under European legislation in cases before the national courts;

Amendment 49 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

Amendment 5 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. bearing in mind that the right of petition enhances the responsiveness of the European Parliament towards the citizens and residents of the union, while at the same time provides people with an open, democratic and transparent mechanism for obtaining, where legitimate and justified, a non-judicial remedy for their complaints, notably when this relates to problems with the implementation of European legislation; whereas the petitions do provide valuable feedback to the legislators and executive bodies both at EU and national level;

Amendment 50 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Welcomes the implementation of the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) on 1 April 2012, as well as the registration of the first ECI, dedicated to policies for Europe’s Youth - Fraternity 2020, and the recently successful ECI dedicated to the Right to Water; believes that the ECI constitutes the first instrument of transnational participatory democracy and will enable citizens to become actively involved in the framing of European policies and legislation; reconfirms its commitment to participate in the organisation of public hearings for successful European Citizens’ Initiatives with the active involvements of all concerned parliamentary committees; underlines the need for regular review of the state of play with the European Citizens’ Initiatives, with the aim of improving the procedure while limiting the red tape and other obstacles; is aware that the outcome of the first parliamentary hearings of the first successful ECIs taking place in 2014 are crucial in setting high procedural standards and the citizens' expectations on the exercise of this right in the future, and commits to give institutional priority to ensuring effectiveness in the participatory process.

Amendment 51 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Appreciates the Commission’s decision to declare 2013 the ‘European Year of Citizenship’ providing valuable information and insight for EU citizens regarding their rights and of the democratic instruments available to them to assert those rights; considers that the ‘European Year of Citizenship’ should be used for the broad dissemination of information on the new ‘European Citizens’ Initiative’, therefore providing clear and understandable guidelines in order to curtail the high rate of inadmissibility comparable to the rate that is still to be found in the ‘petitions’ field; is convinced that the Petitions webportal is concrete valuable contribution of the European Parliament to the European citizenship;

Amendment 52 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22 a. Calls on the Commission as a guardian of the Treaty to ensure that the current lack of sufficient implementation of EU law as shown by the number of submitted petitions to the EP will be resolved, allowing EU citizens to take full advantage of their rights;

Amendment 53 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Deplores that European citizens continue to experience frequent problems caused by the misapplication ~~of Internal Market~~EU law by public authorities while exercising their freedom of movement; deplores the fact that nationals from some EU Member States do not enjoy of full rights in terms of freedom of movements; draws the attention to the fact that hundreds of Spanish, Romanian and Bulgarian citizens have been deported from Belgium as this Member State has decided to revoke their status as legal residents;

Amendment 54 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23a. Deplores that in the recent time the reports on fact-finding missions and other documents were not translated to the EU official languages, especially the national languages of petitioners;

Amendment 55 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)

24a. Is of the opinion that the Ombudsman should have de facto independence, namely to be assimilated as a judge; considers that such independent role is more properly portrayed before the public opinion when the Ombudsman does not have obvious partisan affiliations; underlines the importance to keep for the future objective and non- political profiles as Ombudsmen in order to ensure the rights of the citizens are properly defended.

Amendment 56 #

Motion for a resolution
Subheading before paragraph 25

~~New horizons and relations with other institutions~~deleted

Amendment 57 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Points out th~~at this final non- legislative resolution could bring forward new suggestions to~~e importance of makeing theis Committee work more substantial inside the House by raising its profile as a scrutiny Committee; invites the newly elected Petitions Committee to nominate internal Annual Rapporteurs on the major policies, which are of concern of European petitioners; invites the other parliamentary committees to involve the Petitions Committee more as an opinion giving committee on implementation reports and other instruments to monitor the correct transposition and implementation of the European legislation in the Member States, as well as to take into account the input of this committee, given the practical expertise gained over years of handling concrete cases in many fields of the EU law, when undertaking a revision of the existing acquis; stresses the importance, also in view of the ever-increasing amount of petitions received and their related undertakings, of enjoying a de-neutralised status in the Parliament's committee portfolio; invites the Plenary Session of the European Parliament to dedicate more time to debates on the petitions of the European citizens and the work of the Petitions Committees;

Amendment 58 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Points out that this final non-legislative resolution could bring forward new suggestions to make the Committee work more substantial inside the House by raising its profile as a scrutiny Committee; invites the newly elected Petitions Committee to nominate internal Annual Rapporteurs on the major policies, which are of concern of European petitioners, and to enhance cooperation with other parliamentary committees by systematically inviting their members (e.g. via e-mail) to those debates in PETI which concern their respective field of legislative competence; invites the other parliamentary committees to involve the Petitions Committee more as an opinion giving committee on implementation reports and other instruments to monitor the correct transposition and implementation of the European legislation in the Member States; stresses the importance, also in view of the ever- increasing amount of petitions received and their related undertakings, of enjoying a de-neutralised status in the Parliament's committee portfolio; invites the Plenary Session of the European Parliament to dedicate more time to debates on the petitions of the European citizens and the work of the Petitions Committees;

Amendment 59 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Highlights the need to reinforce the Petitions Committee collaboration with the other EU Institutions and bodies, and the national authorities in the Member States; considers its importance to enhance structured dialogue and systematic cooperation with Member States especially with the National Parliaments' Petitions Committees~~; creating such a partnership will allow best exchange of experience and practices~~, e.g. by holding regular meetings with the chairs of all national Petitions Committees; creating such a partnership will allow best exchange of experience and practices, a more systemic and efficient practice of petitions’ referral to the competent level and body and ultimately will bring the European Parliament closer to the European citizens' concerns; welcomes the establishment in Ireland of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Investigation, Oversight and Petitions, and the useful links it has established with the European Parliament in the course of this year in order to bring about an even better service to citizens; notes that parliaments in other member states are currently considering creating petitions committees or similar bodies, or that some have other processes for dealing with petitions;

Amendment 6 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

C. a whereas further irreparable losses in biodiversity must be averted, especially inside Natura 2000 designated sites; whereas Member States have undertaken to ensure the protection of special conservation areas under the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) and the Birds Directive (79/409 EEC); whereas, although the Commission can fully check compliance with EU law only when a final decision has been taken by national authorities, it is important – particularly in relation to environmental matters – to verify at an early stage that local, regional and national authorities correctly apply all relevant procedural requirements under EU law, including implementation of the principle of precaution;

Amendment 60 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Calls on the Commission to duly recognise the role of petitions in monitoring the effective implementation of EU law, since petitions are usually the earliest indications that Member States are lagging behind in implementing legal measures; invites the European Parliament to recommend in its Interinstitutional Agreement with the Commission to reduce the time it takes to respond to the Committee’s requests and to also keep the Petitions Committee informed of developments in infringement proceedings directly linked to petitions; whereas in general terms the European institutions ought to supply more information and be more transparent with regard to EU citizens, in order to combat the increasing perception of democratic deficits;

Amendment 61 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. EStresses that a close cooperation with the Member States is essential for the work of the Petitions Committee; encourages Member States to play a proactive role in responding to petitions related to the implementation and enforcement of European law, and considers the presence and the active cooperation of Member State representatives at Petitions Committee meetings to be of the utmost importance; is determined to maintain close cooperation and communication between EU Institutions and the citizens;

Amendment 62 #

Angelika WERTHMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Calls upon MEPs in the Petitions Committee to adopt final internal rules to ensure maximum efficiency and openness in the work of the Committee and to make proposals to revise accordingly the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament in order to consolidate their continuous attempts during the whole seventh legislature to improve working methods; calls on the Petitions Committee to adopt clear deadlines in the process of petitions in order to speed up the petitions life-cycle in the European Parliament and make the whole process even more transparent and democratic; underlines that this could put in place a defined lifecycle of the petition from registration until their final closure in the European Parliament, similarly to the existing deadlines for the work in process on legislative and non-legislative files; recalls that fact-finding visits are one of the key investigative instruments of the Petitions Committee, therefore an urgent revision of the relevant rules is needed, in order to enable the newly elected Members to carry out efficient visits and report swiftly back to the petitioners and the Committee on their findings and recommendations.deleted

Amendment 63 #

Motion for a resolution
Subheading before paragraph 30

~~Working methods~~deleted

Amendment 64 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

Amendment 65 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Calls upon MEPs in the Petitions Committee to adopt final internal rules to ensure maximum efficiency and openness in the work of the Committee and to make proposals to revise accordingly the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament in order to consolidate their continuous attempts during the whole seventh legislature to improve working methods; calls on the Petitions Committee to adopt clear deadlines in the process of petitions in order to speed up the petitions life-cycle in the European Parliament and make the whole process even more transparent and democratic; underlines that this could put in place a defined lifecycle of the petition from registration until their final closure in the European Parliament, similarly to the existing deadlines for the work in process on legislative and non-legislative files; considers that these deadlines should establish an alert mechanism which automatically draws members’ attention on petitions where there has not been any action nor correspondence for a considerable amount of time, in order to avoid old petitions staying open over years without substantial reason; recalls that fact-finding visits are one of the key investigative instruments of the Petitions Committee, therefore an urgent revision of the relevant rules is needed, in order to enable the newly elected Members to carry out efficient visits and report swiftly back to the petitioners and the Committee on their findings and recommendations.

Amendment 66 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Welcomes the presence of public authorities of the Member State concerned at meetings of the Petitions Committee, as well as of other interested parties; highlights the fact that the Petitions Committee is the only Committee which systematically provides a platform for citizens to voice their concerns directly to Members of the European Parliament and which enables a multiparty dialogue between the EU institutions, the national authorities and petitioners; suggests that in order to facilitate organisation of the meetings as well as to reduce the travel costs in the future, that the Petitions Committee and Parliament's administration explore the possibility for participation of the petitioners or the public authorities by means of video conference or similar facility;

Amendment 67 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Notes the growing number of petitions in the course of the legislative period and remains highly concerned that delays and response times are still too long throughout the registration phase and the admissibility phase in the process; calls for providing the Petitions Committee Secretariat with additional juridical experts and administrative support, to issue recommendations related to whether the petition lies within the competence of European law; considers that these recommendations along with petitions summaries need to be provided to members only in English first and then be translated in all official languages only when being published, in order to further speed up the first decisions on admissibility; expects that the launch of the new petitions web-portal will diminish the number of questionable submissions which are occasionally registered as petitions;

Amendment 7 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas it is necessary to increase citizen participation in the EU decision- making process, with a view to reinforcing its legitimacy and accountability; whereas the petitions process also constitutes a means to establish a reality check regarding the tensions which exist within European societies, particularly during times of economic crisis and social unrest, such as have resulted from the impact of the collapse of the world financial markets and banking systems on the people of Europe; recalling that the Committee on Petitions organised a public hearing involving petitioners on this subject in September 2013;

Amendment 8 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas the petitions process also constitutes a means to establish a reality check regarding the tensions which exist within European societies, particularly during times of economic crisis and social unrest, such as have resulted from the impact of the collapse of the world financial markets and banking systems on the people of Europe; recalling that the Committee on Petitions organised a public hearing involving petitioners on this subject in September 2013; whereas many petitions on financial malpractices and abuses towards consumers' rights in the banking sector have drawn the attention of the committee, and particularly the dramatic consequences of household evictions for entire families as a result of abusive mortgage clauses;

Amendment 9 #