2015/2326(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

Amendment 10 #

Jérôme LAVRILLEUX

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that timely and correct transposition of EU law into national legislation and a clear domestic legislative framework should be a priority for the Member States, taking into account the numerous delays in a number of Member States in this regard, in order to reduce breaches of EU law and therefore deliver the benefits to people and business which the efficient and effective application of Community law makes possible;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Notes that since national parliaments are directly elected by the voters the power over all legislation which affects EU citizens should rest ultimately with the national parliaments and not the European Commission;

Amendment 12 #

Ádám KÓSA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Calls on the Commission to make further efforts and to draw up a legislative proposal – possibly including a proposed amendment to the Treaty – with a view to the establishment of greater, more transparent and clearer regulation of the adoption and application of delegated and implementing acts in accordance with the principles and objectives of the Lisbon Treaty, with due regard for the role of the European Parliament as a co-legislator and without opting for any further administrative and commitology solutions;

Amendment 13 #

Siôn SIMON, Elena GENTILE, Jutta STEINRUCK, Richard HOWITT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Highlights the fact that in 2014 the Commission received its highest number of new complaints in the areas of employment, social affairs and inclusion since 2011; notes that it has taken the Commission longer than normal to respond to certain complaints in the areas of employment, social affairs and inclusion;

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Highlights the fact that in 2014 there were 3715 new complaints registered and the Commission received its highest number of new complaints (666) in the area of employment, social affairs and inclusion since 2011;1 b ; ___________ 1b Monitoring the application of Union law, 2014 Annual Report, p. 8

Amendment 15 #

Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO, Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS, Tania GONZÁLEZ PEÑAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Highlights the fact that in 2014 the Commission received its highest number of new complaints in the area of employment, social affairs and inclusion since 2011; regrets that as regards employment and social policies there are tendencies in the Commission to use the power to launch infringement in a selective way; recalls that lack of implementation as well as the incorrect or non-application of EU legislation by Member States renders legislation ineffective, significantly reduces social and employment rights and therefore needs to be followed up by action at EU level;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Highlights the fact that in 2014 the Commission received its highest number of new complaints in the area of employment, social affairs and inclusion since 2011; stresses the fundamental role of trade unions and civil society organisations in monitoring shortcomings in the transposition and application of EU law by Member State authorities;

Amendment 17 #

Siôn SIMON, Elena GENTILE, Brando BENIFEI, Richard HOWITT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Highlights the fact that in 2014 there we no significant European court of Justice rulings in the field of employment, social affairs and inclusion;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Points out that of the 2341 complaints dealt with by the European SOLVIT network in 2014, 1458 concerned the access to and use of social security rights under Regulation 883/2004/EC, with the highest numbers registered for cases regarding child benefits, pensions and unemployment benefits;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Calls on the Commission to present the long overdue revision of 883/2004/EC as well as its implementation regulation as soon as possible to ensure everyone fully enjoys their social security rights; reminds Member States of their obligation to cooperate closely on this so as to avoid that mobile EU citizens are deprived of their rights; calls on the Administrative Commission for the coordination of social security systems to evaluate on an annual basis which problems are most recurrent, put forward concrete suggestions on how to improve the situation and publish this evaluation and suggestions;

Amendment 2 #

Claude ROLIN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Underlines the fact that the Commission has the power and duty to oversee the application of EU law and to launch infringement proceedings against those Member States that have failed to fulfil an obligation under the Treaties; calls, nevertheless, on the Commission, before launching formal infringement proceedings, to give priority to the EU Pilot initiative and embark on a process of dialogue with the Member States; reminds Member States that EU law is an integral part of their national law and that they have a responsibility to apply it correctly;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Points out that the number of new late transposition ~~cases~~ infringement cases in the area of employment (17)increased slightly in 2014 compared to the previous year (13) and all of these were related to labour law;1 a; ___________ 1a Commission Staff Working Document, 2014 Annual Report, Part I: Policy areas, p. 40

Amendment 21 #

Jérôme LAVRILLEUX

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Points out that the number of new late transposition cases increased slightly in 2014 compared to the previous year and that all of these were related to labour law, and calls on the Member States to take action, including legislative action, to ensure the practical and beneficial transposition of EU directives into all national legal systems;

Amendment 22 #

Siôn SIMON, Jutta STEINRUCK, Richard HOWITT, Elena GENTILE

4. Points out that the number of new late transposition cases increased slightly in 2014 compared to the previous year and all of these were related to labour law; points out that late transposition is a persistent problem which averts people and stakeholders from receiving the benefit of Union law; stresses that late transposition has a negative effect on the overall legal certainty and the level playing field of Single Market;

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Points out that the number of new late transposition cases increased slightly in 2014 compared to the previous year and all of these were related to labour law; recalls that late transposition of labour law often means delayed or non-use of rights for individuals;

Amendment 24 #

Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Stresses that transposition delays are an obstacle to the proper functioning of the internal market and go against the interests of citizens and businesses, depriving them of some of their rights; calls, in this regard, on the Member States to transpose as quickly as possible Directive 2011/24/EU on the application of patients’ rights in cross-border healthcare in order to ensure that all Europeans have access to quality healthcare in another Member State;

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Stresses that at the end of 2014, there were 1347 infringement cases opened including 72 which were related to employment4 a ; ___________ 4a Monitoring the application of Union law, 2014 Annual report, p. 15

Amendment 26 #

Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Welcomes the fact that the Commission, as part of its Regulatory Fitness and Performance Programme (REFIT), is paying close attention to the issue of implementation and enforcement of EU legislation to prevent and limit the number of cases of late transposition by Member States;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Takes note of the fact that reasons for late transposition of directives varies from country to country, urges the Commission to conduct an in-depth analyses in Members States in order to gain comprehensive knowledge in this area and to combat future late transposition by providing solutions which are compatible with legal contingencies of particular Member States;

Amendment 28 #

Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO, Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS, Tania GONZÁLEZ PEÑAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)

4c. Welcomes the fact that the Commission has made the effort to decrease the number of formal infringement procedures in the last five years through effective structured dialogue with Member States via EU Pilot initiated before a formal infringement procedure was launched;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Urges the Commission, when drafting and assessing legislation, to ~~take greater ac~~ensure adequate parliamentary participation, count ~~of the burden it may impose on SMEs, which create 85% of new job~~rol and supervision, as well as the involvement of social partners;

Amendment 3 #

Amjad BASHIR, Anthea McINTYRE, Ulrike TREBESIUS, Zdzisław KRASNODĘBSKI, Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Underlines the fact that the Commission has the power and duty to oversee the application of EU law and to launch infringement proceedings against those Member States that have failed to fulfil an obligation under the Treaties; underlines that it would strengthen the democratic legitimacy of the Union if the European Parliament, in line with its right to call for legislative initiative, also receives the right to call on the Commission to launch infringement;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Urges the Commission~~, when drafting and assessing legislation,~~ to take greater account of the burden ithat legislation may impose on SMEs, which create 85% of new jobs; calls therefore upon the Council, the Commission and the Parliament to ensure the 'think-small- first' principle is applied when drafting and amending legislation;

Amendment 31 #

Siôn SIMON, Richard HOWITT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Urges the Commission, when drafting and assessing legislation, to take ~~greater~~full account of the burden ~~it may impose on~~and benefits it may create for people and others affected by this legislation, including SMEs, which created 85% of new jobs between 2002 and 2010;

Amendment 32 #

Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Urges the Commission, when drafting and assessing legislation, to take greater account of the burden it may impose on SMEs, which ~~create 85% of new jobs~~account for 99% of European businesses and create 85% of new jobs; stresses, in this connection, the need to apply the ‘Think Small First’ principle, which must underpin all regulation, so that it no longer places an additional regulatory and administrative burden on SMEs but instead guarantees a stable regulatory environment conducive to their development;

Amendment 33 #

Claude ROLIN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Urges the Commission, when drafting and assessing legislation, to take greater account of the burden it may impose on SMEs, which create 85% of new jobs; stresses, however, that all employees have the right to enjoy the highest possible level of protection as regards health and safety at work, regardless of the size of the company which employs them;

Amendment 34 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Urges the Commission, when drafting and assessing legislation, to take greater account of the burden it may impose on SMEs, which create 85% of new jobs; underlines the need to not only assess financial factors and short-term effects but also the long-term value of legislation including societal benefits which are often difficult to quantify in economic terms;

Amendment 35 #

Mara BIZZOTTO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 (new)

Deplores the fact that, although the Directive (2011/7/EU) on combating late payment in commercial transactions requires public authorities to pay invoices within 30-60 days, data from the CGIA association of SMEs and craft undertakings in Mestre indicate that in Italy the public authorities still take 144 days to pay their bills, which is reduced to 106 days where electronic invoicing has been introduced, as against the European average of 38 days;

Amendment 36 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Notes that since the driving force behind growth and jobs in all EU member states is private sector employment there should be a reduction in EU laws governing employment led by national parliaments to encourage business start- ups and expansion;

Amendment 37 #

Arne GERICKE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls on the Commission to expand the remits of the Special Adviser for Better Regulation and the Impact Assessment Board in such a way that in future not only bureaucratic consequences for SMEs and industry but also the direct increase in the burden on individual citizens and families is examined and consistently reduced;

Amendment 38 #

Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO, Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS, Tania GONZÁLEZ PEÑAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Underlines the important role of social partners and other stakeholders in the creation of legislation by monitoring through reporting shortcomings in transposition and application of EU law by Member States; takes note of the Commissions acknowledgment of stakeholders' role by launching, in 2014, new tools which facilitate this process;

Amendment 39 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Expresses its concern at the Commission's initiatives under the "Better Regulation" agenda, which is being used to lower the rights and protection afforded to workers under existing regulation;

Amendment 4 #

Amjad BASHIR, Anthea McINTYRE, Ulrike TREBESIUS, Zdzisław KRASNODĘBSKI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Believes that EU law should not supersede national law and that national parliaments be allowed to ignore implementing Union legislation for any reason; Believes that as the Commission is not directly elected it should not have the power to initiate or enforce EU laws;

Amendment 40 #

Siôn SIMON, Jutta STEINRUCK, Richard HOWITT, Brando BENIFEI, Elena GENTILE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls on further measures to ensure effective monitoring and enforcement of legislation, including timely transposition and compliance with the objectives of the legislation, and to deal with damaging loopholes where they arise; stresses the need for clearly-worded legislation in order to facilitate compliance in this context;

Amendment 41 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Believes that an Annual Burden Survey would allow legislators to more easily identify where the administrative burden of EU legislation could be reduced with a view to increasing compliance, aiding swift implementation and cutting red-tape; calls on the Commission to introduce Burden Reduction Targets;

Amendment 42 #

Amjad BASHIR, Anthea McINTYRE, Ulrike TREBESIUS, Zdzisław KRASNODĘBSKI, Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Believes that impact assessments should include SME and competitiveness tests in order to ensure that companies and SMEs in particular, are not overburdened by new legislation;

Amendment 43 #

Siôn SIMON, Richard HOWITT, Brando BENIFEI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Stresses, however, that EU legislation sets only minimum standards which can be improved by member States by national legislation; emphasises that the Commission´s focus on gold-plating as a negative practice for employment legislation runs contrary the principle of the EU Treaty including art 151 TFEU for the protection and improvement of living and working conditions;

Amendment 44 #

Amjad BASHIR, Anthea McINTYRE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5c. Believes that an external, independent regulatory scrutiny board involving independent experts for the whole policy cycle and common to the three Institutions should be established to supervise their respective impact assessments;

Amendment 45 #

Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO, Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS, Tania GONZÁLEZ PEÑAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

Amendment 46 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Welcom~~Notes the efforts made by the Commission during the past years and acknowledges the range of measures that have been put in place to assist the Member States with implementation such as correlation tables, an annual scoreboard and guidelines; is concerned by the discretion of the Commission in setting up these instruments;

Amendment 47 #

Siôn SIMON, Brando BENIFEI, Richard HOWITT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Welcomes the efforts made by the Commission during the past years and acknowledges the range of measures that have been put in place to assist the Member States with implementation such as correlation tables, an annual scoreboard and guidelines; welcomes the fact that the Commission provides implementation plans to make it easier to apply the Union law without delay and effectively; points out the importance of the Commission monitoring the use of implementation plans by Member States;

Amendment 48 #

Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO, Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS, Tania GONZÁLEZ PEÑAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

Amendment 49 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

Amendment 5 #

Amendment 50 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to coordinate their efforts ~~at an earlier stage of the legislative process~~regarding implementation at an earlier stage in the legislative process and to fully respect the ordinary legislative procedure, and reminds the Commission to involve both Parliament and Member States at an early stage with a view to ensuring that future EU law can be implemented more effectively;

Amendment 51 #

Amjad BASHIR, Anthea McINTYRE, Ulrike TREBESIUS, Zdzisław KRASNODĘBSKI, Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. CWelcomes the European Commission's ongoing revision of the existing legislation under Better Regulation Agenda which aims at ensuring the high quality of EU legislation in terms of transparency, public consultation, implementation and compliance with the principle of subsidiarity, therefore calls on the Commission and the Member States to coordinate their efforts at an earlier stage of the legislative process with a view to ensuring that future EU law can be implemented more effectively, since overregulation might cause more harm to business and employment;

Amendment 52 #

Siôn SIMON

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to coordinate their efforts at an earlier stage of the legislative process with a view to ensuring that future EU law can be implemented more effectively; points out, however, that such a coordination must be without prejudice to the prerogative of the legislator;

Amendment 53 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to coordinate their efforts at an earlier stage of the legislative process with a view to ensuring that future EU law can be implemented more effectively; underlines the important role and democratic legitimacy of the Member States in this respect;

Amendment 54 #

Amjad BASHIR, Anthea McINTYRE, Ulrike TREBESIUS, Zdzisław KRASNODĘBSKI, Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Stresses that the principle of equal treatment and non-discrimination is well established in the Community law, therefore it should be taken into consideration and respected while drafting EU legislation;

Amendment 55 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Recalls Article 155 TFEU; Calls on the social partners to embrace better regulation tools, to increase the use of impact assessments in their negotiations and to refer agreements proposing legislative action to the Commission's Impact Assessment Board;

Amendment 56 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

~~8. Calls on the Commission to strengthen cooperation with the Member States in order to speed up the correction of breaches of EU law where necessary;~~deleted

Amendment 57 #

Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO, Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS, Tania GONZÁLEZ PEÑAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Commission to strengthen cooperation with the Member States in order to speed up the correction of breaches of EU law ~~where necessary~~;

Amendment 58 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Commission to strengthen cooperation with the Member States in order to speed up the correction of breaches of EU law where necessary; highlights that this cooperation must be transparent and open to parliamentary scrutiny;

Amendment 59 #

Siôn SIMON, Richard HOWITT, Brando BENIFEI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Calls on the Commission to review the framework under which Member States provide supporting information about how they transposed directives into national law;

Amendment 6 #

Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO, Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS, Tania GONZÁLEZ PEÑAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that timely and correct transposition of EU law into national legislation and a clear domestic legislative framework should be a priority for the Member States in order to reduce breaches of EU law ~~and therefore deliver benefits to people and business;~~; expresses its concern at the high number of cases of late or incorrect transposition of EU Directives which result in restrictions to workers' freedom of movement, the non-application of the non-discrimination principle or the circumvention of maximum working time requirements in several Member States1 a; ___________ 1a http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/applying-eu- law/docs/annual_report_32/20140701_an nual_report_2014_member_states_en.pdf

Amendment 60 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

~~9. Calls on the Commission to give greater support to the Member States with regard to implementing EU law by providing tailor-made tools, such as detailed implementation plans and guidance documents.~~deleted

Amendment 61 #

Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO, Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS, Tania GONZÁLEZ PEÑAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Calls on the Commission to give greater support to the Member States with regard to implementing EU law by providing tailor-made tools, such as detailed implementation plans and guidance documents which are a result of enhanced and mutual cooperation between the Commission and Member States starting at an early stage of legislation creation.

Amendment 62 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Calls on the Commission to give greater support to the Member States with regard to implementing EU law by providing tailor-made tools, such as detailed implementation plans and guidance documents; stresses that an increase in the staffing of Member States' labour inspectorates, in line with ILO recommendations, and the establishment of a regular dialogue with social partners are essential to ensure effective implementation of EU labour law in Member States.

Amendment 63 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

Amendment 64 #

Deirdre CLUNE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 – subparagraph 1 (new)

Calls on the Commission to work with member states to further implement and make use of the Blue Card Directive (Directive 2009/50/EC) which allows skilled migrant workers access to employment in member states, whereas the take up until now has been poor.

Amendment 65 #

Siôn SIMON, Jutta STEINRUCK, Richard HOWITT, Brando BENIFEI, Elena GENTILE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Welcomes the tools developed by the Commission, such as Your European Portal, Solvit and Chap, which provide support to stakeholders, but deplores the fact that these tools are still only little known and little used.

Amendment 66 #

Siôn SIMON

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9b. Calls on member states to provide more precise and clear information regarding the transposition of directives to the Commission in order to allow for a better review.

Amendment 7 #

Siôn SIMON, Jutta STEINRUCK, Richard HOWITT, Brando BENIFEI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

Amendment 8 #

Claude ROLIN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

Amendment 9 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that timely and correct transposition of EU law into national legislation and a clear domestic legislative framework should be a priority for the Member States in order to ~~reduce~~avoid breaches of EU law and ~~therefore~~ deliver benefits to people and business; notes that members of the public, business, trade unions, NGOs and other stakeholders contribute substantially to the Commission´s monitoring through reporting defaults in the transposition and in the application of EU law by Member State authorities; encourages stakeholders to remain vigilant in this regard also in the future;

source: 573.080

2016/02/15 EMPL 8 amendments...

Amendment A #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that timely and correct transposition of EU law into national legislation and a clear domestic legislative framework should be a priority for the Member States in order to ~~reduce~~avoid breaches of EU law ~~and therefore deliver~~while delivering the intended benefits to people and business which the efficient and effective application of Community law makes possible;

Amendment B #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Highlights the fact that in 2014 there were 3715 new complaints registered and the Commission received its highest number of new complaints (666) in the areas of employment, social affairs and inclusion since 20111; b ; recalls that lack of implementation as well as the incorrect or non-application of EU legislation by Member States renders legislation ineffective, significantly reduces social and employment rights and may require further action at EU level while fully respecting the principle of subsidiarity; ___________ 1bMonitoring the application of Union law, 2014 Annual Report, p. 8

Amendment C #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Points out that the number of new late transposition ~~cases~~infringement cases in the area of employment (17) increased slightly in 2014 compared to the previous year ~~and~~(13) and that all of these were related to labour law;1 a; recalls that late transposition of labour law is a persistent problem in some Member States, which averts people from enjoying their rights and receiving the benefits of Union law; stresses that late and incorrect transposition of EU Directives has a negative effect on the overall legal certainty and the level playing field of the Single Market; calls on the Member State totake action where appropriate, including legislative action, to ensure the practical and beneficial transposition of EU directives into all national legal systems; ___________ 1a Commission Staff Working Document, 2014 Annual Report, Part I: Policy areas, p. 40

Amendment D #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Urges the Commission, when drafting and assessing legislation, to take ~~greater account of the burden it may impose on SMEs, which create 85% of new jobs~~account of potential benefits and burden including for SMEs, which account for 99% of European businesses and create 85% of new jobs; stresses, in this connection, the need to apply the ‘Think Small First’ principle; underlines the need to not only assess short-term effects but also the long- term value of legislation; stresses, however, that all employees have the right to enjoy the highest possible level of protection as regards health and safety at work, regardless of the size of the company which employs them;

Amendment E #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Calls on the Commission and the Member States to coordinate their efforts at an earlier stage of the legislative process with a view to ensuring that future EU law can be implemented more effectively~~Notes the European Commission's ongoing revision of the existing legislation under Better Regulation Agenda which aims at ensuring the high quality of EU legislation in terms of transparency, public consultation, implementation and compliance with the principle of subsidiary, therefore calls on the Commission to coordinate their efforts with the Member States and the European Parliament at an earlier stage of the legislative process with a view to ensuring that future EU law can be implemented more effectively, since deregulation, overregulation or non-regulation might cause more harm to business and employment; points out, however, that such coordination must be without prejudice to the prerogative of the legislators and must fully respect the ordinary legislative procedure as well as democratic legitimacy of the Members States;

Amendment F #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Calls on the Commission to give greater support to the Member States with regard to implementing and correctly applying EU law by providing tailor-made tools, such as detailed implementation plans and guidance documents. which are a result of enhanced and mutual cooperation between the Commission and Member States starting at an early stage of legislation creation; believes that regular dialogue with social partners is also an essential way in which Member States can ensure effective implementation of EU labour law;

Amendment G #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Underlines the important role of social partners, civil society organisations and other stakeholders in the creation of legislation as well as with regard to monitoring and reporting shortcomings in transposition and application of EU law by the Member States; notes the Commissions acknowledgment of stakeholders' role by launching, in 2014, new tools which facilitate this process; encourages stakeholders to remain vigilant in this regard also in the future

Amendment H #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9a (new)

9a. Stresses that strengthening a Member States' labour inspectors is essential to ensure effective implementation of EU Labour law in Member States;

source: 575.124

2016/03/04 PETI 39 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Pál CSÁKY, Jarosław WAŁĘSA, Peter JAHR

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. Reiterates that problems of implementation and enforcement of EU law have been longstanding and supports the effective application of common EU rules in the Member States which is vital to strengthen the credibility of the Union and to meet citizens' expectations of the benefits that the EU can bring to them;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Points out that the different implementation and transposition of EU law creates continuous burdens for citizens and businesses, namely for those citizens who want to benefit from the achievements of the internal market and live, work, do business or study in another Member State; stresses that delays in transposition have also negative impact on legal certainty; reiterates its position that the Commission should make compliance with EU law a true political priority through an effective cooperation with the institutions, with special regard to the Council in particular to systematic recourse to correlation tables, Member States and other interested parties; underlines the primary responsibility of the Member States to implement and apply EU law correctly;

Amendment 11 #

Pál CSÁKY, Jarosław WAŁĘSA, Roberta METSOLA, Peter JAHR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Notes that in 2014 3715 new complaints were registered and the total number of complaints increased by 5.7%; notes the number of new EU Pilot files which was 1208 in 2014; acknowledges the number of processed complaints and EU Pilot files in 2014 and appreciates the 75% resolution rate of EU Pilot files as quick and effective problem solving method;

Amendment 12 #

Pál CSÁKY, Jarosław WAŁĘSA, Roberta METSOLA, Peter JAHR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Acknowledges the administrative guarantees granted to complainants, such as the provision of information, and notification, in respect of their complaints, as also requested by the Committee on Petitions in its 2015 opinion on the aforementioned report; welcomes the renewed 'Applying Union law' web section of the Europa portal which gives citizens relevant information about how EU law has been applied in the Member States and about how to file a complaint; welcomes the better on-line accessibility of the decisions on infringements; notes that some improvements are desirable in the practices of the Commission regarding the information delivered for citizens in processing their complaints;

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Acknowledges the administrative guarantees granted to complainants, such as the provision of information, and notification, in respect of their complaints, as also requested by the Committee on Petitions in its 2015 opinion on the aforementioned report; regrets, however, the delays in receiving responses from the Commission regarding numerous petitions, when it is asked to give an opinion and urges the Commission to improve its current practices to inform citizens in a timely and appropriate manner of any actions and steps taken in response to processing their complaints;

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Acknowledges the administrative guarantees granted to complainants, such as the timely provision of information, and notification, in respect of their complaints, as also requested by the Committee on Petitions in its 2015 opinion on the aforementioned report; stresses that the quality in its treatment on a case-by-case basis should not in any case be undermined by a higher volume of petitions received;

Amendment 15 #

Pál CSÁKY, Jarosław WAŁĘSA, Roberta METSOLA, Peter JAHR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes the positive impact of EU Pilot on the exchange of information between the Commission and the Member States, and on the resolution of problems relating to the application of EU law at national level~~; stresses that this can also provide valuable information for pending petitions~~ and asks the Commission to pay special attention to the actual enforcement and internal review of decisions taken during the EU Pilot process; stresses that this can also provide valuable information for pending petitions and invites the Commission to involve the petitioners in the process of EU Pilot cases deriving from petitions, in order to facilitate also the dialogue between petitioners and the national authorities concerned;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes the positive impact of EU Pilot on the exchange of information between the Commission and the Member States, and on the resolution of problems relating to the application of EU law at national level; stresses that this can also provide valuable information for pending petitions; welcomes the Member States' increasing efforts to settle infringement cases before the Court procedure stage; notes that preliminary rulings help clarify questions on application of the EU law and can prevent infringement procedures;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Calls on the European Parliament and in particular the PETI Committee to promote awareness raising campaigns on the citizens' complaint system for breaches of EU law, the EU Pilot project and infringement procedures enhancing a broader use and facilitating public access to information through the EP website;

Amendment 18 #

Pál CSÁKY, Roberta METSOLA, Peter JAHR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the commitment shown by Commission services to strengthening the exchange of information with the Committee on Petitions, and reiterates its requests for improved communication between the two parties, in particular with regard to the initiation and conduct of infringement procedures by the Commission, including the EU Pilot procedure, and for efforts to be made to provide the Committee on Petitions that it be provided with information within a reasonable timeframe, thus allowing it to respond to citizens’ requests more effectively;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the commitment shown by Commission services to strengthening the exchange of information with the Committee on Petitions, and reiterates its requests for improved communication between the two parties, in particular with regard to the initiation and conduct of infringement procedures by the Commission, including the EU Pilot procedure, and for efforts to be made to provide the Committee on Petitions with information within a reasonable timeframe, thus allowing it to respond to citizens’' requests more effectively; recalls its repeated request to the Commission to take into account in its monitoring and legislative work the reports and findings of the Committee on Petitions;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 a (new)

-1 a. Stresses the Commission's essential role in overseeing the application of EU law and submitting its annual report to the European Parliament and the Council; Calls on the Commission to continue with its active role to develop various tools to improve implementation, enforcement and compliance of EU law in Member States and, in addition to the data for the implementation of EU Directives, to provide data on implementation of EU Regulations in the next Commission's annual report;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Considers that the assessment of cases of possible breach of EU legislation, and in particular those emerging from petitions, should not only be done merely on procedural grounds, but taking into account the substantial elements and the ultimate spirit of the related EU legislation applicable;

Amendment 21 #

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Welcomes the improved provision of information by the European Commission to citizens on monitoring the fact application of EU law through webpages, databases, simpler complaint forms and online problem-solving tools, which aim at increased transparency ;

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Regrets that petitions submitted by EU citizens are~~fer to violations of EU law; considers that~~ handled on the basis of political criteria and that, apart from theose ~~petitions attest to the fact that there are still frequ~~citing violations of EU law, many petitions are not givent a~~nd widespread instances of late or incomplete transposition, or of misapplication, of EU law~~ more positive reception, in particular where petitioners call for migration to be restricted, ban~~d stresses that the Member States should implement and execute EU law~~king practices to be regulated or soclal, health- related and environmental standards to be applied more effectively;

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

Amendment 24 #

Pál CSÁKY, Jarosław WAŁĘSA, Peter JAHR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Regrets that petitions submitted by EU citizens still refer to violations of EU law; considers that these petitions attest to the fact that there are still frequent and widespread instances of late or incomplete transposition, or of misapplication, of EU law, and stresses that the Member States should implement and execute EU law effectively; suggests incorporating more effectively preventive mechanisms, such as injunction procedures, particularly when it comes to cases such infrastructure projects where the possibility of a breach of EU environmental law is envisaged;

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Regrets that petitions submitted by EU citizens refer to violations of EU law; considers that these petitions attest to the fact that there are still frequent and widespread instances of late or incomplete transposition, or of misapplication, of EU law, and stresses that the Member States should implement and execute EU law effectivelystresses that petitions mainly concern alleged breaches of EU law in the fields of fundamental rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities and persons with disabilities, discrimination, including discrimination based on nationality, internal market, free movement, transport, environment, education, employment and health care; considers that these petitions attest to the fact that there are still frequent and widespread instances of late or incomplete transposition, or of misapplication, of EU law, and stresses that the Member States should implement and execute EU law effectively and should legislate in full respect of fundamental values and principles enshrined in the Treaties and the Charter of the Fundamental Rights of the EU; calls the Member states for a substantive improvement on the quality of the information exchange with the Committee on Petitions and the clarifications provided; emphasizes the need for presence and balanced dialogue with the representatives of the Member States on concerned petitions during the meetings of the Committee on Petitions;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Regrets that petitions submitted by EU citizens refer to violations of EU law or to a number of consequences thereof for citizens and businesses or to instances of EU maladministration; considers that these petitions attest to the fact that there are still frequent and widespread instances of late or incomplete transposition, or of misapplication, of EU law, and stresses that the Member States should implement and execute EU law effectively;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Welcomes the Commission's efforts to inform people about their rights and to ensure that they find suitable mechanisms of redress, by developing instruments such as the Commission's database 'Applying Union law" and "Europa portal Your rights"; Stresses that further measures are needed to provide better access to information on the application of EU law and problem-solving instruments and improve the handling of complaints from EU citizens and businesses about breaches of EU law;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5 b. Calls on the Commission to interlink all different portals, access points and information websites in a single gateway that will provide citizens with easy access to online complaint forms and user- friendly information on infringement procedures; Calls, in addition, on the Commission to include in its next monitoring report more detailed information on the use of those portals;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 b (new)

-1 b. Acknowledges that the European Parliament also performs a crucial role by exercising a political control over the Commission's enforcement actions, scrutinising the annual reports on monitoring the implementation of EU law and developing relevant parliamentary resolutions; Suggests that the EP can contribute further to the timely and accurate transposition of EU legislation by sharing the expertise gained in the legislative decision making process through pre-established links with national Parliaments;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Recalls that the area of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters (previously known as the ‘third pillar’) is frequently addressed in petitions by natural persons; ~~welcomes, therefore,~~is concerned at the expansion of the Commission’s competences to include police and judicial cooperation as of 1 December 2014, at a time when cooperation between police, court, intelligence and customs services should be heightened and a culture of confidence and communication cultivated within Interpol's current intergovernmental framework, centring on a number of priority areas (terrorism, transnational crime, illegal immigration, drugs and people trafficking), rather than weakening arrangements by adding a layer of bureaucratic oversight which can but be detrimental to the effectiveness of those services, as is illustrated by Europol's poor record, and therefore to territorial security and fundamental freedoms;

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Recalls that the area of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters (previously known as the ‘third pillar’) is frequently addressed in petitions by natural persons; ~~welcomes, therefore, the expansion of the Commission’s competences to include police and judicial cooperation as of 1 December 2014~~notes that persisting shortcomings such as long delays in national court proceedings concerning matters involving EU law are often identified in the treatment of several petitions; underlines the usefulness and appropriateness of preliminary rulings by the ECJ as guidance for these cases and regrets the scarce use of such a provision by national courts; welcomes, therefore, the expansion of the Commission’s competences to include police and judicial cooperation as of 1 December 2014; reminds that the examination and treatment of petitions is independent and of a different nature than national judiciary procedures, and that these are likely to run in parallel without mutual interference;

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines the importance of simpl~~ementation plans adopted by the Commission with the aim of assisting and guiding Member States in the~~ ifying rules and of applying the subsidiarity principle more effectimvely~~, clear and correct~~ in order to facilitate transposition of EU directives; welcomes the importance attributed to Better Regulation and to the monitoring of EU regulatory fitness, which form part of a greater effort to improve the quality of EU legislation and – it is to be hoped – should have a positive impact on by Member States, thus reducing the number of petitions submitted.

Amendment 33 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

Amendment 34 #

Pál CSÁKY, Jarosław WAŁĘSA, Peter JAHR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines the importance of implementation plans adopted by the Commission with the aim of assisting and guiding Member States in the timely, clear and correct transposition of EU directives; underlines the need for the Commission to act quickly, and on a grand scale, so as gradually to cut the number of legislative acts by up to half, by 2020, on the basis of the principle that two old acts should be done away with for every new act adopted; welcomes the importance attributed to Better Regulation and to the monitoring of EU regulatory fitness, which form part of a greater effort to improve the quality of EU legislation and – it is to be hoped – should have a positive impact on the number of petitions submitted.

Amendment 35 #

Jérôme LAVRILLEUX

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines the importance of implementation plans adopted by the Commission with the aim of assisting and guiding Member States in the timely, clear and correct transposition of EU directives, which is necessary for the EU to operate effectively and viably; welcomes the importance attributed to Better Regulation and to the monitoring of EU regulatory fitness, which form part of a greater effort to improve the quality of EU legislation and – it is to be hoped – should have a positive impact on the number of petitions submitted.

Amendment 36 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

Amendment 37 #

Pál CSÁKY, Jarosław WAŁĘSA, Roberta METSOLA, Peter JAHR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines the importance of implementation plans adopted by the Commission with the aim of assisting and guiding Member States in the timely, clear and correct transposition of EU directives; ~~welcomes~~takes note of the importance attributed to Better Regulation and ~~to the monitoring of EU regulatory fitness~~REFIT programme in the annual report on monitoring the application of Union Law, which form part of ~~a greater~~ efforts to improve the quality of EU legislation and should – it is to be hoped – ~~should have a positive impact on the number of petitions submitted.~~have a positive impact on the number of petitions submitted; Calls on the Commission to actively involve all stakeholders, in particular social partners, consumers organisations and NGOs when assessing the impact of EU legislation, run the proportionality and subsidiarity check (at ex-ante stage), and monitor implementation (ex-post stage); Calls on the Commission to assess in the better regulation activities and in the REFIT process not only the costs but also the benefits and values of legislation, as well as to take into account its broader social and environmental impact and not only its economic one;

Amendment 38 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Welcomes the importance attributed to Better Regulation and to the EU regulatory fitness (REFIT); the REFIT programme should be strengthened and also include measuring and reducing administrative burdens faced by citizens; believes that this programmes form part of a greater effort to improve the quality of EU legislation and – it is to be hoped – should have a positive impact on the number of petitions submitted.

Amendment 39 #

Svetoslav Hristov MALINOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Emphasises that a more courageous approach should be taken by the European Commission when examining petitions raising fundamental rights issues in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity.

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 c (new)

-1 c. Stresses individual citizens' complaints are one of the main sources for detecting breaches of European Union law and a source of information for the Commission; Notes that in 2014, members of the public, businesses, NGOs and other organisations remained very active in reporting potential breaches of EU law and as a result, the total number of open complaints increased by approximately 5.7% in 2014.

Amendment 5 #

Pál CSÁKY, Jarosław WAŁĘSA, Roberta METSOLA, Peter JAHR

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 d (new)

-1 d. Recalls the importance of petitions and questions, received by the European Parliament under Article 227 TFEU, which often trigger infringement procedures initiated by the Commission against a Member State;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Acknowledges the impact of effective application of EU law on strengthening the credibility of the EU institutions; appreciates the importance attributed in the report to petitions submitted by citizens, businesses and civil society organisations as a means of monitoring the application of EU law through citizens’' direct expression of their views, a right enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty and an important element of European citizenship; emphasizes the role of petitions to draw the attention of the Parliament and Commission to shortcomings in the application of EU law by the Member States; notes that parliamentary questions and petitions serve as useful alerting tools addressed to the Commission indicating weaknesses in the application of the EU law;

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Appreciates the importance attributed in the report to petitions submitted by citizens, businesses and civil society organisations as a secondary means of monitoring the application of EU law through ~~citizens’ direct expression of their views,~~direct expression by citizens of their views - in addition to their primary avenue for democratic expression: elections and referendums - a right enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty and an important element of European citizenship;

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Appreciates the importance attributed in the report to petitions submitted by citizens, businesses and civil society organisations as an important means of monitoring the application of EU law and identifying possible loopholes in it through citizens’ direct expression of their views, and experiences, a fundamental right enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty and an important element of European citizenship;

Amendment 9 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Appreciates the importance attributed in the Commission's annual report to petitions submitted by citizens, businesses and civil society organisations as a means of monitoring the application of EU law through citizens’ direct expression of their views, a right enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty and an important element of European citizenship;

source: 578.683

2016/03/31 ECON 78 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Tibor SZANYI, Cătălin Sorin IVAN, Renato SORU, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. Whereas in 2014 the European Commission received 3715 complaints reporting potential breaches of EU law, being Spain (553), Italy (475) and Germany (276) the Member States that most complaints were filed against;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers that the effectiveness of EU law is ~~systematically undermined by its unsatisfactory application by Member St~~fundamental in achieving an "ever closer" Union as enshrined in the TEU; recognizes the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union of same legal value as the Treaties~~; n~~. Notes that thise lack of enforcement ~~is at the root of a number of European crises~~of EU law weakens the EU itself;

Amendment 11 #

Sylvie GOULARD, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Marian HARKIN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Considers that unrealistic implementation deadlines for legislation can lead to an inability of Member States to comply which provides tacit endorsement to delaying application; Calls upon the Commission to provide realistic timetables for implementation of regulations and directives prior to conclusion of the legislative procedure, taking due account of necessary scrutiny and consultation periods;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. calls on the Commission to dedicate, for each directorate-general, a webpage listing the Member States not having transposed directives or not complying with decisions and regulations; considers it should be updated on a monthly basis and should detail which directives have not been transposed and/or which decisions and regulations have not been complied with;

Amendment 13 #

Sylvie GOULARD, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Marian HARKIN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. considers that the Commission should more actively tackle cases of improperly transposed directives, as it may cover cases of both involuntary and of voluntary action by Member States;

Amendment 14 #

Sylvie GOULARD, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Marian HARKIN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1c. considers it the duty of the Commission to oppose the two legislative branches of decision making at the European level leaving substantive elements to be decided through delegated acts/implementing acts during the co- decision process, due to the legal uncertainties and potential risks, dangers and complications which could result;

Amendment 15 #

Sylvie GOULARD, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Marian HARKIN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)

1d. expresses concern that the settlement concluded with the UK on February 19 2016 has been concluded outside of the EU treaty framework which could create legal uncertainties; underlines the importance of the Court of Justice in its enforcement control as well as its sovereign power;

Amendment 16 #

Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Alfred SANT, Tibor SZANYI, Cătălin Sorin IVAN, Hugues BAYET, Renato SORU, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes ~~with concern~~ that 11the directives relating t~~he area of banking and finance~~o banking legislation arhave being infringed by one or more Member States, with Germany being the only country to comply with all existing legislation in this field, and Austria the only other Member State with fewer than three infringements1; __________________ (footnote deleted)en applied unevenly, which has created fragmentation among the EU States to the detriment of less financially-oriented systems and to the benefit of large investment banking groups;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes with concern that 11 directives in the area of banking and finance legislation are being infringed by one or more Member States, with Germany being the only country to comply with all existing legislation in this field, and Austria the only other Member State with fewer than three infringements1 ; __________________ 1 Particularly worrying are the cases of Poland (10 infringements), Luxembourg (9) and Slovenia, Spain and Estonia (8 each).;

Amendment 18 #

Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Tibor SZANYI, Cătălin Sorin IVAN, Renato SORU, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Points out that the Late Payments Directive is still not properly implemented ~~well~~ in 11 Member States, and that the situation is worst in Italy, Cyprus, Spain, Portugal and Greece, where the delay in B2B2 payments is well above average3 ; __________________ 2 Business-to-business. Business-to-business. 3 See ‘Transposition and implementation of the Directive on Late Payments in Commercial Transactions’, European Parliamentary Research Service.

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Points out that the Late Payments Directive is still not implemented well in 11 Member States, and ~~that the situation is worst in Italy, Cyprus, Spain, Portugal and Greece~~is also correlated to the state of public finances affected by the economic crisis; notes as well that the delay in B2B payments is well above average; points out that also the directive on access to the activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institutions and investment firms, wthe~~re the delay in B2B2 payments is well above average3~~ directive on requirements for budgetary framework of the Member States and the directive on consumer rights have not yet been transposed; __________________ 2 Business-to-business. 3 See ‘Transposition and implementation of the Directive on Late Payments in Commercial Transactions’, European Parliamentary Research Service.

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 a (new)

-1a. Whereas in 2014 the Commission launched 893 new infringement procedures, being Greece (89), Italy (89) and Spain (86) the Member States with a highest number of open cases;

Amendment 20 #

Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Points out that the Late Payments Directive is still not implemented well in 11 Member States, most of them being the ones that suffered most from the economic crisis and would be most able to reap its benefits, and that the situation is worst in Italy, Cyprus, Spain, Portugal and Greece, where the delay in B2B2 payments is well above average3 ~~; __________________ 2~~causing additional problems for SMEs3a; __________________ 2 Business-to-business. Business-to-business. 3 See ‘Transposition and implementation of the Directive on Late Payments in Commercial Transactions’, European Parliamentary Research Service. 3a"The Economic Impact of Late Payments", September 2014, European Commission.

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Recalls that ~~non-compliance with the Maastricht criteria, and the lenient~~the pro-cyclical and highly discretionary enforcement of the Stability and Growth Pact rules by the Commission ~~and~~, the Council ~~before 2010, contributed to the emergence of the European debt crisis that followed the global financial crisi~~and Member States before and after 2008 aggravated the European debt crisis that followed the global financial crisis; asks he Commission and the Council to adopt a more proactive stance as regards the enforcement of the macroeconomic imbalances procedure and in particular when it comes to the effective prevention of severe macroeconomic and financial imbalances such as excessive current account surpluses;

Amendment 23 #

Esther DE LANGE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Recalls that non-compliance with the Maastricht criteria, and the lenient enforcement of the Stability and Growth Pact rules by the Commission and the Council ~~before 2010~~, contributed to the emergence of the European debt crisis that followed the global financial crisis;

Amendment 24 #

Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Tibor SZANYI, Hugues BAYET, Renato SORU, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Recalls that non-compliance with the Maastricht criteria, and the lenient enforcement of the Stability and Growth Pact rules by the Commission and the Council before 2010, contributed to the emergence of the European debt crisis that followed the global financial crisis; and points out that besides the persistent non- compliance of Greece, France and Germany infringed deficit rules earlier (in 2003-2004) and that Commission and Council did not react to these breaches with a stringent application of the rules, including possible sanctions.

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Recalls that ~~non-compliance with the Maastricht criteria, and the lenient enforcement of the Stability and Growth Pact rules by the Commission and the Council before 2010, contribu~~following the global financial crisis which led to a European debt crisis, the EU has further strengthened its economic coordination and banking supervision; stresses the importance of completing the Banking Union, deepening the EMU and creating a CMU that finances the real economy and growth in Europe; invites all Member Stateds to ~~the emergence of the European debt crisis that followed the global financial crisis~~make full use of flexibility within the existing rules of the Stability and Growth Pact as per Commission's Communication COM (0215)12;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Recalls that non-compliance with the Maastricht criteria, and th~~Condemns the fact that the policies the Commission has imposed with the euro constraining exchange-rate flenient enforcement of the Stability and Growth Pact rules by the Commission and the Council before 2010, contributed to the emergence of the European debt crisis that followed the global financial crisixibility have significantly limited Member States’ ability to respond to crises and have caused a drop in competitiveness, a fall in domestic production and the loss of jobs, crises in the credit banking sector, an increase in debt, the cutting of welfare payments and the selling-off of public assets and services to the benefit of large capital holders;

Amendment 27 #

Matt CARTHY, Miguel VIEGAS, Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Recalls that non-compliance with the Maastricht criteria, and the lenient enforcement of the Stability and Growth Pact rules by the Commission and the Council ~~before 2010,~~essentially contributed to the emergence of the European debt crisis ~~that followed~~in 2009 and to an aggravation of the global financial crisis;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Recalls that ~~non-compliance with the Maastricht criteria, and the lenient enforcement of the Stability and Growth Pact rules by the Commission and the Council before 2010,~~the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP), the 6-pack and the 2-pack, as well as the Fiscal Compact, unnecessarily constrains the vital fiscal policy space of the Eurozone Member States, depriving them of the only effective macroeconomic tool in a context of weak demand and ineffective monetary policy; recalls that it was these austerity policies which contributed to the emergence of the European debt crisis that followed the global financial crisis;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Recalls that non-compliance with the Maastricht criteria, and the lenient enforcement of the Stability and Growth Pact rules by the Commission and the Council before 2010, contributed to the emergence of the European sovereign debt crisis that followed the global financial crisis; is concerned at the persisting non- compliance and inconsistent enforcement of the SGP rules and considers that this still represents a major challenge in some instances;

Amendment 3 #

Matt CARTHY, Miguel VIEGAS, Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 b (new)

-1b. Whereas between 2010 and 2014 3550 infringement cases where open due to late transposition by Member States of the 439 directives, with an average of 8 Member States infringing every directive approved during that period; Belgium (36), Romania (34) and Slovenia (26) where the most affected MS1; __________________ 1 Data from Recitals A, B and C come from the Report from the Commission on "Monitoring the application of Union law 2014 Annual Report" (9.7.2015).

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Stresses that the 2008 financial crisis resulted in a colossal intervention by EU governments in support of the financial sector; points out that the total state aid granted to the financial sector amounted to more than EUR 5 trillion, representing 40.3 % of EU GDP;

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Is deeply worried by the fact that under the Excessive Deficit Procedure from SGP while France has not complied with the structural deficit targets of the Commission in 2013 and 2014, and while no assessment of the effective action has been carried out by the Commission for the whole correction period (2013-2015), it has again been granted additional years to correct its excessive deficit; calls on the Commission to ensure that Spain and Portugal take action to reach their structural deficit targets1. __________________ 1Briefing from the ECON governance support unit: "Implementation of the Stability and Growth Pact and the Opinions on the 2016 Draft Budgetary Plans".

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Recalls, that according to the OECD 2012 report, the sustainability of sovereign debt was significantly affected by the extent of explicit or implicit guarantees for bank debt;

Amendment 33 #

Matt CARTHY, Miguel VIEGAS, Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Points out that in 2014 only 10 of the 157 main recommendations made to Member States in the framework of the European Semester were fully implemented or showed substantial progress4; __________________ 4Success rate of around 6.5%: Zsolt Darvas and Alvaro Leandro, ‘The Limitations of Policy Coordination in the Euro Area under the European Semester’, Bruegel, November 2015.deleted

Amendment 34 #

Danuta Maria HÜBNER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Points out that in 2014 only 10 of the 157 main recommendations made to Member States in the framework of the European Semester were fully implemented or showed substantial progress4 ; calls, in this context, for following the recommendations made on the European Semester in the Five presidents' report on deepening the EMU, that is: more concrete and ambitious Country-Specific Recommendations and a clearer focus on defined priorities while leaving the necessary room for manoeuvre to Member States in the implementation of CSRs, as well as a more systematic use of reporting, peer review and "comply-or-explain" approach in order to ensure proper implementation; __________________ 4 Success rate of around 6.5%: Zsolt Darvas and Alvaro Leandro, ‘The Limitations of Policy Coordination in the Euro Area under the European Semester’, Bruegel, November 2015.

Amendment 35 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Points out that ~~in 2014 only 10 of the 157 main recommendations made to Member States in the framework of the European Semester were fully implemented or showed~~the European Semester has failed to address the challenges of ensuring macroeconomic stability or promoting substantial progress4 ; __________________ 4Success rate of around 6.5%: Zsolt Darvas and Alvaro Leandro, ‘The Limitations of Policy Coordination in the Euro Area under the European Semester’, Bruegel, November 2015.inable growth; underlines that the current framework does not allow for a proper debate on the alternatives to an unbalanced governance framework based on arbitrary budgetary rules;

Amendment 36 #

Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Tibor SZANYI, Renato SORU, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Points out that in 2014 only 10 of the 157 main recommendations made to Member States in the framework of the European Semester were fully implemented or showed substantial progress4 ; ; and believes that, in order to improve implementation, there is a need to better identify clearly articulated priorities at European level as well as to increase genuine public debate, political willingness and commitment at national level, leading to greater relevance and national ownership; welcomes the recommendation on the economic policy of the euro area, proposed by the Commission six months before country- specific recommendations, as a step to deepen policy coordination in the follow- up to the Five Presidents' Report and relevant resolutions of the European Parliament; __________________ 4 Success rate of around 6.5%: Zsolt Darvas and Alvaro Leandro, ‘The Limitations of Policy Coordination in the Euro Area under the European Semester’, Bruegel, November 2015.

Amendment 37 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Emphasises the fact that the European Semester recommendations to MS have a similar responsiveness rate as the unilateral OECD recommendations (29% vs 30% in 2014), even though the compliance with the latter is based just on a voluntary basis; notes that, according to data, compliance in Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and Czech Republic is systematically higher for OECD recommendations1. __________________ 1 Same as last one.

Amendment 38 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Condemns the differential treatment, within the framework of European economic governance, of trade deficits and trade surpluses which, despite jeopardising the entire EU economy, have gone unpunished;

Amendment 39 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Highlights that for MS which are part of the Euro area or participate in the Banking Union, transposition of the BRRD is indispensable for the Single Resolution Mechanism to function, as in many cases decisions of the Single Resolution Board must be implemented based on national law transposing the BRRD1. __________________ 1 As stated by the Commission press release from 22.10.2015 on the referral of six countries to the ECj for failing to transpose BRRD.

Amendment 4 #

Esther DE LANGE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers that the effectiveness of EU law is systematically undermined by its unsatisfactory application by Member States; notes that thise lack of implementation and enforcement is at the root of a number of European crises;

Amendment 40 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls on the Commission for a closer monitoring of tax and customs related State aid cases as it is one of the four policy fields where most infringement cases were opened in 2014;

Amendment 41 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Is very concerned by the fact that the Deposit Guarantee Scheme Directive (DGSD) has still not been implemented by 10 Member States6 , which undermines ~~the efforts to build a European Deposit Guarantee Scheme that would complete the Banking Union~~citizens' trust in the banking sector and calls therefore for timely implementation of existing Banking Union legislation and enhanced dialogue with sector experts to evaluate the impact and effectiveness of adopted legislation; Calls on the Commission to carry out a thorough assessment of the potential risks in the context of the European Deposit Insurance Scheme; __________________ 6 Belgium, Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, Poland, Romania, Slovenia and Sweden; Commission press release, 10 December 2015.

Amendment 42 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Is very concerned by the fact that the Deposit Guarantee Scheme Directive (DGSD) has still not been implemented by 10 Member States6 , which undermines the efforts to build a European Deposit Guarantee Scheme that would complete the Banking Union; __________________ 6Belgium, Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, Poland, RomBelieves that it should be the role of national central banks to guarantee all foreign-currency deposits held by financia~~, Slovenia and Sweden; Commission press release, 10 December 2015.~~l institutions based in their countries;

Amendment 43 #

Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Cătălin Sorin IVAN, Tibor SZANYI, Renato SORU, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Is very concerned by the fact that the Deposit Guarantee Scheme Directive (DGSD) has still not been implemented by 10 Member States6, which undermines the efforts to build a European Deposit Guarantee Scheme that would complete the Banking Union; __________________ (footnote deleted) .that under the BRRD Directive, which introduces the principle of bail-in, deposits and current accounts are considered to be investments, and that without a central bank to act as an ultimate guarantor, any guarantee system or scheme will have insufficient funds to properly safeguard savers;

Amendment 44 #

Esther DE LANGE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Is very concerned by the fact that the Deposit Guarantee Scheme Directive (DGSD) has still not been implemented by 10 Member States6 , which undermines the efforts to ~~build a European Deposit Guarantee Scheme that would complete~~strengthen the Banking Union; __________________ 6 Belgium, Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, Poland, Romania, Slovenia and Sweden; Commission press release, 10 December 2015.

Amendment 45 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Is very concerned by the fact that the Deposit Guarantee Scheme Directive (DGSD) has still not been implemented by 10 Member States~~6 , which undermines the efforts to build a~~, and calls on the Commission to ensure that it is implemented; welcomes the Commission proposal on European Deposit ~~Gua~~Insurantece Scheme, th~~at would complete the Banking Union; __________________ 6Belgium, Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, Poland, Romania, Slovenia and Sweden; Commission press release, 10 December 2015.~~e third and final pillar of the Banking Union, needed to safeguard deposits throughout Europe;

Amendment 46 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Is very concerned by the fact that the Deposit Guarantee Scheme Directive (DGSD) has still not been implemented by 10 Member States6 , which undermines the efforts to ~~build a European Deposit Guarantee Scheme that would complet~~enhance the Banking Union; __________________ 6 Belgium, Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, Poland, Romania, Slovenia and Sweden; Commission press release, 10 December 2015.

Amendment 47 #

Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Tibor SZANYI, Renato SORU, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Notes that the creation of a European Deposit Insurance Scheme (EDIS) requires the implementation of the single rulebook as well as of the first and second pillars of the Banking Union, as well as the transposition of the BRRD and the Deposit Guarantee Schemes Directive (DGSD) by all the participating Member States. Stresses with grave concern, that these are moves towards the creation of a Financial Union, notably through a European Deposit Insurance Scheme;

Amendment 48 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Welcomes the European Commission's first proposals in the area of the Capital Markets Union and stresses the importance of encouraging more investments in the real economy;

Amendment 49 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Believes that it is the lack of proper exchange of information under the Directive on administrative cooperation in the field of taxation ("DAC") what led to the malpractices that were at the root of the LuxLeaks case and other abusive tax practices in other MS.

Amendment 5 #

Matt CARTHY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers that the effectiveness of EU law is systematically undermined by ~~its unsatisfactory application by Member States; notes that this lack of enforcement is at the root of a number of European crises~~the EU routinely ignoring every legal and constitutional obstacle in its way in order to increase their supranational power; notes that this lack of respect for the rule of Law is at the root of a number of European crises and has led to a widespread lack of trust and confidence in the aims and objectives of the European Union;

Amendment 50 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7b. stresses that all Legislation should respect the principle of subsidiarity; stresses that issues of subsidiarity and proportionality must be thoroughly agreed upon and should always ensure the competency and autonomy of each Member States' is upheld;

Amendment 51 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the European Investment Bank to evaluate whether the banking systems of Member States that do not comply with the BRDD and the DGSD should be intermediaries in its actions; calls on the European Central Bank to make a similar evaluation regarding the use of emergency liquidity assistance;deleted

Amendment 52 #

Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Tibor SZANYI, Renato SORU, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

Amendment 53 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

Amendment 54 #

Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the European ~~Investment Bank~~Banking Authority to evaluate whether the banking systems of Member States that do not comply with the BRDD and the DGSD should be intermediaries in its actions; calls on the European Central Bank to make a similar evaluation regarding the use of emergency liquidity assistance;

Amendment 55 #

Danuta Maria HÜBNER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Notes with disappointment that, due to the inability of ESMA and of the Commission to draft and adopt the necessary level 2 measures within the timeframe that was set, the Commission has found it necessary to propose delaying by one year the entry into force of the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MIFID II) and of its accompanying regulation, MIFIR, as well as to similarly delay the implementation of some provisions within the Market Abuse Regulation (MAR) and the Central Securities Depositories Regulation (CSDR);

Amendment 56 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Calls on the Commission to open infringement proceedings against Member States which have openly refused to give effect to the obligations arising from Council Decisions (EU) 1601/2015 and (EU) 1523/2015, of 14 and 22 September respectively, which introduce a system of mandatory quotas for the reception of refugees.

Amendment 57 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Believes that the Commission should, where possible and proportionate propose more regulations and fewer directives in order to ensure a level playing field among the Member States vis-à-vis legislation;

Amendment 58 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. ~~Believes that the Commission should propose more regulations and fewer directives in or~~Notes with concern that Regulations are "binding in their entirety" and "directly applicable" on all member states. Directives provide Member States with the autonomy to consider the most appropriate means of implementing directives into domestic law provided that the objectives of the directives are attained and providerd t~~o ensure a level playing field among~~hat the directive is implemented into domestic law within the required timescale. Stresses theat Member States should retain as much competence and sovereign decision making vis-à-vis legislation;

Amendment 59 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. ~~Believe~~Reminds that the ~~Commission should propose more regulations and fewer directives in order to ensure a level playing field among the Member States vis-à-vis legislation~~form of legal texts must correspond to objectives and aims of the proposals;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers that the effectiveness of EU law is ~~systematically~~ undermined by its unsatisfactory application by Member States; notes that this lack of enforcement ~~is at the root of a number of European crises~~creates an unlevel playing field within the single market;

Amendment 60 #

Danuta Maria HÜBNER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Believes that the Commission should propose more regulations and fewer directives in order to ensure a level playing field among the Member States vis-à-vis legislation; welcomes in this respect the decisions taken to move some provisions of the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFiD) to a regulation and to replace the Market Abuse Directive (MAD) by a regulation; also welcomes the current proposal to replace the Prospectus Directive by a regulation;

Amendment 61 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Believes that the Commission should only propose ~~more~~ regulations ~~and fewer~~instead of directives ~~in order~~when it is essential for creating a single market and to ensure a level playing field among the Member States vis-à-vis legislation;

Amendment 62 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Believes that the Commission should deliver reports, reviews and legislative revisions on the dates agreed by co- legislators and as laid down in the relevant legislation;

Amendment 63 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Condemns the differential treatment, within the framework of European economic governance, of trade deficits and trade surpluses which, despite jeopardising the entire EU economy, have gone unpunished;

Amendment 64 #

Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Tibor SZANYI, Renato SORU, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Is of the opinion that financial penalties for non-compliance with EU law should ~~include a multiplier for those Member States for which several procedures are open~~guarantee equality of treatment among Member States;

Amendment 65 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Is of the opinion that financial penalties for non-compliance with EU law should ~~include a multiplier for those Member States for which several procedures are open~~be effective, proportionate and dissuasive;

Amendment 66 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Is of the opinion that financial penalties for non-compliance with EU law should ~~include a multipli~~become more severe for th~~ose Member States for which several procedures are open~~e worst cases when it comes to late transposition of directives (LTIs) which remains a persistent problem;

Amendment 67 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Is of the opinion that financial penalties for non-compliance with EU law should ~~include a multiplier~~be enforced for those Member States for which several procedures are open;

Amendment 68 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Is of the opinion that financial penalties for non-compliance with EU lLaw ~~should include a multiplier for those Member States for which several procedures are open~~is not effective as powerful states who infringe European law are less sensitive to the costs imposed by sanctions;

Amendment 69 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Is of the opinion that financial penalties for non-compliance with EU law ~~should include a multiplier for those Member States for which several procedures are open~~can't be based on the number of the procedures open; Member States legal rights must be respected;

Amendment 7 #

Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Tibor SZANYI, Renato SORU, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers that the effectiveness of EU law is systematically undermined by its unsatisfactory application by Member States; notes that this lack of ~~enforcement is at the root of a number of European crise~~plays an important role as regards a number of European crises and harms the European citizens;

Amendment 70 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Considers that the number of formal infringement procedures decreased also due to the effectiveness of the structured dialogue with Member States via EU Pilot;

Amendment 71 #

Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ, Tibor SZANYI, Hugues BAYET, Renato SORU, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 b (new)

10b. Welcomes the Commission's efforts to improve access to information on the application of the Union Law. Encourages further efforts to enhance transparency;

Amendment 72 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

~~11. Supports the creation of a subcommittee of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs to focus on monitoring the application of EU law in the Member States.~~deleted

Amendment 73 #

Matt CARTHY, Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. S~~upports the creation of a subcommittee of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs to focus on monitoring the application of EU law in the Member States.~~tresses the importance of regular monitoring of the implementation of financial legislation to evaluate implementation problems, unintended consequences and elements which could be reformed, updated or removed, in line with Better Regulation principles; In this regard, calls on the Commission to report to the economic and monetary affairs committee on the state of play of implementation and application of legislation on a regular basis, which would provide a necessary forum to enhance dialogue and address specific concerns;

Amendment 74 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. ~~Supports~~Highlights that the creation of a subcommittee ~~of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs~~ to focus on monitoring the application of EU law in the Member States. does not address the legislative defects within the EU Legislature process;

Amendment 75 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Supports the creation of a subcommittee ~~of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs to focus~~ inside JURI to focus mores especially on monitoring the application of EU law in the Member States and the causes of non-compliance in systematic cases. A structured dialogue with the Commissioner in charge of Rule of Law in the EU should also be established with the same objective. The creation of a JURI sub-committee would be an opportunity to find the structural flaws behind the failures to apply the EU law and for the Parliament to do an even more thorough control of its implementation; mo~~nitoring the application of EU law in the Member States.~~ reover, it would be possible to produce country-specific reports on those cases where a certain Member State shows a systematic non- compliance or late transposition of EU legislation. The creation of the subcommittee would be very positive to raise awareness on the importance for the EU that Member States comply with its legislation in order to maintain credibility in front of citizens and would allow the European Parliament to hold the Commission and Member States fully accountable.

Amendment 76 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. ~~Supports the creation of a subc~~Is of the opinion that relevant standing Committees of the ~~Committee on Constitutional Affairs to focus on~~European Parliament shall monitor~~ing the~~ application of the EU law within the ~~Member Stat~~ir respective fields of competencies.

Amendment 77 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Supports the creation of a ~~subcommittee of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs~~regular structured process within the European Parliament to focus on monitoring the application of EU law in the Member States.

Amendment 78 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Believes that the European Commission needs to correct its democratic deficit in order to enhance its political legitimacy and fully enforce rule of law in the EU; calls the EU institutions and MS to make steps to ensure that the next President of the European Commission is directly elected by the European citizens in the 2019 European election.

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers that the effectiveness of EU law is systematically undermined by its unsatisfactory application by Member States and unsatisfactory follow-up action by the Commission; notes that thise lack of application and enforcement is at the root of a number of European crises;

Amendment 9 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers that the effectiveness of EU law is systematically undermined by its unsatisfactory a~~pplication by Member State~~nd asymmetric application by the EU institutions; notes that this lack of enforcement is at the root of a number of E~~uropean cris~~U crises and inefficiencies;

source: 580.477

2016/04/05 JURI 63 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)

– having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement on better law-making between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union, and the European Commission,

Amendment 10 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas Article 51 CFREU limits Member States' obligation of compliance with the Charter to situations where they are implementing EU law, but does not provide for such a limitation of the obligations stemming from the Charter for EU institutions, bodies, offices or agencies;

Amendment 11 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)

Eb. whereas, in the context of the recent financial crisis, Member States have had to take measures jeopardising primary EU law, most notably provisions on protection of social and economic rights;

Amendment 12 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls that the Commission is, according to Article 17 TEU, responsible for ensuring the application of Union law, including the CFREU (Article 6(1) TEU), the provisions of which are addressed to the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union and to the Member States when they are implementing Union law;deleted

Amendment 13 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Recognises that the primary responsibility for the correct implementation and application of EU law lies with the Member States, but points out that this does not absolve the EU institutions of their duty to respectPoints out that the EU institutions are required to comply with EU primary EU law when they ~~produce~~adopt secondary EU law or impose policies on the Member States;

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Recognises that the primary responsibility for the correct implementation and application of EU law lies with the Member States, emphasises that Member States when implementing EU law must also respect in full the fundamental values and rights enshrined in the Treaties and the Charter of the Fundamental Rights of the EU; recalls that the monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of EU law lies with the Commission, to this end repeatedly calls on Member States to systematic recourse to correlation tables; but points out that this does not absolve the EU institutions of their duty to respect primary EU law when they produce secondary EU law; reminds Parliament to make use of its implementing reports regarding sectorial legislations;

Amendment 15 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Welcomes that the new IIA on better law-making contains provisions that aim at improving the implementation and application of EU law, inter alia, through better identification of national measures that are not strictly related to the Union legislation (gold-plating) and expects Member States to clearly indicate and document such measures; underlines that the Members States when applying EU legislation should avoid the so-called "gold plating", by which unnecessary burdens are added to EU legislation which leads to a misconception of EU legislative activity and increases unjustified EU scepticism amongst the citizen; in this respect calls on the Commission to provide regular information on the documentation of gold-plating measures;

Amendment 16 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Points out that the EU institutions are bound by the subsidiarity principle and must not encroach on the prerogatives of the Member States; calls for closer dialogue with the national parliaments, in particular when they express concerns about compliance with the subsidiarity principle;

Amendment 17 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Recalls the Commission's new commitment to reviewing the body of EU regulation on an annual basis with regard to the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality and eagerly awaits the results; Notes, furthermore, the importance of ensuring appropriate division of competences between EU and national level and for dialogue with national parliament to be stepped up when subsidiarity concerns have been expressed;

Amendment 18 #

Marie-Christine BOUTONNET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Notes the importance of monitoring the impact on competitiveness, economic growth and job creation when assessing the application of EU law;

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Calls on the Commission, when drafting and assessing legislation, to take greater account of the burden it may impose on SMEs;

Amendment 2 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)

- having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement on better law-making,

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Believ~~Stresses that Parliament should play a more structured role in the analysis of how accession countries and countries with association agreements with the European Union comply with EU law;

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Believes that Parliament shcould play a more structured role in the analysis of how accession countries and countries with association agreements with the European Union comply with EU law;

Amendment 22 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Believes that Parliament should play a more structured role in the analysis of how accession countries and countries with association agreements with the European Union comply with EU law; encourages Parliament in this regard to provide those countries with suitable assistance, in the form of ongoing cooperation with their national parliaments in the field of the observance and application of EU law;

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Believes that Parliament should play a ~~more structured~~stronger role in the analysis of how accession countries and countries with association agreements with the European Union comply with EU law;

Amendment 24 #

Heidi HAUTALA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Suggests that Parliament should draft proper reports and not simply resolutions on all candidate countries in response to the annual progress reports released by the Commission, in order to give the possibility to all the concerned committees to deliver the relevant opinions. Believes that the Commission should also release progress reports for all European Neighbourhood Countries that signed associations agreements in order for Parliament to proceed with a serious and systematic assessment of the progress made by those countries on the implementation of the EU acquis related to the accession agenda;

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the Commission’s 32nd ‘Annual Report on Monitoring the Application of EU Law’, and notes that environment, transport, and internal market and services were the policy areas in 2013 in which most infringement cases remained open in 2014; also notes that in 2014 environment, health, and consumers, and mobility and transport were again the policy areas in which the highest numbers of new infringement proceedings were instituted;

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the Commission’s 32nd ‘Annual Report on Monitoring the Application of EU Law’, and notes that environment, transport, and internal market and services were the policy areas in 2013 in which most infringement cases remained open in 2014; encourages the Commission, in the interests of ensuring inter-institutional transparency, to afford Parliament better access to cases involving infringements of EU law;

Amendment 27 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the Commission’s 32nd ‘Annual Report on Monitoring the Application of EU Law’, and notes that environment, transport, and Sin~~ternal~~gle market and services were the policy areas in 2013 in which most infringement cases remained open in 2014; Stresses the importance of strengthening the effectiveness and implementation of Single Market and services legislation due to its huge potential to deliver jobs, growth and competitiveness to the EU economy;

Amendment 28 #

Marie-Christine BOUTONNET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Welcom~~Notes the Commission’s 32nd ‘Annual Report on Monitoring the Application of EU Law’, and notes that environment, transport, and internal market and services were the policy areas in 2013 in which most infringement cases remained open in 2014;

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Stresses the need to maintain a high level of environmental protection and warns against the tendency to associate frequent instances of infringements with a need to reduce the level of ambition of environmental legislation;

Amendment 3 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 8

— having regard to Rule 52 and 132(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. ~~Not~~Welcomes that according to the Annual report, ‘'the number of formal infringement procedures has decreased in the last five years’', and that, ~~according to the Commission,~~ this reflects the effectiveness of the structured dialogue with Member States via EU Pilot;

Amendment 31 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that according to the Annual report, ‘the number of formal infringement procedures has decreased in the last five years’, and that, according to the Commission, this reflects the effectiveness of the structured dialogue with Member States via EU Pilot; points out, however, that the Commission does not carry out any EU Pilot procedures when directives have been transposed late;

Amendment 32 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Recalls that this ex post evaluation does not replace the Commission's duty to monitor in an effective and timely fashion the application and implementation of EU law, and notes that Parliament could assist in reviewing the implementation of legislation through its scrutiny of the Commission;

Amendment 33 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Considers, therefore, that the decrease in recent years and the decrease expected to occur in coming years are due to the continuing fall in the number of new Commission legislative proposals;

Amendment 34 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Believes and reiterates that the increase in the number of new EU Pilot files during the period under examination, and the decrease in the number of open infringement cases, show that enforcement of EU law is neither sufficiently transparent nor subject to any real control by the complainants and the interested parties, and regrets that, despite its repeated requests, Parliament still has inadequate access to information about the EU Pilot procedure and pending cases;deleted

Amendment 35 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Believes and reiterates that the increase in the number of new EU Pilot files during the period under examination, and the decrease in the number of open infringement cases, show th~~at enforcement of EU law is neither sufficiently transparent nor subject to any real control by the complainants and the interested parties, and~~e positive impact on more efficient enforcement of EU law; regrets that, despite its repeated requests, Parliament still has inadequate access to information about the EU Pilot procedure and pending cases;

Amendment 36 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Believes and reiterates that~~Notes the increase in the number of new EU Pilot files during the period under examination, and the decrease in the number of open infringement cases, ~~show~~which may demonstrate that enforcement of EU law is n~~either~~ot sufficiently transparent nor subject to any real control by the complainants and the interested parties, and regrets that, despite its repeated requests, Parliament still has inadequate access to information about the EU Pilot procedure and pending cases;

Amendment 37 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Believes ~~and reiterates~~ that the increase in the number of new EU Pilot files during the period under examination, and the decrease in the number of open infringement cases, show that the EU Pilot system has proved its worth; reiterates, however, that the enforcement of EU law is neither sufficiently transparent nor subject to any real control by the complainants and the interested parties, and regrets that, despite its repeated requests, Parliament still has inadequate access to information about the EU Pilot procedure and pending cases;

Amendment 38 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

Amendment 39 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Points out that sincere cooperation between the Commission and Parliament is an obligation incumbent on them both; calls, therefore, for the Framework Agreement on Relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission to be revised so as to enable information about EU Pilot procedures to be supplied in the form of a (confidential) document to the parliamentary committee responsible for the interpretation and application of Union law;

Amendment 4 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

~~A. whereas Article 17 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) defines the fundamental role of the Commission as ‘guardian of the Treaties;~~deleted

Amendment 40 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Notes that in future, should Member States transposing directives into national law decide to add elements having no connection with the Union law concerned, such additions will be made visible either in the transposition act or acts or by means of the necessary documents, in order to ensure that the measures in question will be clearly communicated to the public; points out, however, that this in no way affects the Member States’ prerogative of adopting higher social and environmental standards at national level than those agreed at EU level:

Amendment 41 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Recalls that, in its resolution of 15 January 2013, Parliament called for the adoption of an EU regulation on a European law of administrative procedure under Article 298 TFEU, but that, despite the fact that the resolution was adopted by an overwhelming majority (572 in favour, 16 against, 12 abstentions), Parliament’s request was not followed up by a Commission proposal; Stresses in this regard, the importance of a thorough impact assessment before any legislative proposal is presented;

Amendment 42 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Recalls that, in its resolution of 15 January 2013, Parliament called for the adoption of an EU regulation on a European law of administrative procedure under Article 298 TFEU, but that, despite the fact that the resolution was adopted by an overwhelming majority (572 in favour, 16 against, 12 abstentions), Parliament’s request was not followed up by a Commission proposal; calls on the Commission to re-examine Parliament's resolution with a view to bringing forward a proposal for a legislative act in respect of the law of administrative procedure;

Amendment 43 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Stresses the need for Member States to provide notification in the event of their introducing national rules supplementing European directives, with a view to resolving the issue of the gold-plating of EU directives with national rules;

Amendment 44 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Deplores, more specifically, the fact that there has been no follow-up to its call for binding rules in the form of a regulation setting out the various aspects of the infringement and pre-infringement procedure – including notifications, binding time limits, the right to be heard, the obligation to state reasons, and the right for every person to have access to his or her file – so as to reinforce citizens’ rights and guarantee transparency;deleted

Amendment 45 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Deplores, more specifically, the fact that there has been no follow-up to its call for binding rules in the form of a regulation setting out the various aspects of the infringement and pre-infringement procedure – including notifications, binding time limits, the right to be heard, the obligation to state reasons, and the right for every person to have access to his or her file – so as to reinforce ~~citizens’ right~~the rights of natural or legal persons from the Member States and guarantee transparency;

Amendment 46 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Underlines the importance of regular monitoring of the application of implementation of EU law to evaluate problems, unintended consequences and elements which could be reformed, updated or removed, in line with Better Regulation principles; In this regard, calls on the Commission to report to the committee on the state of play of implementation and application of legislation relevant to the Legal Affairs committee on an annual basis, which would provide a necessary forum to enhance dialogue and address specific concerns;

Amendment 47 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Points out that in a European Union founded on the rule of law and on the certainty and predictability of laws, EU citizens must, as of right, be the first to be made aware, in a clear, accessible, transparent and timely manner (via the internet and by other means), whether and which national laws have been adopted in transposition of EU laws, and which national authorities are responsible for ensuring they are correctly implemented;

Amendment 48 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Recalls, in this context, that the Committee on Legal Affairs has set up a new Working Group on Administrative Law which has decided to elaborate an actual draft regulation on the administrative procedure of the Union’s administration as a ‘source of inspiration’ for the Commission, not in order to question the Commission’s right of initiative, but to show that such a regulation would be both useful and feasible to enactas a ‘source of inspiration’ for the Commission;

Amendment 49 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

Amendment 5 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas, according to Article 6(1) TEU, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CFREU) has the same legal value as the Treaties, and is addressed to the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union and the Member States when they are implementing Union law (Article 51(1) CFREU);deleted

Amendment 50 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Believes that the intent of this draft regulation is not to replace existing EU legislation, but rather to supplement this when there are gaps or problems arise regarding interpretation, and to bring more accessibility, clarity and coherence to the interpretation of existing rules, for the benefit of citizens and businesses and of the administration and its officials;

Amendment 51 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Believes that the intent ~~of this draft regulation~~ is not to replace existing EU legislation, but rather to consider supplementing this when there are gaps, and to bring more clarity and coherence to the interpretation of existing rules, for the benefit of citizens and businesses and of the administration and its officials; Notes, in this regard the crucial role of carrying out thorough impact assessments to help evaluate all possible policy choices before pursuing one option;

Amendment 52 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Believes that the intent of this draft regulation is not to replace existing EU legislation, but rather to supplement this when there are gaps, and to bring more clarity and coherence to the interpretation of existing rules, for the benefit of ~~citize~~persons and businesses from the Member States and of the administration and its officials;

Amendment 53 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

~~11. Calls, therefore, once more on the Commission to come forward with a legislative proposal on a European Law of administrative procedure;~~deleted

Amendment 54 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Calls, therefore, once more on the Commission to come forward with a legislative proposal on a European Llaw of administrative procedure, taking into account the steps taken so far by Parliament in this field;

Amendment 55 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Expresses its concern that the austerity measures imposed on over- indebted EU Member States, which were subsequently incorporated in acts of secondary EU law before being transposed into domestic legislation, during the period covered by the annual report under examination, and in particular the drastic cuts in public spending, have had the effect of significantly reducing the capacity of Member States' administration and judiciary to assume their responsibility correctly to implement EU law;

Amendment 56 #

Heidi HAUTALA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Welcomes the commitment by the three institutions in the Interinstitutional Agreement on better law-making to engage in a more structured cooperation to assess the application and effectiveness of EU law and their emphasis on the need to swiftly and correctly apply Union legislation in the Member States; supports the agreement's call upon the Member States to clearly identify elements of the national legislation transposing directives which are not required by Union law in order to allow citizens to know and understand the origin of such additional elements;

Amendment 57 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)

11b. Considers that Member States under economic adjustment programmes should still be able to fulfil their obligation to respect social and economic rights;

Amendment 58 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 c (new)

11c. Recalls that the EU institutions, even when they act as members of groups of international lenders ('troikas'), are bound by the Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;

Amendment 59 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 d (new)

11d. Regrets the fact that the EU relocation programme envisaged in the Council Decision 2015/1601 of 22 September 2015 establishing provisional measures in the area of international protection for the benefit of Italy and Greece has not yet adequately been followed up by the Member States in accordance with the principle of solidarity 2a; __________________ 2ahttp://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home- affairs/what-we-do/policies/european- agenda-migration/press- material/docs/state_of_play_- _relocation_en.pdf

Amendment 6 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

Amendment 60 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Calls on the Commission to make compliance with EU law a real political priority, to be pursued in close collaboration with Parliament, which has a duty (a) to keep the Commission politically accountable and (b), as co- legislator, to make sure that it is itself fully informed, with a view to constantly improving its legislative work;deleted

Amendment 61 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Calls on the Commission to make compliance with EU law a real political priority, to be pursued and evaluated in close collaboration with Parliament, which has a duty (a) to keep the Commission politically accountable and (b), as co- legislator, to make sure that it is itself fully informed, with a view to constantly improving its legislative work; Calls on the Commission to publish concerns raised by Member States during the implementation process so that they can be fully addressed; Urges the Commission to fully evaluate problems encountered by Member States with regard to compliance with EU law to better understand any possible unintended consequences of EU law or problems encountered as a result of unrealistic implementation deadlines due to 'fast track' procedures;

Amendment 62 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Recognises that the primary responsibility for the correct application of EU law lies with Member States and therefore notes the importance of enhancing transposition to avoid 'gold plating', while fully respecting the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality and the prerogatives of Member States in this regard;

Amendment 63 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)

12b. Notes the role that the introduction of sunset clauses may play in monitoring the application of EU law;

Amendment 7 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas the Framework Agreement on Relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission provides for sharing of information concerning all infringement procedures based on letters of formal notice~~, but does not cover the informal EU Pilot procedure which precedes the opening of formal infringement proceedings~~;

Amendment 8 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas the Commission invokes Article 4(3) TEU and the principle of sincere cooperation between the Union and Member States in order to enforce its obligation to exercise discretion in relation to Member States during EU Pilot procedures;

Amendment 9 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)

Db. whereas EU Pilot procedures are intended to make for closer and more coherent cooperation between the Commission and Member States so as to remedy breaches of EU law at an early stage in order, wherever possible, to avert the need to resort to formal infringement proceedings;

source: 578.824

2016/06/02 AFCO 18 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Maintains that the citizens of the Union may feel confident about Union law ~~and can benefit effectively from its correct application in the Member States only if Union law is~~only if Union law is implemented in an effective manner and established in full compliance with fundamental rights and the principles of conferral, legal certainty, equality before the law and the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality~~, as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union~~;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. URegrets that the verification of correct transposition of directives by Member States remains a problem as indicated in the annual report 2014; calls on the Member States to take all the necessary measures to respect their commitments as agreed in the Joint Political Declaration of 28.September 2011 of Member States and the Commission on explanatory documents, including by submitting correlation tables containing clear and precise information; underlines that Member States should express their political concerns at an early stage rather than postponing the timely transposition of Union law;

Amendment 11 #

Kostas CHRYSOGONOS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Underlines that it would be positive if the Member States ~~should~~ expressed their political concerns at an early stage rather than postponing the timely transposition of Union law; however, being able to express their objections on important issues is an essential element of liberty for the Member States and the citizens of Europe;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Underlines that Member States should express their political concerns at an early stage, through actively engaging in the legislative process as foreseen in the Treaties, rather than postponing the timely transposition of Union law;

Amendment 13 #

Fabio Massimo CASTALDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Reiterates its call for the establishment, within the appropriate Directorates-General (IPOL, EXPO and Research), of an autonomous system for retrospective impact assessment of the main European legislation adopted in codecision by the European Parliament, including by means of cooperation with national parliaments, as the European Parliament does not yet have timely information about the application of EU law;

Amendment 14 #

Kostas CHRYSOGONOS, Helmut SCHOLZ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls that proper and transparent monitoring of the application of Union law by the Commission is part of the Commission’s Better Regulation Agenda and ~~believes that as in~~of the latest inter-institutional agreement~~s, different institutional powers and prerogatives must be exercised as transparently as possible~~ on better law making; calls on the Member States to avoid the practice of “gold-plating” in order to reduce overregulation and administrative burdens and expects Member States to clearly indicate and document such measures; believes that unnecessary national measures added to EU legislation increase Euroscepticism and undermines EU legitimacy and actions.

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls that proper and transparent monitoring of the application of Union law by the Commission is an integral part of the Commission’s Better Regulation Agenda and believes that as in interinstitutional agreements, different institutional powers and prerogatives must be exercised as transparently as possible, always taking into account not only citizens’ interests but also applying consequently the principle of subsidiarity according to Art. 5 of the Treaty on European Union.

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Points out that EU Pilot is a working tool that has no legal status and that allows a discretionary power to the Commission that does not comply with the proper standards of transparency and accountability; considers that these shortcomings can be addressed through the adoption of a legally binding act that should clarify the legal rights and obligations of individual complainants and the Commission;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Recalls that the European Parliament, in its resolutions, called on the Commission to propose binding rules in the form of a regulation; deplores that no follow-up has been made to these resolutions and calls, therefore, once again on the Commission to propose a legal act in the form of a regulation under the legal basis of Article 298 TFEU, so as to ensure full respect for citizens’ right to good administration as set out in Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights;

Amendment 18 #

Sylvia-Yvonne KAUFMANN, Mercedes BRESSO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5c. Regrets the fact that the European Parliament does not yet receive transparent and timely information on the implementation of EU laws; recalls that, in the revised Framework Agreement on relations with Parliament, the Commission undertakes to ‘make available to Parliament summary information concerning all infringement procedures from the letter of formal notice, included, if so requested, on the issues to which the infringement procedure relates’, and expects this clause to be applied in good faith in practice;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Maintains that the citizens of the Union ~~may~~ feel confident about Union law and can benefit ~~effectively~~ from its correct application in the Member States ~~only~~ if Union law is established in full compliance with the principle of conferral and the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union;

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Maintains that the citizens of the Union may feel confident about Union law and can benefit effectively from its correct application in the Member States ~~only if~~when Union law is established in full compliance with the ~~principle of conferral and~~Treaties; recalls that the principles of conferral and subsidiarity and proportionality, asre set out in ~~Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union~~the Treaties (article 5 TEU);

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Recalls that when monitoring the application of Union law under the control of the Court of Justice of the European Union, the European Commission is ensuring the application of the treaties in accordance with Article 17 TEU;

Amendment 5 #

Fabio Massimo CASTALDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Recalls that, in accordance with the principle of legal certainty, citizens first of all should be given the opportunity to establish promptly and clearly whether national provisions have transposed EU law, which national provisions have done so, and which national authorities are responsible for their correct implementation, including for the purpose of being able to assert their rights in the courts;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the steady decrease in the number of infringement proceedings launched by the Commission under Article 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) in the years 2010- 2014, which according to the Commission 2014 Annual Report could be attributed both to the EU pilot structured dialogue with the Member States and to the significant increase in preliminary rulings under Article 267 TFEU; further welcomes the significant efforts made by the European Commission to promote compliance before the infringement proceedings which resulted in a 75% resolution rate in 2014;

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Welcomes the recent efforts made by the Commission to ensure better access to information on the application of Union law for EU citizens and businesses by launching the new web section ‘Applying Union law’;

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Recalls that it is important for both the Member States and the Commission to respect their own roles and responsibilities, the former with regard to the timely and accurate transposition of directives and the proper application of EU law, and the latter with regard to the efficient monitoring ~~of the application~~and enforcement of EU law;

Amendment 9 #