Procedure completed
2015/2326(INI) Monitoring the application of Union law. 2014 annual report
Lead committee dossier: JURI/8/05074
Legal Basis RoP 052
| Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
|---|---|---|---|
| Opinion | AFCO | ANNEMANS Gerolf (ENF) | |
| Opinion | ECON | TREMOSA I BALCELLS Ramon (ALDE) | |
| Opinion | EMPL | KOZŁOWSKA-RAJEWICZ Agnieszka (EPP) | |
| Opinion | ENVI | ||
| Opinion | IMCO | ||
| Opinion | INTA | ||
| Opinion | ITRE | ||
| Lead | JURI | HAUTALA Heidi (Verts/ALE) | KAUFMANN Sylvia-Yvonne (S&D), DZHAMBAZKI Angel (ECR), MARINHO E PINTO António (ALDE) |
| Opinion | PETI | WIKSTRÖM Cecilia (ALDE) |
Legal Basis RoP 052
Subjects
Activites
-
2016/10/06
Debate in Parliament
- Debate in Parliament
-
T8-0385/2016
summary
The European Parliament adopted by 490 votes to 61, with 57 abstentions, a resolution following the annual report of 2014 on monitoring the application of Union law. Members stressed the Commission’s essential role in overseeing the application of EU law. They called on the Commission to continue its active role in developing various tools to improve EU law implementation, in the Member States, and to provide data, in addition to that on the implementation of EU directives, on implementation of EU regulations in its next annual report. Role of Parliament and stakeholders: while recalling that the role of monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of EU law lies with the Commission, Members acknowledged that Parliament also has a crucial role to play in this regard by exercising political oversight of the Commission’s enforcement actions. They suggested that it could contribute further to the timely and accurate transposition of EU legislation by sharing its expertise in the legislative decision-making process through pre-established links with national parliaments. Parliament also stressed the important role of the social partners, civil society organisations and other stakeholders in creating legislation and in monitoring and reporting shortcomings in the transposition and application of EU law by the Member States. It appreciated the importance attributed in the Commission’s annual report to petitions submitted by citizens, businesses and civil society organisations. Better enforcement: Parliament welcomed the fact that the new Interinstitutional Agreement on better law-making contains provisions that aim to improve the implementation and application of EU law and to encourage more structured cooperation in this respect. It supported the call, expressed in the agreement, for better identification of national measures that are not strictly related to Union legislation (a practice known as ‘gold plating’). Members called on the European institutions to agree on more suitable timetables for the implementation of regulations and directives, whereby due account is taken of necessary scrutiny and consultation periods. Candidate countries: Members felt that Parliament itself should play a stronger role in the analysis of how accession countries and countries with association agreements with the European Union comply with EU law, and provide those countries with suitable assistance. It is suggested that Parliament should draft proper reports, not simply resolutions, on all candidate countries in response to the annual progress reports released by the Commission. More transparency: Parliament noted 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 usefulness, and has had a positive impact. It reiterated, however, that the enforcement of EU law is neither sufficiently transparent nor subject to any real control by the complainants and the interested parties. Members regretted that, despite repeated requests, Parliament still has inadequate access to information about the EU Pilot procedure and pending cases. Pointing out that sincere cooperation between the Commission and Parliament is an obligation incumbent on them both, Parliament called 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. In this context, the resolution also underlined that the Committee on Legal Affairs has set up a new Working Group on Administrative Law, which could be a source of inspiration for the Commission, to show that a regulation on the administrative procedure of the Union’s administration would be both useful and feasible to enact. The Commission was asked to present a legislative proposal on a European law of administrative procedure and to make compliance with EU law a real political priority, to be pursued in close collaboration with Parliament.
-
2016/09/09
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
-
A8-0262/2016
summary
The Committee on Legal Affairs adopted the own-initiative report by Heidi HAUTALA (Greens/EFA, FI) following the annual report of 2014 on monitoring the application of Union law. Members stressed the Commission’s essential role in overseeing the application of EU law. They called on the Commission to continue its active role in developing various tools to improve EU law implementation, in the Member States, and to provide data, in addition to that on the implementation of EU directives, on implementation of EU regulations in its next annual report. Role of Parliament and stakeholders: while recalling that the role of monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of EU law lies with the Commission, Members acknowledged that Parliament also has a crucial role to play in this regard by exercising political oversight of the Commission’s enforcement actions. They suggested that it could contribute further to the timely and accurate transposition of EU legislation by sharing its expertise in the legislative decision-making process through pre-established links with national parliaments. The report also stressed the important role of the social partners, civil society organisations and other stakeholders in creating legislation and in monitoring and reporting shortcomings in the transposition and application of EU law by the Member States. It called on the European institutions to agree on more suitable timetables for the implementation of regulations and directives, whereby due account is taken of necessary scrutiny and consultation periods. Candidate countries: Members felt that Parliament itself should play a stronger role in the analysis of how accession countries and countries with association agreements with the European Union comply with EU law, and provide those countries with suitable assistance. More transparency: the report noted 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 usefulness, and has had a positive impact. It reiterated, however, that the enforcement of EU law is neither sufficiently transparent nor subject to any real control by the complainants and the interested parties. Members regretted that, despite repeated requests, Parliament still has inadequate access to information about the EU Pilot procedure and pending cases. Pointing out that sincere cooperation between the Commission and Parliament is an obligation incumbent on them both, Members called 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. In this context, the report also underlined that the Committee on Legal Affairs has set up a new Working Group on Administrative Law, which could be a source of inspiration for the Commission, to show that a regulation on the administrative procedure of the Union’s administration would be both useful and feasible to enact. The Commission was asked to present a legislative proposal on a European law of administrative procedure and to make compliance with EU law a real political priority, to be pursued in close collaboration with Parliament.
-
A8-0262/2016
summary
-
2016/09/05
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
-
2015/11/26
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
-
2015/07/09
Non-legislative basic document published
-
COM(2015)0329
summary
PURPOSE: to present the 2014 annual report on monitoring the application of Union law. CONTENT: this annual report from the Commission reviews the Member States’ performance on key aspects of the application of EU law and highlights the main enforcement policy developments of 2014. Detecting and resolving problems: before infringement proceedings are started, the Commission first opens bilateral discussions with the Member State concerned via EU Pilot (a Commission initiative aimed at asking Member States to answer questions and to find solutions to problems related to the application of EU law): 777 EU Pilot investigations were launched in 2014 (in 2013, 1023 were started). Environment, energy, and mobility/transport were the three policy areas with the most potential infringements. 3715 new complaints were registered in 2014. The Member States primarily concerned were Italy, Spain and Germany. By way of petitions and questions, in 2014 the European Parliament alerted the Commission to shortcomings in the way Member States implement and apply EU law. These include the fields of environment, transport, health and consumers and taxation. In 2014, the number fell back to its 2011 level: 1208 new files were opened (a fall of approximately 20%). Of the 1336 processed EU Pilot files in 2014, the Commission closed 996. This is a 75% resolution rate for the Member States, up from 70% in 2013. Infringement procedure Pre-litigation phase: in 2014, the Commission launched 893 new procedures by sending a letter of formal notice. The overall decrease in the number of formal infringement procedures in the last five years (from nearly 2900 to 1347) reflects the effectiveness of structured dialogue via the EU Pilot in resolving potential infringements quickly, to the benefit of people and businesses. Statistics confirm that Member States make serious efforts to settle their infringements before the Court hands down its ruling. Referrals to the Court of Justice: the Court delivered 38 judgments under Article 258 TFEU in 2014, of which 35 (92%) were in favour of the Commission. Environment (10), taxation (8) and enterprise and industry (5) were the subject of the most judgments delivered by the Court during 2014. Member States frequently take the necessary measures to comply with the judgment of the Court promptly. In the coming year, the Commission aims to strengthen cooperation with Member States to prevent infringements from arising and speed up correction of breaches of EU law where necessary. Transposition of directives: late transposition of directives by Member States remains a persistent problem. Combating late transposition is therefore a long-established priority for the Commission. There were fewer directives to transpose in 2014 than in the previous year i.e. 67 compared with 74 in 2013) but more than in 2012 (56). However, there was a significant increase in new late transposition infringements in 2014 compared with the previous year: 585 new late transposition infringements were launched in 2014 compared with 478 in 2013. The rising number of infringements relating to late transposition shows that prompt transposition continues to be a challenge in numerous Member States and requires an effective response by the Commission. Timely and correct transposition of EU law into national legislation and a clear domestic legislative framework should be a priority for the Member States. Once directives are adopted, the Commission will use the period before the transposition deadline expires to focus on providing assistance to Member States on implementation. After the transposition deadline expires, the Commission will strengthen enforcement of EU law based on structured and systematic transposition and conformity checks of national legislation. Policy developments: in 2014, the Commission continued its efforts to inform people better about their rights under EU law and to ensure that they find suitable mechanisms of redress, if they consider these rights have been breached. These efforts focused on providing better access to information on the application of EU law, on problem-solving instruments (such as SOLVIT) for EU citizens and businesses in Member States and on improving the handling of complaints from EU citizens and businesses about breaches of EU law. The Commission also provides implementation plans to make it easier to apply the Union law effectively and on time, while fully recognising that applying the Union law is the responsibility of Member States. The implementation plans are drafted at an early stage when drafting new legislation. Better Regulation Agenda: the Commission will focus on ensuring the clarity, operability and enforceability of EU legislation. This objective cannot be achieved without an active contribution from all parties involved in the EU’s legislative process. Increased attention will be paid to aspects of implementation, management and enforcement, both when the Commission drafts proposals and throughout the legislative process. Lastly, with its Regulatory Fitness and Performance Programme (REFIT), and Communication of June 2014, the Commission set out an ambitious agenda with almost 200 individual actions to simplify and reduce the regulatory burden, repeal existing regulation and withdraw proposals for new regulation.
- DG {'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/secretariat_general/index_en.htm', 'title': 'Secretariat-General'}, TIMMERMANS Frans
-
COM(2015)0329
summary
Documents
- Non-legislative basic document published: COM(2015)0329
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A8-0262/2016
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T8-0385/2016
| Amendments | Dossier |
| 272 |
2015/2326(INI)
2015/12/10
EMPL
66 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 Amendment 10 #
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 #
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 #
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;
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
Amendment 15 #
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 #
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 #
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
Amendment 21 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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
Amendment 3 #
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
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Urges the Commission, when drafting and assessing legislation, to take
Amendment 32 #
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
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Urges the Commission, when drafting
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6.
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Welcomes the efforts made by the
Amendment 48 #
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
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7.
Amendment 52 #
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 #
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 Amendment 57 #
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
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 #
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 #
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
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 Amendment 61 #
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
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 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.
Amendment 64 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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
Amendment 8 #
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
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
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
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
Amendment C #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Points out that the number of new late transposition
Amendment D #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Urges the Commission, when drafting and assessing legislation, to take
Amendment E #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7.
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
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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
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 #
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 request
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
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 #
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
Amendment 23 #
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 effectively; considers that the EU itself should seek gradually to cut the size of its rulebook by up to half and to concentrate on areas where it enjoys exclusive competence, focusing within shared- competence fields solely on policies that are genuinely more effective when conducted at European level rather than at national level; points out that the EU cannot opt out of periodic assessments of the true impact of its legislation and of drawing conclusions from them, on an objective basis, in order either to maintain legislation, if not enlarge upon it, or to shift its focus or, in line with the subsidiarity principle, to return competence for it to Member States;
Amendment 24 #
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;
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 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;
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;
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;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Underlines the importance of simpl
Amendment 33 #
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;
Amendment 34 #
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 #
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 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;
Amendment 37 #
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;
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 #
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 #
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
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
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
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 #
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
Amendment 11 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes
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
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Points out that the Late Payments Directive is still not properly implemented
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Points out that the Late Payments Directive is still not implemented well in 11 Member States, and
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 #
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
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Recalls that
Amendment 23 #
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
Amendment 24 #
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
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 27 #
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
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Recalls that
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 #
Draft opinion Paragraph -1 b (new) 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 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 Amendment 34 #
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
Amendment 36 #
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
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 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Considers that the effectiveness of EU law is systematically undermined by its unsatisfactory application by Member States; notes that th
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
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7.
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Is very concerned
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Is very concerned by the fact that the
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
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
Amendment 47 #
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 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Considers that the effectiveness of EU law is systematically undermined by
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 Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Calls on the European
Amendment 55 #
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.
Amendment 59 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 9.
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Considers that the effectiveness of EU law is
Amendment 60 #
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
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 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 10. Is of the opinion that financial penalties for non-compliance with EU law should
Amendment 65 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 10. Is of the opinion that financial penalties for non-compliance with EU law should
Amendment 66 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 10. Is of the opinion that financial penalties for non-compliance with EU law should
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 10. Is of the opinion that financial penalties for non-compliance with EU law should
Amendment 68 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 10. Is of the opinion that financial penalties for non-compliance with EU
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 10. Is of the opinion that financial penalties
Amendment 7 #
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
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 #
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 Amendment 73 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 11 11. S
Amendment 74 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 11 11.
Amendment 75 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 11 11. Supports the creation of a subcommittee
Amendment 76 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 11 11.
Amendment 77 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 11 11. Supports the creation of a
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 th
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Considers that the effectiveness of EU law is systematically undermined by its unsatisfactory a
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 Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2.
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 #
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.
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Believes that Parliament
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
Amendment 24 #
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
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4.
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.
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 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
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6.
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Believes
Amendment 38 #
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; calls on the Commission, in this regard, to ensure greater transparency in respect of information on the EU Pilot procedure, and on pending cases;
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 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
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
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 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
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
Amendment 49 #
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
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B 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
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Believes that the intent
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
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 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
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) Amendment 56 #
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) Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 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
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
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
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Underlines that it would be positive if the Member States
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 #
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 #
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
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 #
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
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
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 #
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
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Reiterates the provision in the recently adopted IIA on Better Law- Making that calls on Member States when transposing EU directives into national law where they choose to add elements that are in no way related to that Union legislation to make these additions identifiable either through the transposing act or through associated documents;
source: 584.092
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
2019-07-06Show (29) Changes | Timetravel
| activities |
|
| commission |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/5 |
|
| committees/5 |
|
| committees/6 |
|
| committees/6 |
|
| committees/7 |
|
| committees/7 |
|
| committees/8 |
|
| committees/8 |
|
| docs |
|
| events |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure/Modified legal basis |
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150New
Rules of Procedure EP 159 |
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
JURI/8/05074New
|
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 54
|
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
|
| procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
2016-11-26Show (13) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1/committees/0/date |
2016-04-20T00:00:00
|
| activities/1/committees/0/rapporteur |
|
| activities/1/committees/7/shadows/1 |
|
| activities/2 |
|
| activities/3 |
|
| activities/4/date |
Old
2016-07-04T00:00:00New
2016-10-06T00:00:00 |
| activities/4/docs |
|
| activities/4/type |
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single readingNew
Debate in Parliament |
| committees/0/date |
2016-04-20T00:00:00
|
| committees/0/rapporteur |
|
| committees/7/shadows/1 |
|
| procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
|
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Procedure completed |
2016-04-21Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1/committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
2016-03-17Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/2 |
|
2016-03-08Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/docs/0/celexid |
CELEX:52015DC0329:EN
|
2016-01-30Show (4) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1/committees/0/date |
2015-12-17T00:00:00
|
| activities/1/committees/0/rapporteur |
|
| committees/0/date |
2015-12-17T00:00:00
|
| committees/0/rapporteur |
|
2015-12-16Show (4) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1/committees/7/date |
2015-12-03T00:00:00
|
| activities/1/committees/7/rapporteur |
|
| committees/7/date |
2015-12-03T00:00:00
|
| committees/7/rapporteur |
|
2015-12-11Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/docs/0/text |
|
2015-12-01Show (4) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1 |
|
| committees/6/shadows/1 |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
JURI/8/05074
|
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Preparatory phase in ParliamentNew
Awaiting committee decision |
2015-11-28Show (5) Changes
| activities |
|
| committees |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure |
|