BETA


2016/2018(INI) Interpretation and implementation of the interinstitutional agreement on better law-making

Progress: Procedure completed

RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Committee Opinion INTA BENDTSEN Bendt (icon: PPE PPE) Emma McCLARKIN (icon: ECR ECR), Marietje SCHAAKE (icon: ALDE ALDE)
Committee Opinion ECON GUALTIERI Roberto (icon: S&D S&D) Ashley FOX (icon: ECR ECR), Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS (icon: ALDE ALDE)
Committee Opinion EMPL MCINTYRE Anthea (icon: ECR ECR) Jean LAMBERT (icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE), Dominique MARTIN (icon: ENF ENF), Gabriele ZIMMER (icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL)
Committee Opinion ENVI VĂLEAN Adina-Ioana (icon: PPE PPE) Jo LEINEN (icon: S&D S&D)
Committee Opinion PETI MARIAS Notis (icon: ECR ECR) Alberto CIRIO (icon: PPE PPE), Laurenţiu REBEGA (icon: ENF ENF)
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54, RoP 58

Events

2018/11/16
   EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2018/05/30
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2018/05/30
   EP - Decision by Parliament
Details

The European Parliament adopted by 497 votes to 76, with 111 abstentions, a resolution on the interpretation and implementation of the Interinstitutional Agreement on better law-making.

Members welcomed the progress made during the first year and a half of implementation of the new Interinstitutional Agreement which entered into force on 13 April 2016. They called for further steps to be taken to fully implement the agreement, the objective of which is to establish more open and transparent relations between the three institutions with a view to delivering high-quality legislation in the interest of EU citizens.

Programming : Parliament welcomed the three Institutions’ agreement to reinforce the Union’s annual and multiannual programming by means of a more structured procedure with a precise timeline. It considered that priority treatment for certain legislative files agreed upon in joint declarations should not be used to exert undue pressure on the colegislators and that greater speed should not be prioritised at the expense of legislative quality.

The Commission should present more inclusive, more detailed and more reliable Work Programmes and impact assessments should always encompass a thorough and rigorous analysis of the compliance of a proposal with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality and specify its European added value . Parliament encouraged developing efficient legislation geared to developing employment protection and European competitiveness with a particular focus on small and medium-sized enterprises, across all sectors of the economy.

Members considered it essential that parliamentary committees are fully consulted throughout the joint declaration preparation and implementation process and stressed the importance of transparent cooperation in good faith between Parliament, the Council and the Commission. In this regard, it reminded the Commission of its obligation to respond promptly to legislative and non-legislative own initiative reports.

Tools for better law-making : Parliament underlined that impact assessments may inform but must never be a substitute for political decisions or cause undue delays to the legislative process. Particular attention must be paid to the potential impacts on those stakeholders who have least opportunity to present their concerns to decision-makers, including SMEs, civil society, trade unions and others who do not have the advantage of easy access to the Institutions. They must pay equal attention to the evaluation of social, health and environmental consequences in particular, and that the impact on the fundamental rights of citizens and on equality between women and men must be assessed.

Members recalled that the independence, transparency and objectiveness of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board and its work must be safeguarded and that the members of the Board should not be subjected to any political control. All of the Board’s opinions, including negative ones, shall be made public. In addition, the Commission should clarify how it intends to assess the cost of non-Europe , including the cost to producers, consumers, workers, administrations and the environment of the lack of harmonised legislation at EU level.

All parliamentary committees should review Commission impact assessments and the Parliament’s ex-ante impact assessment analysis as early as possible in the legislative process.

As regards legislative instruments , Members stressed the need for consistency between the explanatory memorandum and the impact assessment related to the same proposal. They stressed that the choice of the legal basis for a Commission proposal should be based on objective grounds subject to judicial review. However, Parliament, as co-legislator, should be able to amend the legal basis on the basis of its interpretation of the Treaties.

Delegated and implementing acts : Members reiterated that it is the competence of the legislator to decide, within the limits of the Treaties, and in the light of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, whether and to what extent to use delegated acts and whether and to what extent to use implementing acts. They welcomed the Commission’s effort to comply with the deadline for proposing the alignment of all basic acts which still refer to the regulatory procedure with scrutiny (RPS). However, they expressed concern that the Council is trying almost systematically to replace delegated acts with implementing acts.

Members recalled that politically significant elements, such as Union lists or registers of products or substances, should remain an integral part of a basic act and should therefore only be amended by means of delegated acts.

Transparency and coordination of the legislative process : Members called on the Commission to make available and, when feasible, public, all relevant documents relating to legislative proposals, including non-papers, to both legislators at the same time. The flow of information from the Council should also be improved. The Council, as a general rule, hold all its meetings in public, as does the European Parliament.

Parliament proposed that the Council meets Parliament at least once during the consultation procedure to allow Parliament to present and explain the reasons for the approved amendments, and the Council to state its position on each of them.

The three EU institutions are reminded that further progress is needed in establishing a dedicated joint database on the state of play of legislative files.

Members called on the other institutions to comply with the Treaties and regulations and to observe the relevant jurisprudence in order to ensure that Parliament is immediately, fully and accurately informed during the whole life-cycle of international agreements , without undermining the EU’s negotiation position, and is accurately informed and involved in the implementation stage of the agreements.

Implementation and application of EU law : when the Member States, in the context of transposing directives into national law, choose to add elements that are in no way related to that Union legislation, such additions should be made identifiable either through the transposing act(s) or through associated documents. In order to reduce the problems related to ‘gold-plating’ , the three Institutions should commit to adopting EU legislation which is clear and easily transposable.

Simplification : Members welcomed the commitment for a more frequent use of the legislative technique of recasting . They considered that this technique should constitute the ordinary legislative technique as an invaluable tool to achieve simplification. However, in the event of a complete policy overhaul, the Commission should, instead of using the recasting technique, put forward a proposal for an entirely new legal act repealing existing legislation, so that the co-legislators can engage in broad and effective political discussions and see their prerogatives as enshrined in the Treaties fully preserved.

Parliament also stressed that the reduction of administrative burdens does not necessarily mean deregulation and that, in any event, it must not compromise fundamental rights and environmental, social, labour, health and safety, consumer protection, gender-equality or animal welfare standards.

Documents
2018/05/30
   EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2018/05/28
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2018/05/15
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary
Details

The Committee on Legal Affairs, together with the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, adopted an own-initiative report prepared by Pavel SVOBODA (EPP, CZ) and Richard CORBETT (S&D, UK) on the interpretation and implementation of the Interinstitutional Agreement on better law-making.

Members welcomed the progress achieved and the experience gained in the first year and a half of the application of the new Interinstitutional Agreement which entered into force on 13 April 2016 and encouraged the Institutions to undertake further efforts to fully implement the agreement, which is an interinstitutional exercise to improve the quality of EU legislation.

Programming : Members welcomed the three Institutions’ agreement to reinforce the Union’s annual and multiannual programming by means of a more structured procedure with a precise timeline. They considered that priority treatment for certain legislative files agreed upon in joint declarations should not be used to exert undue pressure on the colegislators and that greater speed should not be prioritised at the expense of legislative quality.

Members called on the Commission to present more inclusive, more detailed and more reliable Work Programmes and impact assessments should always encompass a thorough and rigorous analysis of the compliance of a proposal with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality and specify its European added value. They encouraged developing efficient legislation geared to developing employment protection and European competitiveness with a particular focus on small and medium-sized enterprises, across all sectors of the economy.

Members considered it essential that parliamentary committees are fully consulted throughout the joint declaration preparation and implementation process.

Tools for better law-making : the report underlined that impact assessments may inform but must never be a substitute for political decisions or cause undue delays to the legislative process. Particular attention must be paid to the potential impacts on those stakeholders who have least opportunity to present their concerns to decision-makers, including SMEs, civil society, trade unions and others who do not have the advantage of easy access to the Institutions. Members considered that impact assessments must pay equal attention to the evaluation of social, health and environmental consequences in particular, and that the impact on the fundamental rights of citizens and on equality between women and men must be assessed.

Members recalled that the independence, transparency and objectiveness of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board and its work must be safeguarded and that the members of the Board should not be subjected to any political control. All of the Board’s opinions, including negative ones, shall be made public. In addition, the Commission should clarify how it intends to assess the cost of non-Europe , including the cost to producers, consumers, workers, administrations and the environment of the lack of harmonised legislation at EU level.

Better regulation tools : the report stressed that impact assessments should never replace political decisions or delay the legislative process. They should pay particular attention to the potential effects on stakeholders, including SMEs, civil society, trade unions and others who do not have easy access to institutions. They should pay equal attention to the assessment of social, health and environmental consequences, in particular, and assess the impact on the fundamental rights of citizens and on equality between men and women.

Members reiterated the need to protect the independence, transparency and objectivity of the regulatory review committee and its work, and that its members should not be subject to political control. All opinions of the Committee, including negative assessments, should be made public. In addition, the Commission should clarify how it intends to assess the cost of non-Europe, including the cost to producers, consumers, workers, administrations and the environment of the lack of harmonised legislation at EU level.

Delegated and implementing acts : Members reiterated that it is the competence of the legislator to decide, within the limits of the Treaties, and in the light of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, whether and to what extent to use delegated acts and whether and to what extent to use implementing acts. They welcomed the Commission’s effort to comply with the deadline for proposing the alignment of all basic acts which still refer to the regulatory procedure with scrutiny (RPS).

However, they expressed concern that the Council is trying almost systematically to replace delegated acts with implementing acts.

Members recalled that politically significant elements, such as Union lists or registers of products or substances, should remain an integral part of a basic act and should therefore only be amended by means of delegated acts.

Transparency and coordination of the legislative process : Members called on the Commission to make available and, when feasible, public, all relevant documents relating to legislative proposals, including non-papers, to both legislators at the same time. The flow of information from the Council should also be improved.

The Council should, as a general rule, hold all its meetings in public, as does the European Parliament.

The report proposed that the Council meets Parliament at least once during the consultation procedure to allow Parliament to present and explain the reasons for the approved amendments, and the Council to state its position on each of them.

The three EU institutions are reminded that further progress is needed in establishing a dedicated joint database on the state of play of legislative files.

Members called on the other institutions to comply with the Treaties and regulations and to observe the relevant jurisprudence in order to ensure that Parliament is immediately, fully and accurately informed during the whole life-cycle of international agreements , without undermining the EU’s negotiation position, and is accurately informed and involved in the implementation stage of the agreements. They also called for the establishment and formalisation of a financial dialogue on the adoption and coherence of European positions in the run-up to major international negotiations.

Implementation and application of EU law : the report underlined the importance of the principle that when the Member States, in the context of transposing directives into national law, choose to add elements that are in no way related to that Union legislation, such additions should be made identifiable either through the transposing act(s) or through associated documents. In order to reduce the problems related to ‘gold-plating’ , the three Institutions should commit to adopting EU legislation which is clear and easily transposable.

Simplification : Members welcomed the commitment for a more frequent use of the legislative technique of recasting . They considered that this technique should constitute the ordinary legislative technique as an invaluable tool to achieve simplification.

However, in the event of a complete policy overhaul, the Commission should, instead of using the recasting technique, put forward a proposal for an entirely new legal act repealing existing legislation, so that the co-legislators can engage in broad and effective political discussions and see their prerogatives as enshrined in the Treaties fully preserved.

Members also stressed that the reduction of administrative burdens does not necessarily mean deregulation and that, in any event, it must not compromise fundamental rights and environmental, social, labour, health and safety, consumer protection, gender-equality or animal welfare standards.

Documents
2018/04/25
   EP - Vote in committee
2018/03/28
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2018/03/21
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2018/02/21
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2018/01/23
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2017/11/24
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2017/01/25
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2016/07/12
   EP - GUALTIERI Roberto (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in ECON
2016/06/21
   EP - MCINTYRE Anthea (ECR) appointed as rapporteur in EMPL
2016/04/29
   EP - MARIAS Notis (ECR) appointed as rapporteur in PETI
2016/03/10
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament
2016/03/10
   EP - Referral to joint committee announced in Parliament
2016/02/17
   EP - VĂLEAN Adina-Ioana (PPE) appointed as rapporteur in ENVI
2016/02/15
   EP - BENDTSEN Bendt (PPE) appointed as rapporteur in INTA

Documents

Votes

A8-0170/2018 - Pavel Svoboda et Richard Corbett - § 10/2 30/05/2018 13:11:56.000 #

2018/05/30 Outcome: +: 395, -: 247, 0: 37
FR PL BE ES CZ BG IT NL FI DK EL SK MT LT HR HU LV IE CY RO DE LU EE AT ?? PT SI SE GB
Total
71
48
20
48
19
16
65
25
11
7
16
12
6
9
11
18
8
10
5
27
85
6
6
18
1
20
3
19
67
icon: PPE PPE
188

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Cyprus PPE

1

Luxembourg PPE

3

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

United Kingdom PPE

2
icon: ALDE ALDE
62

Bulgaria ALDE

3

Denmark ALDE

For (1)

1
2

Croatia ALDE

2

Latvia ALDE

1

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Romania ALDE

3

Germany ALDE

3

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

3

Austria ALDE

For (1)

1

Portugal ALDE

1

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1

United Kingdom ALDE

1
icon: ECR ECR
63

Czechia ECR

2

Bulgaria ECR

2

Italy ECR

2

Netherlands ECR

2
2

Greece ECR

For (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

1

Croatia ECR

For (1)

1

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1

Romania ECR

2

Germany ECR

Against (1)

4
icon: ENF ENF
33

Poland ENF

2

Belgium ENF

For (1)

1

Netherlands ENF

4

Germany ENF

Against (1)

1

United Kingdom ENF

Against (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
48

Czechia GUE/NGL

2

Italy GUE/NGL

3

Netherlands GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

3

Finland GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1
4

Cyprus GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

2

Sweden GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1
icon: NI NI
19

France NI

2

Hungary NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Germany NI

Against (1)

2

NI

For (1)

1

United Kingdom NI

For (1)

4
icon: EFDD EFDD
42

Poland EFDD

1

Czechia EFDD

Against (1)

1

Lithuania EFDD

For (1)

1

Germany EFDD

For (1)

1

Sweden EFDD

2
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
50

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Italy Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2

Finland Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Croatia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Hungary Verts/ALE

2

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Slovenia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

6
icon: S&D S&D
172

Belgium S&D

3

Czechia S&D

4

Netherlands S&D

3

Finland S&D

Against (1)

1

Denmark S&D

2

Greece S&D

2
3

Malta S&D

3

Lithuania S&D

1

Croatia S&D

2

Hungary S&D

Abstain (1)

4

Latvia S&D

Against (1)

1

Ireland S&D

Against (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

2

Luxembourg S&D

Against (1)

1

Estonia S&D

Against (1)

1

Slovenia S&D

Against (1)

1

A8-0170/2018 - Pavel Svoboda et Richard Corbett - Considérant W 30/05/2018 13:15:35.000 #

2018/05/30 Outcome: +: 349, -: 292, 0: 43
PL BG CZ BE LT NL SK HR RO LV FI HU LU EE DK ?? IE MT PT SI ES AT CY IT DE GB EL FR SE
Total
48
16
19
20
10
26
12
11
28
8
12
18
6
6
7
1
10
6
21
3
48
18
5
65
84
68
16
71
19
icon: PPE PPE
190

Luxembourg PPE

3

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Cyprus PPE

1

United Kingdom PPE

2
icon: ALDE ALDE
63

Bulgaria ALDE

3

Croatia ALDE

2

Romania ALDE

3

Latvia ALDE

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

3

Denmark ALDE

For (1)

1

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Portugal ALDE

1

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1

Austria ALDE

For (1)

1

Germany ALDE

3

United Kingdom ALDE

1
icon: ECR ECR
64

Bulgaria ECR

2

Czechia ECR

2

Lithuania ECR

1

Netherlands ECR

2

Croatia ECR

For (1)

1

Romania ECR

2

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1
2

Italy ECR

2

Greece ECR

Against (1)

1
icon: EFDD EFDD
42

Poland EFDD

1

Czechia EFDD

Abstain (1)

1

Lithuania EFDD

For (1)

1

Germany EFDD

Abstain (1)

1

Sweden EFDD

2
icon: NI NI
19

Hungary NI

2

NI

For (1)

1

Germany NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

United Kingdom NI

For (1)

4

France NI

Abstain (1)

2
icon: ENF ENF
33

Poland ENF

2

Belgium ENF

Against (1)

1

Netherlands ENF

4

Germany ENF

Against (1)

1

United Kingdom ENF

Abstain (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
48

Czechia GUE/NGL

2

Netherlands GUE/NGL

Against (1)

3

Finland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
4

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Italy GUE/NGL

3

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
50

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Lithuania Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2

Croatia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Hungary Verts/ALE

2

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Italy Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

For (1)

6
icon: S&D S&D
173

Czechia S&D

4

Belgium S&D

3

Lithuania S&D

1

Netherlands S&D

3
3

Croatia S&D

2

Latvia S&D

Against (1)

1

Finland S&D

2

Luxembourg S&D

Against (1)

1

Estonia S&D

Against (1)

1

Denmark S&D

2

Ireland S&D

Against (1)

1

Malta S&D

3

Slovenia S&D

Against (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

2

Greece S&D

Against (1)

2

A8-0170/2018 - Pavel Svoboda et Richard Corbett - Résolution 30/05/2018 13:15:50.000 #

2018/05/30 Outcome: +: 497, 0: 111, -: 76
DE IT ES RO FR PL AT HU NL BG BE SE CZ PT HR SK LT GB FI LV IE EE LU MT DK SI ?? CY EL
Total
86
65
47
28
70
48
18
18
26
16
20
19
19
21
11
12
10
68
12
8
10
6
6
6
7
3
1
5
16
icon: PPE PPE
193

United Kingdom PPE

2

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

3

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Cyprus PPE

1
icon: S&D S&D
172

Netherlands S&D

3

Croatia S&D

2

Lithuania S&D

1

Latvia S&D

1

Ireland S&D

For (1)

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Malta S&D

Abstain (1)

3

Denmark S&D

2

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

2

Greece S&D

2
icon: ALDE ALDE
61

Germany ALDE

3

Romania ALDE

3

Austria ALDE

For (1)

1

Bulgaria ALDE

3

Portugal ALDE

1

Croatia ALDE

2

United Kingdom ALDE

1

Latvia ALDE

1

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

3

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Denmark ALDE

For (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
50

Italy Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Hungary Verts/ALE

2

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Croatia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

1

Slovenia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
64

Germany ECR

For (1)

4

Italy ECR

2

Romania ECR

For (1)

Abstain (1)

2

Netherlands ECR

2

Bulgaria ECR

2

Czechia ECR

2

Croatia ECR

Abstain (1)

1

Slovakia ECR

3

Lithuania ECR

Abstain (1)

1

Finland ECR

Against (1)

2

Latvia ECR

Abstain (1)

1

Denmark ECR

2

Greece ECR

Abstain (1)

1
icon: EFDD EFDD
42

Germany EFDD

Against (1)

1

Poland EFDD

1

Sweden EFDD

2

Czechia EFDD

Against (1)

1

Lithuania EFDD

For (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
48

Italy GUE/NGL

3

Netherlands GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

3

Sweden GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

Czechia GUE/NGL

2

Portugal GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

4

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1
4

Denmark GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2
icon: NI NI
19

Germany NI

Against (1)

2

France NI

2

Hungary NI

2

United Kingdom NI

Abstain (1)

4

NI

For (1)

1
icon: ENF ENF
33

Germany ENF

Against (1)

1

Poland ENF

2

Netherlands ENF

4

Belgium ENF

Against (1)

1

United Kingdom ENF

Against (1)

1
AmendmentsDossier
328 2016/2018(INI)
2016/11/22 PETI 28 amendments...
source: 594.137
2017/10/24 ECON 23 amendments...
source: 612.224
2018/01/30 INTA 80 amendments...
source: 616.794
2018/02/06 ENVI 44 amendments...
source: 618.061
2018/02/13 JURI, AFCO 142 amendments...
source: 616.860
2018/03/27 EMPL 11 amendments...
source: 619.263

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Legal Affairs
committee
JURI
rapporteur
shadows
committees/1
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Constitutional Affairs
committee
AFCO
rapporteur
shadows
docs/0/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE582.235&secondRef=02
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/PETI-AD-582235_EN.html
docs/1/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE609.658&secondRef=02
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ECON-AD-609658_EN.html
docs/2/docs/0/url
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE615.497
docs/3
date
2018-02-21T00:00:00
docs
title: PE615.264
committee
INTA
type
Committee opinion
body
EP
docs/3
date
2018-02-12T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE616.860 title: PE616.860
type
Amendments tabled in committee
body
EP
docs/4
date
2018-02-21T00:00:00
docs
title: PE615.264
committee
INTA
type
Committee opinion
body
EP
docs/4
date
2018-03-21T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE615.308&secondRef=02 title: PE615.308
committee
ENVI
type
Committee opinion
body
EP
docs/4/docs/0/url
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE615.264&secondRef=02
docs/4/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE615.308&secondRef=02
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ENVI-AD-615308_EN.html
docs/5
date
2018-03-21T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE615.308&secondRef=02 title: PE615.308
committee
ENVI
type
Committee opinion
body
EP
docs/5
date
2018-03-28T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE613.586&secondRef=02 title: PE613.586
committee
EMPL
type
Committee opinion
body
EP
docs/5/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE613.586&secondRef=02
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EMPL-AD-613586_EN.html
docs/6
date
2018-03-28T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE613.586&secondRef=02 title: PE613.586
committee
EMPL
type
Committee opinion
body
EP
events/0/type
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
New
Committee referral announced in Parliament
events/2/type
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
New
Vote in committee
events/3
date
2018-05-15T00:00:00
type
Committee report tabled for plenary
body
EP
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2018-0170_EN.html title: A8-0170/2018
summary
events/3
date
2018-05-15T00:00:00
type
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
body
EP
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2018-0170_EN.html title: A8-0170/2018
summary
events/4/docs
  • url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20180528&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament
events/6
date
2018-05-30T00:00:00
type
Decision by Parliament
body
EP
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2018-0225_EN.html title: T8-0225/2018
summary
events/6
date
2018-05-30T00:00:00
type
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
body
EP
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2018-0225_EN.html title: T8-0225/2018
summary
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Legal Affairs
committee
JURI
rapporteur
shadows
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Legal Affairs
committee
JURI
date
rapporteur
shadows
committees/1
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Constitutional Affairs
committee
AFCO
rapporteur
shadows
committees/1
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Constitutional Affairs
committee
AFCO
date
rapporteur
shadows