2023/2080(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)

– having regard to the European Parliament resolution of 9 June 2016 for an open, efficient and independent European Union administration;

Amendment 10 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas dialogue with national authorities seems to be the Commission’s preferred way to solve infringement procedures, as opposed to bringing Member States before the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU), which it sees as a measure of last resort, crucially in procedures concerning the violation of rule of law and the protection of fundamental rights; whereas in 2016, in its work on infringement cases and complaints, the Commission decided to prioritise the most serious breaches of EU law significantly affecting the interests of citizens and businesses; whereas 2017 was the first year in which the Commission applied this new, more targeted approach;

Amendment 11 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas respect for the rule of law is the cornerstone of democracy and underpins fundamental rights; whereas impartial, independent courts, media pluralism and independence, the fight against corruption and the infiltration of the legal economy by organised crime are essential to guaranteeing equal treatment before the law, protecting citizens’ rights, preventing abuses and ensuring accountability among public office holders;

Amendment 12 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)

Cb. whereas organised crime is a major threat to European security, citizens, business and public institutions; whereas monitoring the correct transposition of the anti-money laundering legislation is key to stop criminals to profit from the proceeds of their crimes;

Amendment 13 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the Commission’s 2020, 2021 and 2022 reports on monitoring the application of EU law; believes that these reports are crucial tools to enable scrutiny of the correct transposition and implementation of EU law and recognises that they enable EU legislators to identify potential issues and to seek remedies; Notes that almost half of the infringements procedures launched by the Commission for the wrongful application of EU law or non-conformity of national rules with EU law concerns the environment, employment, transport and mobility;

Amendment 14 #

Gilles LEBRETON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that, under the Von der Leyen Commission, the total new infringement actions taken by the Commission fell from 903 cases in 2020 to 551 in 2022; stresses that the total infringement actions in relation to the single market – excluding case closures – is ~~worryingly~~ lower than under the Barroso and Juncker commissions; understands the importance of dialogue between the Commission and the Member States at the pre-litigation stage; considers, however, that relying almost exclusively on dialogue and informal diplomacy can lead to either political horse trading with Member States or to the application of double-standards on the part of the Commission; regrets therefore that the Commission seems reluctant to bring actions against Member States before the CJEU where it is appropriate; calls on the Commission to further clarify how it prioritises serious breaches of EU law and to flesh out its selection criteria; recommends that the Commission shorten the dialogue period and not shy away from litigation and welcomes the fact that the Commission favours dialogue over immediate referral to the CJEU;

Amendment 15 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that~~, under the Von der Leyen Commission,~~ the total new infringement actions taken by the Commission fell from 903 cases in 2020 to 551 in 2022~~; stresses that the total infringement actions in relation to th~~ which has to do also with the COVID-19 pandemic and number of legislative sin~~gle market – excluding case closures – is worryingly lower than under the Barroso and Juncker commiss~~struments adopted as most infringement cases are linked to late transpositions; understands the importance of strengthening the dialogue between the Commission and the Member States at the pre-litigation stage; considers, however, that relying almost exclusively on dialogue and informal diplomacy can lead to either political horse trading with Member States or to the application of double-standards on the part of the Commission; regrets therefore that the Commission seems reluctant to bring actions against Member States before the CJEU where it is appropriate in order to avoid, when possible, infringement procedures which should be used as a measure of last resort; calls on the Commission to further clarify how it prioritises serious breaches of EU law and to flesh out its selection criteria; recommends that the Commission shorten the dialogue period and not shy away from litigation;

Amendment 16 #

Catharina RINZEMA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that, under the Von der Leyen Commission, the total of new infringement actions taken by the Commission fell from 903 cases in 2020 to 551 in 2022; sStresses that the total infringement actions in relation to the single market – excluding case closures – is worryingly lower than under the Barroso and Juncker commissions; uUnderstands the importance of dialogue between the Commission and the Member States at the pre-litigation stage; considers, however, that relying almost exclusively on dialogue and informal diplomacy can lead to either political horse trading with Member States or to the application of double-standards on the part of the Commission; rRegrets therefore that the Commission seems reluctant to bring actions against Member States before the CJEU where it is appropriate; calls on the Commission to further clarify how it prioritises serious breaches of EU law and to flesh out its selection criteria; recommends that the Commission shortens the dialogue period ~~and not shy away from litigation~~, minimises and clarifies the timeframe for infringement procedures, and does not shy away from litigation, which is key to put an end to EU law’s violations by Member States and to ensure protection of EU citizens and to guarantee regulatory convergence across the Single Market;

Amendment 17 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that, under the Von der Leyen Commission, the total new infringement actions taken by the Commission fell from 903 cases in 2020 to 551 in 2022; stresses that the total infringement actions in relation to the single market – excluding case closures – is worryingly lower than under the Barroso and Juncker commissions; understands the importance of dialogue between the Commission and the Member States at the pre-litigation stage; considers, however, that relying almost exclusively on dialogue and informal diplomacy can lead to either political horse trading with Member States or to the application of double-standards on the part of the Commission; regrets therefore that the Commission seems reluctant to bring actions against Member States before the CJEU where it is appropriate; calls on the Commission to further clarify how it prioritises serious breaches of EU law and to flesh out its selection criteria; in that regard, calls on the Commission to prioritise breaches of EU law that impair fundamental rights, violate fundamental values of the Union, affect vulnerable people or lead to severe environmental damage; recommends that the Commission shorten the dialogue period and not shy away from litigation;

Amendment 18 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that, under the Von der Leyen Commission, the total new infringement actions taken by the Commission fell from 903 cases in 2020 to 551 in 2022; stresses that the total infringement actions in relation to the single market – excluding case closures – is worryingly lower than under the Barroso and Juncker commissions; understands the importance of dialogue between the Commission and the Member States at the pre-litigation stage; considers, however, that relying almost exclusively on dialogue and informal diplomacy can lead to either political horse trading with Member States or to the application of double-standards on the part of the Commission; regrets therefore that the Commission seems reluctant to bring actions against Member States before the CJEU where it is appropriate; calls on the Commission to further clarify how it prioritises serious breaches of EU law ~~and~~, to flesh out its selection criteria, and to provide legal clarification on key concepts related to its monitoring action on the enforcement of EU law like “issue of wider principles” and “systematic failure to enforce EU law”; recommends that the Commission shorten the dialogue period and not shy away from litigation;

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that, under the Von der Leyen Commission, the total new infringement actions taken by the Commission fell from 903 cases in 2020 to 551 in 2022; stresses that the total infringement actions in relation to the single market – excluding case closures – is worryingly lower than under the Barroso and Juncker commissions; understands the importance of dialogue between the Commission and the Member States at the pre-litigation stage; considers, however, that relying almost exclusively on dialogue and informal diplomacy can lead to either political horse trading with Member States or to the application of double-standards on the part of the Commission; regrets therefore that the Commission seems reluctant to bring actions against Member States before the CJEU where it is appropriate; calls on the Commission to further clarify how it prioritises serious breaches of EU law and to flesh out its selection criteria; recommends that the Commission shorten the dialogue period and not shy away from litigation while at the same time start the reflection on possible alternative mechanisms to guarantee the correct application of EU law;

Amendment 2 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 3 a (new)

– having regard to its resolution of 7 July 2022 on Better regulation: Joining forces to make better laws,

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Considers key for the full protection of citizens’ rights a rapid action to put an end to EU law’s violations by Member States, especially in environmental matters, by adopting a shorter and clear timeframe and strengthening legal rules on infringement procedures as well as on the deferral of a matter to the Court of Justice of the EU in case of persistent violation of EU law; is concerned about the huge amount of ongoing infringement procedures kept stalled for many years in the pre- contentious phase by the European Commission, with no referral to the CJEU for the concerned Member States, despite their persistent failure to uphold the related EU law or to correctly transpose EU law's provisions within their respective national legal system;

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Highlights that the Commission has a number of tools at its disposal in order to help Member States transpose, apply and implement EU law correctly and on time, among those guidance documents, implementation plans, expert groups, explanatory documents, trainings, or workshops; some of these tools are used as preventive tools while others can be used in parallel with infringement procedures in order to resolve detected breaches of EU law with the objective to avoid referrals of the case to the Court of Justice of the European Union; Invites the Commission, where possible, to provide greater support to the competent national and regional authorities in the process of transposing EU legislation;

Amendment 22 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Strongly believes that CJEU’s judgments must be implemented to the fullest extent by the Member States; underlines that a superficial implementation, followed by the introduction of new laws and policies suffering the same deficits as identified earlier by the CJEU, must be sanctioned through the launching of infringement procedures;

Amendment 23 #

3. Takes note of the fact that the ~~Commission no longer uses~~number of the new EU Pilot ~~as its default platform through which to engage in dialogue with Member Stat~~cases has increased from 212 cases in 2020 to 279 cases in 2022; notes that out of the 279 cases oin ~~alleged breaches of EU law, as it added an additional bureaucratic layer to the procedure without adding real value~~2022 there were 51 triggered by complaints and 228 cases were opened by the Commission following own-initiative investigations;

Amendment 24 #

Antonius MANDERS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the creation, in 2020, of the Single Market Enforcement Task Force (SMET), which is made up of relevant national authorities and the Commission; calls for a constant cooperation of the Task Force with the existing SOLVIT system; welcomes the current effort to identify how SMET can help deal with cases involving the misapplication of EU law that SOLVIT has not been able to address; welcomes the ongoing reporting on structural SOLVIT cases that could become SMET projects; calls on the Commission, as the support of the existing SOLVIT system is limited, especially in cross-border cases in which public authorities breach the rights of citizens and businesses, to assess the possibilities of injunctions that would give legal clarity within three months at Union level, for example at the European Court of Justice, to ensure the correct transposition, application and implementation of EU law in all Member States;

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Regrets the persistent lack of homogeneity between Member States in the effective implementation of legislation aimed at building a social Union; is concerned about the serious shortcomings and delays in the application of EU law in the field of employment, social affairs and inclusion; notes with concern that, in 2022, the Commission launched infringement proceedings against 19 Member States for failing to fully transpose the Work-Life Balance Directive and against another 19 Member States for failing to transpose EU rules on transparent and predictable working conditions;

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Recalls that the EU has set itself the goal to make Europe the first climate- neutral continent by 2050; underlines that, in aiming to achieve the climate objectives, the Governance Regulation required Member States to prepare their first long-term strategies with a perspective of at least 30 years; notes that, in 2022, the Commission launched infringement proceedings against four Member States for failing to notify such strategies; calls on the Member States to urgently and duly adopt and implement their long-term strategies;

Amendment 27 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 c (new)

4c. Expresses concern at the serious gaps in the application of EU energy and environmental laws; points in particular to the transposition shortcomings in numerous Member States identified by the Commission in relation to the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive, the Energy Efficiency Directive, the Renewable Energy Directive, and the Single-Use Plastics Directive; urges the Member States to correctly transpose this legislation;

Amendment 28 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 d (new)

4d. Welcomes the Commission efforts to protect LGBTIQ+ people from discrimination, including by referring Hungary to the Court of Justice over national rules that discriminate against people based on their sexual orientation and gender identity; urges Member States, particularly Hungary, to ensure that national legislation fully complies with the fundamental rights enshrined in EU law; expresses deep concern that the deterioration of media freedom contributes to an increasing targeting of minorities, including LGBTIQ+ people; welcomes, in this regard, the Commission efforts to uphold media freedom and pluralism, and its decision to refer Hungary to the Court of Justice over an alleged violation of the freedom of speech as enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights;

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. ~~Calls on the Commission and the Member States to act jointly and consistently on problems related to ‘gold- plating’;~~ notes that, while additional unnecessary administrative burdens should be avoided and should even be decreased in order to prevent fragmentation of the single market, Member States may take more ambitious measures in cases where only minimum standards have been defined by Union law;, calls on the Commission, in this regard, to come up with specific guidelines for Member States to prevent unnecessary gold-plating, including a template for a ‘gold-plating test’ focusing on assessing the necessity, proportionality, and feasibility of more ambitious national standards compared to relevant EU legislation and national legislation of other Member States, as well as on the potential effects of such standards on the national business climate, with the goal of preventing competitive disadvantages and ensuring harmonised rules for businessesrucially in the areas of providing citizens with better human rights and social protections, access to public services, and environmental protection;

Amendment 3 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas infringement procedures are unfair insofar as they make citizens bear the cost of the incomplete transposition or incorrect application of European law by Member States;

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to act jointly and consistently on problems related to ‘gold- plating’; notes that, while additional unnecessary administrative burdens should be avoided and should even be decreased in order to prevent fragmentation of the single market, Member States mayMember States to avoid adding unnecessary additional administrative or compliance burdens when transposing EU legislation; stresses however that, while additional unnecessary administrative burdens should be avoided in designing, transposing and implementing EU acts, this should not be translated into deregulation or “no- regulation” nor prevent Member States from maintaining or takeing more ambitious measures in cases where only minimum standards have been defined by Union law; calls on the Commission, in this regard, to come up with specific guidelines for Member States to prevent unnecessary gold-plating, including a template for a ‘gold-plating test’ focusing on and adopting higher social, environmental, climate and consumer protection standards in casses~~sing the necessity, proportionality, and feasibility of more ambitious national standards compared to relevant EU legislation and national legislation of o~~ where only minimum standards are defined by Union law; supports the Commission’s request to ther Member States~~, as well as on the potential effects of such standards on the national business climate, with the goal of preventing competitive disadvantages and ensuring harmonised rules for businesses~~ to report when they choose to add elements that do not stem from EU legislation;

Amendment 31 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. ~~Calls on the Commission and the Member States to act jointly and consistently on problems related to ‘gold- plating’; n~~Notes that, while additional unnecessary administrative burdens should be avoided and should even be decreased in order to prevent fragmentation of the single market, Member States ~~may~~should not be prevented from maintaining or takeing more ambitious measures and adopting higher social, environmental and consumer protection standards in cases where only minimum standards have been defined by Union law; calls on the Commission~~, in this regard, to come up with specific guidelines f~~ to support Member States ~~to prevent unnecessary gold-plating, including a template for a ‘gold-plating test’ focusing on~~in the implementation of such measures, where appropriate; considers that the Commission may assess~~ing~~ the necessity, proportionality, and feasibility of more ambitious national standards compared to relevant EU legislation and national legislation of other Member States, as well as on the ~~potential effects of such standards on the national business climate, with the goal of preventing competitive disadvantages and ensuring harmonised rules for businesse~~economic, social and environmental consequences of such standards;

Amendment 32 #