Index 
 Previous 
 Next 
 Full text 
Procedure : 2018/0136(COD)
Document stages in plenary
Document selected : A8-0469/2018

Texts tabled :

A8-0469/2018

Debates :

PV 16/01/2019 - 29
CRE 16/01/2019 - 29

Votes :

PV 17/01/2019 - 10.8
CRE 17/01/2019 - 10.8
Explanations of votes
PV 04/04/2019 - 6.17

Texts adopted :

P8_TA(2019)0038
P8_TA(2019)0349

Debates
Thursday, 17 January 2019 - Strasbourg Revised edition

10.8. Protection of the Union's budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States (A8-0469/2018 - Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, Petri Sarvamaa) (vote)
PV
 

– Before the vote:

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Petri Sarvamaa, Rapporteur. – Madam President, one of the most important and crucial things needed to sustain democracy in any Member State is the rule of law. Undermining the rule of law is always dangerous because it clears a way for weakening other democratic elements of the state. This is why we are voting on this report.

Let me emphasise that this regulation has its legal basis in the financial regulation. Article 322 of the Treaty, not in Article 7. This is about protecting the EU budget from generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law.

Another very important thing to understand about this report and proposal is that it has to be, and will be, the same budgetary consequences for every Member State that would undermine the rule of law.

 
  
 

– Before the vote on Amendment 41:

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Petri Sarvamaa, Rapporteur. – Madam President, the oral amendment reads: ‘the prevention and the sanctioning of tax evasion and the proper functioning of authorities contributing to administrative cooperation in tax matters’ – that is deleting words ‘and tax competition’ because tax competition is in the competence of the Member States and therefore does not belong in this report.

 
  
 

(The oral amendment was not accepted)

– After the vote on the Commission proposal:

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Eider Gardiazabal Rubial (S&D). – Madam President, thank you for the big support. In line with the Conference of President decision for MFF related files, I would request that Parliament refers the matter back to the committees responsible for institutional negotiations in accordance with Rule 59A.

 
  
 

(The request to refer the matter back to committee was approved)

 
Last updated: 7 June 2019Legal notice